    [Senate Hearing 108-168]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                            S. Hrg. 108-168

             LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004
    =======================================================================

                                    HEARINGS

                                    before a

                              SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE

                COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE

                          ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                       on

                               H.R. 2657/S. 1383

    AN ACT MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH FOR THE FISCAL
             YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2004, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

                                   __________

                 Architect of the Capitol (except House items)
                              Capitol Police Board
                          Congressional Budget Office
                           General Accounting Office
                           Government Printing Office
                              Library of Congress
                                  U.S. Senate

                                   __________

             Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations

     Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/
                                     senate

                                     ______

                        U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
    85-935                      WASHINGTON : 2003
    ____________________________________________________________________________
    For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
    Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov  Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512-1800
    Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001

                          COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

                         TED STEVENS, Alaska, Chairman
    THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi            ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia
    ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania          DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii
    PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico         ERNEST F. HOLLINGS, South Carolina
    CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri        PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont
    MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky            TOM HARKIN, Iowa
    CONRAD BURNS, Montana                BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland
    RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama           HARRY REID, Nevada
    JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire            HERB KOHL, Wisconsin
    ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah              PATTY MURRAY, Washington
    BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado    BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota
    LARRY CRAIG, Idaho                   DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California
    KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas          RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois
    MIKE DeWINE, Ohio                    TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota
    SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas                MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana
                        James W. Morhard, Staff Director
                     Lisa Sutherland, Deputy Staff Director
                  Terrence E. Sauvain, Minority Staff Director
                                     ------

                     Subcommittee on the Legislative Branch

                  BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado, Chairman
    ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah              RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois
    TED STEVENS, Alaska                  TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota
                                         ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia
                                           (ex officio)
                               Professional Staff
                              Carolyn E. Apostolou
                         Terrence E. Sauvain (Minority)
                            Drew Willison (Minority)

                             Administrative Support

                                  Erin McHale
                           Nancy Olkewicz (Minority)

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------

                            Thursday, March 27, 2003

                                                                       Page
    General Accounting Office........................................     1
    Government Printing Office.......................................    23
    Congressional Budget Office......................................    41

                            Thursday, April 10, 2003

    Library of Congress..............................................    55

                             Thursday, May 1, 2003

    U.S. Senate: Office of the Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper.......    99
    Capitol Police Board.............................................   125

                             Thursday, May 8, 2003

    U.S. Senate: Office of the Secretary.............................   151
    Architect of the Capitol.........................................   217

             LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004

                                  ----------

                            THURSDAY, MARCH 27, 2003

                                           U.S. Senate,
               Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The subcommittee met at 1:30 p.m., in room SD-124, Dirksen
    Senate Office Building, Hon. Ben Nighthorse Campbell (chairman)
    presiding.
        Present: Senators Campbell and Durbin.

                           GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE

    STATEMENT OF DAVID WALKER, COMPTROLLER GENERAL
    ACCOMPANIED BY:
            GENE L. DODARO, CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER
            STANLEY J. CZERWINSKI, CONTROLLER
            ANTHONY CICCO, JR., CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER AND DEPUTY CHIEF
                MISSION SUPPORT OFFICER

              opening statement of senator ben nighthorse campbell

        Senator Campbell. The subcommittee will come to order.
        This is my first hearing as chairman of the Legislative
    Branch Subcommittee, and today's hearing is the first of four
    hearings we plan to have to review the fiscal year 2004
    legislative branch budget request, which totals roughly $3.8
    billion. Two of our three witnesses this afternoon are also new
    to this subcommittee. This afternoon we will take testimony
    from three agencies, the General Accounting Office, the
    Government Printing Office, and the Congressional Budget
    Office.
        We will hear first from Mr. David Walker, Comptroller
    General. Mr. Walker is accompanied by his Chief Operating
    Officer, Mr. Gene Dodaro, and Mr. Stan Czerwinski, GAO's
    Controller. GAO's budget request of $472 million will
    accommodate all inflationary increases with no real significant
    change in its operations. We do want to understand the urgency
    of $4.8 million of your budget request, whether it is truly
    needed in the supplemental, or whether it can await the fiscal
    year 2004 appropriations.
        GAO will be followed by witnesses from the Government
    Printing Office, Mr. Bruce James, the new Public Printer, who
    will appear for the first time before this subcommittee. Mr.
    James will be accompanied by Mr. George Taylor, Deputy Printer,
    Mr. Frank Partlow, Chief of Staff, and Ms. Judith Russell,
    Superintendent of Documents.
        Mr. James, we look forward to hearing about the changes you
    are planning at GPO. We are very pleased to have underway a
    comprehensive general management review by the GAO requested by
    this committee, which we expect will help you as you make your
    plans. GPO's budget totals $135.6 million, and does include $10
    million for anticipated restructuring efforts.
        Finally, we will hear from Dr. Douglas Holtz-Eakin, the
    Director of the Congressional Budget Office, who will appear
    for the first time before this subcommittee. He will be
    accompanied by Mr. Barry Anderson, his deputy. The CBO's budget
    of roughly $34 million would provide for some additional
    employees and its cost of the Federal Accounting Standards
    Advisory Board.
        We are expecting a number of votes this afternoon, and so
    we will not have you read your statements. We will put them in
    the record, and Mr. Walker, you may proceed.
        Mr. Walker. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to
    be here today and congratulations on your new position as
    chairman of this subcommittee. In addition to Mr. Dodaro and
    Mr. Czerwinski, I would also like to introduce Tony Cicco, our
    Chief Information Officer and Deputy Chief Mission Support
    Officer, who is also with me today. Now, to summarize a few
    highlights for the committee. We realize that you face tough
    budget choices this year and will continue to face them in the
    years ahead. As such, we are requesting, for fiscal year 2004,
    a modest increase of 4.1 percent in our current budget of $473
    million. This request includes the $4.8 million supplemental we
    previously requested for safety and security needs. If the
    Congress is able to fund our fiscal year 2003 supplemental
    request for security needs, we could reduce our fiscal year
    2004 budget request accordingly to a net 3.1 percent increase.
        Fiscal year 2002 was an outstanding year for GAO. We
    achieved record or near record performance results in virtually
    every key category. For example, over $37 billion in measurable
    financial benefits, a return on investment of $88 for every $1
    appropriated to us. Our performance results have increased
    significantly over the last 4 years, and we continue to lead by
    example. We are in the vanguard of the overall government
    transformation effort and are positioning GAO for the future.
        We also plan to work with our oversight committees and
    possibly this committee to seek human capital legislation that
    would make permanent some of the human capital flexibilities
    provided to us by Congress in fiscal year 2001 and recently
    extended to the executive branch in the homeland security
    legislation. We also plan to file the required statutory report
    on our fiscal year 2001 human capital legislation in the coming
    weeks.

                               PREPARED STATEMENT

        Mr. Chairman, we will just submit our testimony for the
    record and would welcome your questions.
        [The statement follows:]
                     Prepared Statement of David M. Walker
        Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: I am pleased to
    appear before the Subcommittee today as the Comptroller General of the
    United States and head of the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO). GAO
    is a key source of objective information and analyses and, as such,
    plays a crucial role in supporting congressional decision-making and
    helping improve government for the benefit of the American people. My
    testimony today will focus on GAO's (1) fiscal year 2002 performance
    and results, (2) efforts to maximize our effectiveness, responsiveness
    and value, and (3) our budget request for fiscal year 2004 to support
    the Congress and serve the American public. In summary:
      --In fiscal year 2002, GAO's work informed the national debate on a
            broad spectrum of issues including helping the Congress answer
            questions about the associated costs and program trade-offs of
            the national preparedness strategy, including providing
            perspectives on how best to organize and manage the new
            Transportation Security Administration and Department of
            Homeland Security. GAO's efforts helped the Congress and
            government leaders achieve $37.7 billion in financial
            benefits--an $88 return on every dollar invested in GAO. The
            return on the public's investment in GAO extends beyond dollar
            savings to improvements in how the government serves its
            citizens. This includes a range of accomplishments that serve
            to improve safety, enhance security, protect privacy, and
            increase the effectiveness of a range of federal programs and
            activities.
      --The results of our work in fiscal year 2002 were possible, in part,
            because of changes we have made to transform GAO in order to
            meet our goal of being a model federal agency and a world-class
            professional services organization. We had already realigned
            GAO's structure and resources to better serve the Congress in
            its legislative, oversight, appropriations, and investigative
            roles. Over the past year, we cultivated and fostered
            congressional and agency relations, better refined our
            strategic and annual planning and reporting processes, and
            enhanced our information technology infrastructure. We also
            continued to provide priority attention to our management
            challenges of human capital, information security, and physical
            security. We have made progress in addressing each of these
            challenges, but we still have work to do and plan to ask for
            legislation to help address some of these issues.
      --GAO is requesting budget authority of $473 million for fiscal year
            2004. Our request represents a modest 4.1 percent increase in
            direct appropriations, primarily for mandatory pay and
            uncontrollable costs. This budget will allow us to maintain
            current operations for serving the Congress as outlined in our
            strategic plan and to continue initiatives to enhance our human
            capital, support business processes, and ensure the safety and
            security of GAO staff, facilities, and information systems.
            Approximately $4.8 million, or about 1 percent, of our request
            relates to several safety and security items that are included
            in our fiscal year 2003 supplemental request. If this
            supplemental request is granted, our fiscal year 2004 request
            could be reduced accordingly.

                    FISCAL YEAR 2002 PERFORMANCE AND RESULTS

        Fiscal year 2002 was a year of challenges, not just for GAO but
    also for the Congress and the nation. The nation's vulnerabilities were
    exposed in a series of events--America's vulnerability to sophisticated
    terrorist networks, bioterrorism waged through mechanisms as mundane as
    the daily mail, and corporate misconduct capable of wiping out jobs,
    pensions, and investments virtually overnight. As the Congress's
    priorities changed to meet these crises, GAO's challenge was to respond
    quickly and effectively to our congressional clients' changing needs.
        With work already underway across a spectrum of critical policy and
    performance issues, we had a head start toward meeting the Congress'
    needs in a year of unexpected and often tumultuous events. For example,
    in fiscal year 2002 GAO's work informed the debate over national
    preparedness strategy, helping the Congress determine how best to
    organize and manage major new departments, assess key vulnerabilities
    to homeland defense, and respond to the events of September 11 in areas
    such as terrorism insurance and airline security. GAO's input also was
    a major factor in shaping the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which created the
    Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, as well as new rules to
    strengthen corporate governance and ensure auditor independence.
    Further, GAO's work helped the Congress develop and enact election
    reform legislation in the form of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 to
    help restore voter confidence.
        In fiscal year 2002, GAO also served the Congress and the American
    people by helping to:
      --Contribute to a national preparedness strategy at the federal,
            state, and local levels that will make Americans safer from
            terrorism
      --Protect investors through better oversight of the securities
            industry and the accounting profession
      --Ensure a safer national food supply
      --Expose the inadequacy of nursing home care
      --Make income tax collection fair, effective, and less painful to
            taxpayers
      --Strengthen public schools' accountability for educating children
      --Keep sensitive American technologies out of the wrong hands
      --Protect American armed forces confronting chemical or biological
            weapons
      --Identify the risks to employees in private pension programs
      --Identify factors causing the shortage of children's vaccines
      --Assist the postal system in addressing anthrax and various
            management challenges
      --Identify security risks at ports, airports, and transit systems
      --Save billions by bringing sound business practices to the
            Department of Defense
      --Foster human capital strategic management to create a capable,
            effective, well-managed federal workforce
      --Ensure that the armed forces are trained and equipped to meet the
            nation's defense commitments
      --Enhance the safety of Americans and foreign nationals at U.S.
            installations worldwide
      --Assess ways of improving border security through biometric
            technologies and other means
      --Reduce the international debt problems faced by poor countries
      --Reform the way federal agencies manage their finances
      --Protect government computer systems from security threats
      --Enhance the transition of e-government--the new ``electronic
            connection'' between government and the public.
        During fiscal year 2002, GAO's analyses and recommendations
    contributed to a wide range of legislation considered by the Congress,
    as shown in the following table.

        ----------------------------------------------------------------

     Table 1.--Selected Public Laws to Which GAO Contributed During Fiscal
                                   Year 2002

        Prescription Drug User Fee Amendments of 2002, Public Law 107-188
        Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act, Public Law 107-1092
        No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Public Law 107-110
        Food Stamp Reauthorization Act of 2002, Public Law 107-171
        Help America Vote Act of 2002, Public Law 107-252
        Homeland Security Act of 2002, Public Law 107-296
        Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response
    Act of 2002, Public Law 107-188
        Aviation and Transportation Security Act, Public Law 107-71
        Department of Defense Appropriation Act, 2003, Public Law 107-248
        Department of Defense and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for
    Recovery From and Response to Terrorist Attacks on the United States
    Act, 2002, Public Law 107-117
        Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003
    Public Law 107-314
        Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 2003, Public Law
    107-228
        Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198
        Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002, Public Law
    107-347
        Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Public Law 107-204
        National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002, Public Law
    107-107
        Legislative Branch Appropriations, Fiscal Year 2002, Public Law
    107-68
        Improper Payments Information Act of 2002, Public Law 107-300
        Trade Act of 2002, Public Law 107-210
        Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002, Public Law 107-297
        E-Government Act of 2002, Public Law 107-347

        Source: GAO.

        ----------------------------------------------------------------

        By year's end, we had testified 216 times before the Congress,
    sometimes on as little as 24 hours' notice, on a range of issues. We
    had responded to hundreds of urgent requests for information. We had
    developed 1,950 recommendations for improving the government's
    operations, including, for example, those we made to the Secretary of
    State calling for the development of a governmentwide plan to help
    other countries combat nuclear smuggling and those we made to the
    Chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission calling for his
    agency to develop an action plan for overseeing competitive energy
    markets. We also had continued to track the recommendations we had made
    in past years, checking to see that they had been implemented and, if
    not, whether we needed to do follow-up work on problem areas. We found,
    in fact, that 79 percent of the recommendations we had made in fiscal
    year 1998 had been implemented, a significant step when the work we
    have done for the Congress becomes a catalyst for creating tangible
    benefits for the American people.
        Table 2 highlights, by GAO's three external strategic goals,
    examples of issues on which we testified before Congress during fiscal
    year 2002.

        ----------------------------------------------------------------

                             TABLE 2.--ISSUES ON WHICH GAO TESTIFIED DURING FISCAL YEAR 2002
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Goal 1--Well-Being and Financial   Goal 2--Changing Security Threats and     Goal 3--Transforming the Federal
     Security of the American People         Challenge of Globalization                  Government's Role
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Aviation security                  A-76 competitive sourcing               Contract management
    Bioterrorism                       Anthrax vaccine                         Contracting for services
    Blood supplies                     Ballistic missile defense               Corporate governance and
    Child welfare                      Chemical and biological preparedness     accountability
    Childhood vaccines                 Combating terrorism                     Debt collection
    Coast Guard's security missions    Compact with Micronesia                 DOD financial management
    Customs' cargo inspections         Conflict diamonds                       Electronic Government Act of 2002
    Disability programs                Debt relief for poor countries          Electronic-government security
    EPA cabinet status                 Encroachment on training ranges         Enterprise architecture
    FBI reorganization                 Export controls                         Federal budget issues
    Federal property management        Food aid                                Federal building security
     reform                            Foreign language needs                  Federal financial management reform
    Food safety                        Gulf War illnesses                      Federal rulemaking requirements
    Highway trust fund                 Information security aspects of         Freedom to Manage Act
    Housing                             homeland security                      Human capital strategy
    HUD management reform              International trade                     Illegal tax schemes and scams
    Identity theft                     Nuclear smuggling                        Intergovernmental aspects of
    Immigration enforcement            Organizational aspects of homeland       homeland security
    Indian tribal recognition           security                               IRS modernization
    Intercity passenger rail           SEC's human capital challenges          Medicaid financial management
    Long-term care                     Strategic seaport protection            NASA's management challenges
    Medicare payments                  Terrorism insurance                     President's Management Agenda
    Nuclear waste storage              U.S. overseas presence                  Purchase card controls
    Nursing homes                      Weapons of mass destruction             Securing America's borders
    Postal Service challenges                                                  U.S. government's financial
    Public health aspects of homeland                                           statements
     security
    Retiree health insurance
    SBA's human capital challenges
    Social Security reform
    Transit safety and security
    VA health care
    Welfare reform
    Wildfire threats
    Workforce development
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Source: GAO.

        ----------------------------------------------------------------

        Congress and the executive agencies took a wide range of actions in
    fiscal year 2002 to improve government operations, reduce costs, or
    better target budget authority based on GAO analyses and
    recommendations, as highlighted in the following sections.
        Federal action on GAO's findings or recommendations produced
    financial benefits for the American people: a total of $37.7 billion
    was achieved by making government services more efficient, improving
    the budgeting and spending of tax dollars, and strengthening the
    management of federal resources (see fig. 1). For example, increased
    funding for improved safeguards against fraud and abuse helped the
    Medicare program to better control improper payments of $8.1 billion
    over 2 years, and better policies and controls reduced losses from farm
    loan programs by about $4.8 billion across 5 years.

        In fiscal year 2002, we also recorded 906 instances in which our
    work led to improvements in government operations or programs (see fig.
    2). For example, by acting on GAO's findings or recommendations, the
    federal government has taken important steps toward enhancing aviation
    safety, improving pediatric drug labeling based on research, better
    targeting of funds to high-poverty school districts, greater
    accountability in the federal acquisition process, and more effective
    delivery of disaster recovery assistance to other nations, among other
    achievements.

        As shown in table 3, we met all of our annual performance targets
    except our timeliness target. While we provided 96 percent of our
    products to their congressional requesters by the date promised, we
    missed this measure's target of 98 percent on-time delivery. The year's
    turbulent events played a part in our missing the target, causing us to
    delay work in progress when higher-priority requests came in from the
    Congress. We know we will continue to face factors beyond our control
    as we strive to improve our performance in this area. We believe the
    agency protocols we are piloting will help clarify aspects of our
    interactions with the agencies we evaluate and audit and, thus,
    expedite our work in ways that could improve the timeliness of our
    final products. We also believe that our continuing investments in
    human capital and information technology will improve our timeliness
    while allowing us to maintain our high level of productivity and
    performance overall.

        ----------------------------------------------------------------

                                    TABLE 3.--ANNUAL PERFORMANCE MEASURES AND TARGETS
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Fiscal  Fiscal  Fiscal  Fiscal  Fiscal   Fiscal           Fiscal  Fiscal
                                             Year    Year    Year    Year    Year     Year   4-year    Year    Year
              Performance measure            1998    1999    2000    2001    2002     2002    avg.     2003    2004
                                            Actual  Actual  Actual  Actual  Target   Actual  Actual   Target  Target
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Financial benefits (dollars in           $19.7   $20.1   $23.2   $26.4   $30.0  \1\ $37   $26.9  \2\ $32   $35.0
     billions)............................                                               .7               .5
    Other benefits........................     537     607     788     799     770      906     775  \2\ 800     820
    Past recommendations implemented            69      70      78      79      75       79     N/A       77      77
     (percent)............................
    New recommendations made..............     987     940   1,224   1,563   1,200    1,950   1,419  \2\ 1,2   1,250
                                                                                                          50
    New products with recommendations (in       33      33      39      44      45       53      42       50      50
     per-  cent)..........................
    Testimonies...........................     256     229     263     151     200      216     215  \2\ 180     200
    Timeliness (in percent)...............      93      96      96      95      98       96      96       98      98
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Changes GAO made to its methodology for tabulating financial benefits caused about 11 percent of the
      increase in fiscal year 2002.
    \2\ Four targets published in GAO's performance plan for fiscal year 2003 were subsequently revised based on
      more current information. Two were raised; two were lowered. The original targets were financial benefits, $35
      billion; other benefits, 785; recommendations made, 1,200; and testimonies, 210.

    N/A=not applicable.
    Source: GAO.

        ----------------------------------------------------------------

            MAXIMIZING GAO'S EFFECTIVENESS, RESPONSIVENESS AND VALUE

        The results of our work were possible, in part, because of changes
    we have made to maximize the value of GAO. We had already realigned
    GAO's structure and resources to better serve the Congress in its
    legislative, oversight, appropriations, and investigative roles. Over
    the past year, we cultivated and fostered congressional and agency
    relations, better refined our strategic and annual planning and
    reporting processes, and enhanced our information technology
    infrastructure. We also continued to provide priority attention to our
    management challenges of human capital, information security, and
    physical security. Changes we made in each of these areas helped enable
    us to operate in a constantly changing environment.

    Congressional and Agency Relations
        Over the course of the year, we cultivated and fostered
    congressional and agency relations in several ways. On October 23,
    2001, in response to the anthrax incident on Capitol Hill, we opened
    our doors to 435 members of the House of Representatives and their
    staffs. Later in the year, we continued with our traditional hill
    outreach meetings and completed a 7-month pilot test of a system for
    obtaining clients' views on the quality of our testimonies and reports.
    We also developed agency protocols to provide clearly defined,
    consistently applied, well-documented, and transparent policies for
    conducting our work with federal agencies. We have implemented our new
    reporting product line entitled Highlights--a one-page summary that
    provides the key findings and recommendations from a GAO engagement. We
    continued our policy of outreach to our congressional clients, the
    public, and the press to enhance the accessibility of GAO products. Our
    external web site now logs about 100,000 visitors each day and more
    than 1 million GAO products are downloaded every month by our
    congressional clients, the public, and the press.
        In light of certain records access challenges during the past few
    years and with concerns about national and homeland security unusually
    high at home and abroad, it may become more difficult for us to obtain
    information from the Executive Branch and report on certain issues. If
    this were to occur, it would hamper our ability to complete
    congressional requests in a timely manner. We are updating GAO's
    engagement acceptance policies and practices to address this issue and
    may recommend legislative changes that will help to assure that we have
    reasonable and appropriate information that we need to conduct our work
    for the Congress and the country.

    Strategic and Annual Planning
        GAO's strategic planning process serves as a model for the federal
    government. Our plan aligns GAO's resources to meet the needs of the
    Congress, address emerging challenges and achieve positive results.
    Following the spirit of the Government Performance and Results Act, we
    established a process that provides for updates with each new Congress,
    ongoing analysis of emerging conditions and trends, extensive
    consultations with congressional clients and outside experts, and
    assessments of our internal capacities and needs.
        At the beginning of fiscal year 2002, we updated our strategic plan
    for serving the Congress based on substantial congressional input--
    extending the plan's perspective out to fiscal year 2007 and factoring
    in developments that had occurred since we first issued it in fiscal
    year 2000. The updated plan carries forward the four strategic goals we
    had already established as the organizing principles for a body of work
    that is as wide-ranging as the interests and concerns of the Congress
    itself. Using the plan as a blueprint, we lay out the areas in which we
    expect to conduct research, audits, analyses, and evaluations to meet
    our clients' needs, and we allocate the resources we receive from the
    Congress accordingly. Following is our strategic plan framework.
    Appendix I of this statement delineates in a bit more detail our
    strategic objectives and our qualitative performance goals for fiscal
    years 2002 and 2003.

        We issued our 2001 Performance and Accountability Report that
    combines information on our past year's accomplishments and progress in
    meeting our strategic goals with our plans for achieving our fiscal
    year 2003 performance goals. The report earned a Certificate of
    Excellence in Accountability Reporting from the Association of
    Government Accountants. We issued our Fiscal Year 2002 Performance and
    Accountability Report in January 2003.
        Our financial statements, which are integral to our performance and
    accountability, received an unqualified opinion for the sixteenth
    consecutive year. Furthermore, our external auditors did not identify
    any material control weaknesses or compliance issues relating to GAO's
    operations.

    Information Technology
        During the past year, we acquired new hardware and software and
    developed user-friendly systems that enhanced our productivity and
    responsiveness to the Congress and helped meet our initial information
    technology goals. For example, we replaced aging desktop workstations
    with notebook computers that provide greater computing power, speed,
    and mobility. In addition, we upgraded key desktop applications, the
    Windows desktop operating system, and telecommunications systems to
    ensure that GAO staff have modern technology tools to assist them in
    carrying out their work. We also developed new, integrated, user-
    friendly Web-based systems that eliminate duplicate data entry while
    ensuring the reusability of existing data. As the Clinger-Cohen Act
    requires, GAO has an enterprise architecture program in place to guide
    its information technology planning and decision making. In designing
    and developing systems, as well as in acquiring technology tools and
    services, we have applied enterprise architecture principles and
    concepts to ensure sound information technology investments and the
    interoperability of systems.

    Human Capital
        Given GAO's role as a key provider of information and analyses to
    the Congress, maintaining the right mix of technical knowledge and
    expertise as well as general analytical skills is vital to achieving
    our mission. We spend about 80 percent of our resources on our people,
    but without excellent human capital management, we could still run the
    risk of being unable to deliver what the Congress and the nation expect
    from us. At the beginning of my term in early fiscal year 1999, we
    completed a self-assessment that profiled our human capital workforce
    and identified a number of serious challenges facing our workforce,
    including significant issues involving succession planning and
    imbalances in the structure, shape, and skills of our workforce. As
    presented below, through a number of strategically planned human
    capital initiatives over the past few years, we have made significant
    progress in addressing these issues. For example, as illustrated in
    figure 3, by the end of fiscal year 2002, we had almost a 60 percent
    increase in the percentage of staff at the entry-level (Band I) as
    compared with fiscal year 1998. Also, the proportion of our workforce
    at the mid-level (Band II) decreased by about 8 percent.

        Our fiscal year 2002 human capital initiatives included the
    following:
      --In fiscal year 2002, we hired nearly 430 permanent staff and 140
            interns. We also developed and implemented a strategy to place
            more emphasis on diversity in campus recruiting.
      --In fiscal years 2002 and 2003, to help meet our workforce planning
            objectives, we offered voluntary early retirement under
            authority established in our October 2000 human capital
            legislation. Early retirement was granted to 52 employees in
            fiscal year 2002 and 24 employees in fiscal year 2003.
      --To retain staff with critical skills and staff with less than 3
            years of GAO experience, we implemented legislation authorizing
            federal agencies to offer student loan repayments in exchange
            for certain federal service commitments.
      --In fiscal year 2002, GAO implemented a new, modern, effective, and
            credible performance appraisal system for analysts and
            specialists, adapted the system for attorneys, and began
            modifying the system for administrative professional and
            support staff.
      --We began developing a new core training curriculum for managers and
            staff to provide additional training on the key competencies
            required to perform GAO's work.
      --We also took steps to achieve a fully democratically-elected
            Employee Advisory Council to work with GAO's Executive
            Committee in addressing issues of mutual interest and concern.
        The above represent just a few of many accomplishments in the human
    capital area. GAO is the clear leader in the federal government in
    designating and implementing 21st century human capital policies and
    practices. We also are taking steps to work with the Congress, the
    Office of Management and Budget, and the Office of Personnel
    Management, and others to ``help others help themselves'' in the human
    capital area.

    Information Security
        Ensuring information systems security and disaster recovery systems
    that allow for continuity of operations is a critical requirement for
    GAO, particularly in light of the events of September 11 and the
    anthrax incidents. The risk is that our information could be
    compromised and that we would be unable to respond to the needs of the
    Congress in an emergency. In light of this risk and in keeping with our
    goal of being a model federal agency, we are implementing an
    information security program consistent with the requirements in the
    Government Information Security Reform provisions (commonly referred to
    as ``GISRA'') enacted in the Floyd D. Spence National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001. We have made progress through
    our efforts to, among other things, implement a risk-based, agencywide
    security program; provide security training and awareness; and develop
    and implement an enterprise disaster recovery solution.

    Physical Security
        In the aftermath of the September 11 terrorist attacks and
    subsequent anthrax incidents, our ability to provide a safe and secure
    workplace emerged as a challenge for our agency. Protecting our people
    and our assets is critical to our ability to meet our mission. We
    devoted additional resources to this area and implemented measures such
    as reinforcing vehicle and pedestrian entry points, installing an
    additional x-ray machine, adding more security guards, and reinforcing
    windows.

                     GAO'S FISCAL YEAR 2004 BUDGET REQUEST

        GAO is requesting budget authority of $473 million for fiscal year
    2004 to maintain current operations for serving the Congress as
    outlined in our strategic plan and to continue initiatives to enhance
    our human capital, support business processes, and ensure the safety
    and security of GAO staff, facilities, and information systems. This
    funding level will allow us to fund up to 3,269 full-time equivalent
    personnel. Our request includes $466.6 million in direct appropriations
    and authority to use estimated revenues of $6 million from reimbursable
    audit work and rental income. Our requested increase of $18.4 million
    in direct appropriations represents a modest 4.1 percent increase,
    primarily for mandatory pay and uncontrollable costs. Our budget
    request also includes savings from nonrecurring fiscal year 2003
    investments in fiscal year 2004 that we propose to use to fund further
    one-time investments in critical areas, such as security and human
    capital.
        We have submitted a request for $4.8 million in supplemental fiscal
    year 2003 funds to allow us to accelerate implementation of important
    security enhancements. Our fiscal year 2004 budget includes $4.8
    million for safety and security needs that are also included in the
    supplemental. If the requested fiscal year 2003 supplemental funds are
    provided, our fiscal year 2004 budget could be reduced by $4.8 million.
    Table 4 presents our fiscal year 2003 and requested fiscal year 2004
    resources by funding source.

        ----------------------------------------------------------------

                            TABLE 4.--FISCAL YEARS 2003 AND 2004 RESOURCES BY FUNDING SOURCE
                                                 [Dollars in thousands]
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                               Change--fiscal year
                                                                   Fiscal Year  Fiscal Year        2003 to 2004
                            Funding source                             2003         2004    ------------------------
                                                                     Revised      Request       Amount      Percent
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total budget authority.......................................  \1\ $451,20    $472,627      $21,425   ..........
                                                                            2
    Less: offsetting collections \2\.............................      (3,000)      (6,006)      (3,006)  ..........
    Direct appropriation.........................................    $448,202     $466,621      $18,419          4.1
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Excludes request for supplemental funds of $4.8 million.
    \2\ Offsetting collections include reimbursable audit work and rental income.

    Source: GAO.

        ----------------------------------------------------------------

        During fiscal year 2004, we plan to sustain our investments in
    maximizing the productivity of our workforce by continuing to address
    the key management challenges of human capital, and both information
    and physical security. We will continue to take steps to ``lead by
    example'' within the federal government in connection with these and
    other critical management areas.
        Over the next several years, we need to continue to address skill
    gaps, maximize staff productivity and effectiveness, and reengineer our
    human capital processes to make them more user-friendly. We plan to
    address skill gaps by further refining our recruitment and hiring
    strategies to target gaps identified through our workforce planning
    efforts, while taking into account the significant percentage of our
    workforce eligible for retirement. We will continue to take steps to
    reengineer our human capital systems and practices to increase their
    efficiency and to take full advantage of technology. We will also
    ensure that our staff have the needed skills and training to function
    in this reengineered environment. In addition, we are developing
    competency-based performance appraisal and broad-banding pay systems
    for our mission support employees.
        To ensure our ability to attract, retain, and reward high-quality
    staff, we plan to devote additional resources to our employee training
    and development program. We will target resources to continue
    initiatives to address skill gaps, maximize staff productivity, and
    increase staff effectiveness by updating our training curriculum to
    address organizational and technical needs and training new staff.
    Also, to enhance our recruitment and retention of staff, we will
    continue to offer a student loan repayment program and transit subsidy
    benefit established in fiscal year 2002. In addition, we will continue
    to focus our hiring efforts in fiscal year 2004 on recruiting talented
    entry-level staff.
        To build on the human capital flexibilities provided by the
    Congress in 2000, we plan to recommend legislation that would, among
    other things, facilitate GAO's continuing efforts to recruit and retain
    top talent, develop a more performance-based compensation system,
    realign our workforce, and facilitate our succession planning and
    knowledge transfer efforts. In addition, to help attract new recruits,
    address certain ``expectation gaps'' within and outside of the
    government, and better describe the modern audit and evaluation entity
    GAO has become, we will work with the Congress to explore the
    possibility of changing the agency's name while retaining our well-
    known acronym and global brand name of ``GAO.''
        On the information security front, we need to complete certain key
    actions to be better able to detect intruders in our systems, identify
    our users, and recover in the event of a disaster. Among our current
    efforts and plans for these areas are completing the installation of
    software that helps us detect intruders on all our internal servers,
    completing the implementation of a secure user authentication process,
    and refining the disaster recover plan we developed last year. We will
    need the Congress' help to address these remaining challenges.
        We also are continuing to make the investments necessary to enhance
    the safety and security of our people, facilities, and other assets for
    the mutual benefit of GAO and the Congress. With our fiscal year 2003
    supplemental funding, if provided, or if not, with fiscal year 2004
    funds, we plan to complete installation of our building access control
    and intrusion detection system and supporting infrastructure, and
    obtain an offsite facility for use by essential personnel in emergency
    situations. With the help of the Congress, we plan to implement these
    projects over the next several years.

                               CONCLUDING REMARKS

        As a result of the support and resources we have received from this
    Subcommittee and the Congress over the past several years, we have been
    able to make a difference in government, not only in terms of financial
    benefits and improvements in federal programs and operations that have
    resulted from our work, but also in strengthening and increasing the
    productivity of GAO, and making a real difference for our country and
    its citizens. Our budget request for fiscal year 2004 is modest, but
    necessary to sustain our current operations, continue key human capital
    and information technology initiatives, and ensure the safety and
    security of our most valuable asset--our people. We seek your continued
    support so that we will be able to effectively and efficiently conduct
    our work on behalf of the Congress and the American people.
        As the Comptroller General of the United States, I am very proud of
    how, in a time of uncertainty, GAO staff responded with a positive
    attitude and did whatever their country required and demonstrated an
    unwavering resolve to continue their work. Knowing this organization as
    I do, I was not surprised. We at GAO look forward to continuing to help
    the Congress and the nation meet the current and emerging challenges of
    the 21st century.

     Appendix I: GAO's Qualitative Performance Goals for Fiscal Years 2002
                                    and 2003

        This appendix lists GAO's strategic goals and the strategic
    objectives for each goal. They are part of our updated draft strategic
    plan (for fiscal years 2002 through 2007).
        Organized below each strategic objective are its qualitative
    performance goals. The performance goals lay out the work we plan to do
    in fiscal years 2002 and 2003 to help achieve our strategic goals and
    objectives. We will evaluate our performance at the end of fiscal year
    2003.

    Strategic Goal 1--Provide Timely, Quality Service to the Congress and
            the Federal Government to Address Current and Emerging
            Challenges to the Well-Being and Financial Security of the
            American People
        To achieve this goal, we will provide information and
    recommendations on the following:
      --the Health Care Needs of an Aging and Diverse Population
        --evaluate Medicare reform, financing, and operations;
        --assess trends and issues in private health insurance coverage;
        --assess actions and options for improving the Department of
                Veterans Affairs' and the Department of Defense's (DOD)
                health care services;
        --evaluate the effectiveness of federal programs to promote and
                protect the public health;
        --evaluate the effectiveness of federal programs to improve the
                nation's preparedness for the public health and medical
                consequences of bioterrorism;
        --evaluate federal and state program strategies for financing and
                overseeing chronic and long-term health care; and
        --assess states' experiences in providing health insurance coverage
                for low-income populations.
      --the Education and Protection of the Nation's Children
        --analyze the effectiveness and efficiency of early childhood
                education and care programs in serving their target
                populations;
        --assess options for federal programs to effectively address the
                educational and nutritional needs of elementary and
                secondary students and their schools;
        --determine the effectiveness and efficiency of child support
                enforcement and child welfare programs in serving their
                target populations; and
        --identify opportunities to better manage postsecondary,
                vocational, and adult education programs and deliver more
                effective services.
        --the Promotion of Work Opportunities and the Protection of Workers
        --assess the effectiveness of federal efforts to help adults enter
                the workforce and to assist low-income workers;
        --analyze the impact of programs designed to maintain a skilled
                workforce and ensure employers have the workers they need;
        --assess the success of various enforcement strategies to protect
                workers while minimizing employers' burden in the changing
                environment of work; and
        --identify ways to improve federal support for people with
                disabilities.
      --a Secure Retirement for Older Americans
        --assess the implications of various Social Security reform
                proposals;
        --identify opportunities to foster greater pension coverage,
                increase personal saving, and ensure adequate and secure
                retirement income; and
        --identify opportunities to improve the ability of federal agencies
                to administer and protect workers' retirement benefits.
      --an Effective System of Justice
        --identify ways to improve federal agencies' ability to prevent and
                respond to major crimes, including terrorism;
        --assess the effectiveness of federal programs to control illegal
                drug use;
        --identify ways to administer the nation's immigration laws to
                better secure the nation's borders and promote appropriate
                treatment of legal residents; and
        --assess the administrative efficiency and effectiveness of the
                federal court and prison systems.
      --the Promotion of Viable Communities
        --assess federal economic development assistance and its impact on
                communities;
        --assess how the federal government can balance the promotion of
                home ownership with financial risk;
        --assess the effectiveness of federal initiatives to assist small
                and minority-owned businesses;
        --assess federal efforts to enhance national preparedness and
                capacity to respond to and recover from natural and man-
                made disasters; and
        --assess how well federally supported housing programs meet their
                objectives and affect the well-being of recipient
                households and communities.
      --Responsible Stewardship of Natural Resources and the Environment
        --assess the nation's ability to ensure reliable and
                environmentally sound energy for current and future
                generations;
        --assess federal strategies for managing land and water resources
                in a sustainable fashion for multiple uses;
        --assess federal programs' ability to ensure a plentiful and safe
                food supply, provide economic security for farmers, and
                minimize agricultural environmental damage;
        --assess federal pollution prevention and control strategies; and
        --assess efforts to reduce the threats posed by hazardous and
                nuclear wastes.
      --a Secure and Effective National Physical Infrastructure
        --assess strategies for identifying, evaluating, prioritizing,
                financing, and implementing integrated solutions to the
                nation's infrastructure needs;
        --assess the impact of transportation and telecommunications
                policies and practices on competition and consumers;
        --assess efforts to improve safety and security in all
                transportation modes;
        --assess the U.S. Postal Service's transformation efforts to ensure
                its viability and accomplish its mission; and
        --assess federal efforts to plan for, acquire, manage, maintain,
                secure, and dispose of the government's real property
                assets.

    Strategic Goal 2--Provide Timely, Quality Service to the Congress and
            the Federal Government to Respond to Changing Security Threats
            and the Challenges of Global Interdependence
        To achieve this goal, we will provide information and
    recommendations on the following:
      --Respond to Diffuse Threats to National and Global Security
        --analyze the effectiveness of the federal government's approach to
                providing for homeland security;
        --assess U.S. efforts to protect computer and telecommunications
                systems supporting critical infrastructures in business and
                government; and
        --assess the effectiveness of U.S. and international efforts to
                prevent the proliferation of nuclear, biological, chemical,
                and conventional weapons and sensitive technologies.
      --Ensure Military Capabilities and Readiness
        --assess the ability of DOD to maintain adequate readiness levels
                while addressing the force structure changes needed in the
                21st century;
        --assess overall human capital management practices to ensure a
                high-quality total force;
        --identify ways to improve the economy, efficiency, and
                effectiveness of DOD's support infrastructure and business
                systems and processes;
        --assess the National Nuclear Security Administration's efforts to
                maintain a safe and reliable nuclear weapons stockpile;
        --analyze and support DOD's efforts to improve budget analyses and
                performance management;
        --assess whether DOD and the services have developed integrated
                procedures and systems to operate effectively together on
                the battlefield; and
        --assess the ability of weapon system acquisition programs and
                processes to achieve desired outcomes.
      --Advance and Protect U.S. International Interests
        --analyze the plans, strategies, costs, and results of the U.S.
                role in conflict interventions;
        --analyze the effectiveness and management of foreign aid programs
                and the tools used to carry them out;
        --analyze the costs and implications of changing U.S. strategic
                interests;
        --evaluate the efficiency and accountability of multilateral
                organizations and the extent to which they are serving U.S.
                interests; and
        --assess the strategies and management practices for U.S. foreign
                affairs functions and activities.
      --Respond to the Impact of Global Market Forces on U.S. Economic and
            Security Interests
        --analyze how trade agreements and programs serve U.S. interests;
        --improve understanding of the effects of defense industry
                globalization;
        --assess how the United States can influence improvements in the
                world financial system;
        --assess the ability of the financial services industry and its
                regulators to maintain a stable and efficient global
                financial system;
        --evaluate how prepared financial regulators are to respond to
                change and innovation; and
        --assess the effectiveness of regulatory programs and policies in
                ensuring access to financial services and deterring fraud
                and abuse in financial markets.

    Strategic Goal 3--Help Transform the Government's Role and How It Does
            Business to Meet 21st Century Challenges
        To achieve this goal, we will provide information and
    recommendations on the following:
      --Analyze the Implications of the Increased Role of Public and
            Private Parties in Achieving Federal Objectives
        --analyze the modern service-delivery system environment and the
                complexity and interaction of service-delivery mechanisms;
        --assess how involvement of state and local governments and
                nongovernmental organizations affect federal program
                implementation and achievement of national goals; and
        --assess the effectiveness of regulatory administration and reforms
                in achieving government objectives.
      --Assess the Government's Human Capital and Other Capacity for
            Serving the Public
        --identify and facilitate the implementation of human capital
                practices that will improve federal economy, efficiency,
                and effectiveness;
        --identify ways to improve the financial management infrastructure
                capacity to provide useful information to manage for
                results and costs day to day;
        --assess the government's capacity to manage information technology
                to improve performance;
        --assess efforts to manage the collection, use, and dissemination
                of government information in an era of rapidly changing
                technology;
        --assess the effectiveness of the Federal Statistical System in
                providing relevant, reliable, and timely information that
                meets federal program needs; and
        --identify more businesslike approaches that can be used by federal
                agencies in acquiring goods and services.
        Support Congressional Oversight of the Federal Government's
    Progress toward Being More Results-Oriented, Accountable, and Relevant
    to Society's Needs
        --analyze and support efforts to instill results-oriented
                management across the government;
        --highlight the federal programs and operations at highest risk and
                the major performance and management challenges confronting
                agencies;
        --identify ways to strengthen accountability for the federal
                government's assets and operations;
        --promote accountability in the federal acquisition process;
        --assess the management and results of the federal investment in
                science and technology and the effectiveness of efforts to
                protect intellectual property;
        --identify ways to improve the quality of evaluative information;
                and
        --develop new resources and approaches that can be used in
                measuring performance and progress on the nations 21st
                century challenges.
      --Analyze the Government's Fiscal Position and Approaches for
            Financing the Government
        --analyze the long-term fiscal position of the federal government;
        --analyze the structure and information for budgetary choices and
                explore alternatives for improvement;
        --contribute to congressional deliberations on tax policy;
        --support congressional oversight of the Internal Revenue Service's
                modernization and reform efforts; and
        --assess the reliability of financial information on the
                government's fiscal position and financing sources.

    Strategic Goal 4--Maximize the Value of GAO by Being a Model Federal
            Agency and a World-Class Professional Services Organization
        To achieve this goal, we will do the following:
      --Sharpen GAO's Focus on Clients' and Customers' Requirements
        --continuously update client requirements;
        --develop and implement stakeholder protocols and refine client
                protocols; and
        --identify and refine customer requirements and measures.
      --Enhance Leadership and Promote Management Excellence
        --foster an attitude of stewardship to ensure a commitment to GAO's
                mission and core values;
        --implement an integrated approach to strategic management;
        --continue to provide leadership in strategic human capital
                management planning and execution;
        --maintain integrity in financial management;
        --use enabling technology to improve GAO's crosscutting business
                processes; and
        --provide a safe and secure workplace.
      --Leverage GAO's Institutional Knowledge and Experience
        --improve GAO's use of Web-based knowledge tools;
        --develop a framework to manage the collection, use, distribution,
                and retention of organizational knowledge; and
        --strengthen relationships with other national and international
                accountability and professional organizations.
      --Continuously Improve GAO's Business and Management Processes
        --improve internal business and administrative processes;
        --improve GAO's product and service lines; and
        --improve GAO's job management processes.
      --Become the Professional Services Employer of Choice
        --maintain an environment that is fair, unbiased, family-friendly,
                and promotes and values opportunity and inclusiveness;
        --improve compensation and performance management systems;
        --develop and implement a training and professional development
                strategy targeted toward competencies; and
        --provide GAO's people with tools, technology, and a working
                environment that is world-class.

        Senator Campbell. You claim you have achieved over $37
    billion in financial benefits, generating a return on
    investment of $88 for every dollar appropriated to you by the
    Congress. Can you explain what you mean by financial benefits,
    how you determine these benefits, and provide examples of some
    of your largest items?
        Mr. Walker. GAO produces financial benefits when its work
    contributes to actions taken by the Congress or the Executive
    Branch to: Reduce annual operating costs of Federal programs or
    activities; lessen the costs of multiyear projects or
    entitlements; or increase revenues from debt collection, asset
    sales, changes in tax laws or user fees.
        The funds made available in response to GAO's work may be
    used to reduce Government expenditures or reallocated by the
    Congress to other priority areas. To ensure conservative
    estimates of net financial benefits, reductions in operating
    cost are typically limited to 2 years of accrued reductions.
    Multiyear reductions in long-term projects, changes in tax
    laws, program terminations, or sales of Government assets are
    limited to 5 years. In addition, all financial benefits are
    calculated in net present value terms.
        GAO has established policies and procedures to guide the
    reporting of financial benefits. Estimates must be based on
    independent third party sources and reduced by any identifiable
    offsetting costs. The third parties are typically the agency
    that acted on GAO's work, a congressional committee, or the
    Congressional Budget Office.
        All accomplishment reports for financial benefits are
    documented and reviewed by another GAO staff member not
    involved in the work, and a senior executive in charge of the
    work. Also, a separate independent unit (Quality and Continuous
    Improvement) reviews all financial benefits and must approve
    benefits of $100 million or more, which amounted to 93 percent
    of the total benefits recorded in fiscal year 2002. Finally,
    all benefits over $1 billion are reviewed by GAO's Inspector
    General, which amounted to about 58 percent of our total
    financial benefits for fiscal 2002.
        The following table lists GAO's major financial benefits
    included in our fiscal year 2002 Performance and Accountability
    Report, followed by summary explanations of the work
    contributing to financial benefits over $500 million.
        [The information follows:]

          GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE FISCAL YEAR 2002 FINANCIAL BENEFITS
                                  [In millions]
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              Description                             Amount
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Financial Benefits Exceeding $1 Billion:
        Preventing Inappropriate Medicare Payments: Advocated         $8,100
         Medicare program safeguards help recover or avoid improper
         payments..................................................
        Improving Farm Loan Programs: Improved controls over USDA      4,800
         loan administration reduces risk of defaults..............
        Reducing the Cost of Federal Housing Programs: Review of       4,800
         unexpended balances at HUD recaptures funds...............
        Adjusting Department of Defense (DOD) Estimates: DOD           1,500
         officials reduced foreign currency exchange estimates.....
        Reducing Nuclear Waste Treatment Costs: New DOE contract       1,500
         for Hanford Tank Waste Project expected to achieve
         significant cost reductions...............................
        Retaining the Substantial Gainful Activity Level:              1,124
         Preserving an inability-to-work test as a qualification
         for SSA disability insurance payouts......................
                                                                    --------
            Subtotal--Financial benefits exceeding $1 Billion......   21,824
                                                                    ========
    Financial Benefits Between $500 Million and $1 Billion:
        Consolidation Initiatives at Department of Defense Computer      859
         Centers: DOD consolidation initiatives at its computer
         centers result in estimated savings and cost avoidances...
        Computerized Interfaces Identify Undisclosed Earnings: SSA       797
         use of computerized interfaces with Office of Child
         Support Enforcement database helps prevent or reduce SSI
         overpayments..............................................
        Delaying Full-Rate Reduction of the V-22: DOD restructuring      764
         of the Marine Corps program reduces program costs.........
        More Efficient Use of In-orbit Satellite Capabilities: DOD       702
         reduces excess capacity...................................
        Ensuring Contingency Funds are Spent Properly: DOD's fiscal      650
         year 2002 contingency funding reduced by Congress.........
        Reducing DOD Funding: DOD's fiscal 2002 working capital          639
         fund request reduced due to overestimate of bulk fuels....
        Targeting Tax Credits: Legislative changes in tax laws           564
         related to earned income tax credit eligibility rules and
         Section 936 tax credit achieve savings....................
        Contributing to the Military Base Closure and Realignment        545
         Process: DOD base closures and realignment result in cost
         reductions................................................
        Increasing Use of Excess Property: DOD improves inventory        526
         controls..................................................
                                                                    --------
          Subtotal--Financial benefits between $500 Million and $1     6,046
           Billion.................................................
                                                                    ========
          Total of 100 Financial Benefits Below $500 Million.......    9,900
                                                                    ========
          Grand Total..............................................   37,770
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Return on Investment: $87.8 per dollar invested in GAO.

    Financial Benefits Exceeding $1 Billion
        Preventing Inappropriate Medicare Payments.--Responding, in part,
    to a body of GAO work and recommendations, the Congress passed
    legislation in 1996 that increased funding from fiscal 1998 through
    fiscal 2003 for activities to help safeguard the Medicare program from
    improper payments. With this increased funding, the Department of
    Health and Human Services created a fraud and abuse control program and
    a Medicare integrity program for a variety of abuse-constraining
    activities. The increased funding for these two programs helped the
    Medicare program control improper payments by an additional $8.1
    billion for fiscal 2001 and 2002.
        Improving Farm Loan Programs.--In 1990, GAO designated the
    Department of Agriculture's Farm Loan Programs as a high-risk area
    because of billions of dollars of losses attributable to significant
    problems primarily with the department's direct loan portfolio. Since
    then, the department has implemented many of our recommendations to
    improve the program, and the 1996 Farm Bill incorporated our key
    legislative recommendations. These changes eliminated the revolving-
    door credit for which the department had become known and gave farmers
    strong incentives to repay their loans rather than to seek loan
    forgiveness or loan refinancing that included write-offs of delinquent
    debt. During the 5 years following enactment of the 1996 Farm Bill,
    improvements in the program were estimated to reduce losses on direct
    loans by about $4.8 billion, compared with the losses for the 5
    preceding years.
        Reducing the Cost of Federal Housing Programs.--In response to GAO
    reports and recommendations over the past several years, the Congress,
    the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and the U.S.
    Department of Agriculture's Rural Housing Service took actions that
    produced financial benefits totaling $6.1 billion. Over $4.8 billion
    resulted from GAO's recommendation that HUD review unexpended balances
    in all of its programs to ensure timely expenditure of appropriated
    program funds. The remaining benefits resulted from a series of actions
    in response to our work. For example, the Congress (1) funded fewer new
    programs or set-asides than HUD had requested, (2) terminated Operation
    Safe Home, and (3) enacted legislation that replaced HUD's home
    mortgage assignment program with less costly alternatives.
    Additionally, the Rural Housing Service centralized its servicing for
    rural single family housing loans.
        Adjusting Department of Defense (DOD) Estimates.--GAO reviewed the
    reasonableness of the DOD's requests for fiscal 2001 for contingency
    funding. During internal DOD budget deliberations, DOD officials
    reduced the agency's foreign currency exchange estimates based on
    congressional action--due to GAO's efforts--by $1.5 billion for fiscal
    2002 and 2003. These adjustments did not affect readiness, and the
    Congress used the adjusted funds for other needs.
        Reducing Nuclear Waste Treatment Costs.--In 1996, GAO reviewed the
    Department of Energy's (DOE) Hanford tank waste privatization project
    and found many unresolved technical and financial uncertainties. In
    1998, GAO compared DOE's Hanford approach with several alternative
    contracting and financing strategies and suggested that DOE reassess
    its approach in light of significant cost growth. In June 2000, GAO
    testified that DOE should reevaluate its Hanford approach and consider
    other contracting and financing options. DOE subsequently terminated
    the Hanford tank waste project, and, after evaluating alternative
    contracting and financing options, awarded a new contract that is
    expected to achieve significant cost reductions--about $4 billion--over
    the life of the construction phase. The financial benefit for fiscal
    2003, 2004, and 2005 is about $1.5 billion.
        Retaining the Substantial Gainful Activity Level.--To establish and
    maintain eligibility for disability insurance benefits, beneficiaries
    must not only meet medical eligibility criteria but also demonstrate
    that they are not earning above a certain amount--known as the
    Substantial Gainful Activity (SGA) level. In March 2000, congressional
    hearings focused on the role of earnings in determining initial and
    continuing eligibility for disability benefits for individuals who are
    blind or have other disabilities. Prior to these hearings, bills
    introduced in the House and Senate had proposed eliminating the SGA
    level for the blind. While an advocate organization for the blind
    testified that it wanted the Congress to eliminate the SGA level for
    the blind, GAO responded that doing so would increase the costs of
    disability insurance and fundamentally alter the purpose of the
    disability insurance program by removing the connection between
    eligibility for benefits and the inability to work. As a result of our
    testimony, the Congress retained the SGA for the blind, resulting in a
    financial benefit of $1.124 billion in fiscal 2001 and 2002.
    Financial Benefits Between $500 Million and $1 Billion
        Consolidation Initiatives at Department of Defense Computer.--GAO
    recommended that DOD deploy cost savings measures such as
    consolidation, modernization, and outsourcing of computer center
    activities and processes to make computer center operations more
    economical and efficient. As a result, the Defense Information Systems
    Agency--the agency responsible for managing Defense Enterprise
    Computing Centers--undertook a major DOD project that led to savings or
    cost avoidance over a 4-year period covering fiscal 1998 through 2001.
    More specifically, DOD estimated savings or cost avoidances of $700
    million from consolidation initiatives at computer centers, $39 million
    from consolidating software licenses, and $19 million from optimization
    of storage capabilities. The net present value of the estimated
    financial benefit is $859 million.
        Computerized Interfaces Identify Undisclosed Earnings.--In 1998,
    GAO reported that an Office of Child Support Enforcement database,
    known as the National Directory of New Hires, could be used to help
    prevent or reduce overpayments of supplemental security income that
    occur when recipients fail to fully disclose their earnings. We
    recommended that the Social Security Administration (SSA) develop
    computerized interfaces to access this database and detect undisclosed
    earnings during initial and subsequent determinations of eligibility.
    SSA developed these interfaces, gave all field offices direct access to
    the database, and instructed field staff to use the database for cases
    meeting specified criteria. These actions have resulted in financial
    benefits of about $797 million.
        Delaying Full-Rate Production of the V-22.--In January 2001, GAO
    briefed the Secretary of Defense's V-22 Blue Ribbon Panel about our
    findings on the aircraft. The Blue Ribbon Panel was formed to
    investigate the V-22 after a fatal crash in December 2000, just prior
    to the aircraft's planned full-rate production. The panel received
    information from GAO about reductions in development testing, test
    waivers, deficiencies identified during operational tests, and results
    of an earlier April 2000 crash investigation that also involved
    fatalities. Much of the information in our briefing about the V-22 had
    not been previously disclosed. The panel used the information to
    support its position that the V-22 was not ready for full-rate
    production and that only a minimum production rate should be continued
    during additional testing and evaluation of the aircraft. The Congress
    subsequently rescinded $446.5 million from the fiscal 2001 supplement
    request and reduced the fiscal 2002 request by $296.3 million. The net
    present value of the two actions is $763.8 million.
        More Efficient Use of In-orbit Satellite Capabilities.--In 1998,
    GAO reviewed DOD's development of the Space-Based Infrared System
    (SBIRS), under which the launch of the first SBIRS satellite was
    planned for fiscal 2002. We reported that implementing this plan would
    put eight excess satellites in orbit without providing sufficient
    ground processing capabilities for the data the satellites generated.
    We recommended that the Secretary of Defense review and assess launch
    alternatives. As a result, DOD delayed the launch of the first SBIRS
    satellite from fiscal 2002 to fiscal 2004 and subsequently delayed
    other such launches. These delays, which allow DOD to use existing
    satellites until the end of their expected lives and avoid 8 years of
    excess satellite capability, saved about $702 million in satellite
    costs.
        Ensuring Contingency Funds Are Spent Properly.--Since 1991, the
    Department of Defense has spent more than $25 billion in support of
    military operations in the Balkans and the Persian Gulf. In assessing
    DOD's use of contingency operations funds in fiscal 2000 and 2001, we
    identified millions of dollars in questionable expenditures resulting
    from limited guidance and oversight combined with a lack of cost
    consciousness. In responding to our findings, the Congress reduced DOD
    funding for those operations by $650 million in fiscal 2002. In
    commenting on our report, DOD also stated its intention to improve its
    guidance for and oversight over the use of contingency funds.
        Reducing DOD Funding.--GAO reviewed the reasonableness of DOD's
    fiscal year 2002 budget request for its Defense Working Capital Fund to
    assist subcommittees in their appropriation and authorization
    deliberations. GAO estimated the value of DOD's overstatement due to
    bulk fuels. On the basis of GAO's findings, the Congress adjusted DOD's
    budget request by $639 million.
        Targeting Tax Credits.--Several GAO studies in the early and mid-
    1990s evaluated aspects of the design of the possessions tax credit and
    the earned income tax credit. As a result of these studies, the
    Congress modified the tax code, replacing the possessions tax credit
    with a less generous credit that will be eliminated in 2006 and
    tightening the eligibility requirements for the earned income tax
    credit. More current information on the 5-year impact of these changes
    points to $564 million in revenue savings that GAO has not claimed
    previously.
        Contributing to the Military Base Closure and Realignment
    Process.--Since 1979, GAO has issued a number of reports documenting
    excess infrastructure within the Department of Defense and supporting
    the need for a base closure and realignment process. The Congress
    authorized such a process and enacted legislation requiring us to
    provide it with a series of reports and testimonies validating DOD's
    implementation. We monitored and assessed all phases of the decision-
    making process, including executive-level sessions, for compliance with
    congressional requirements. In addition, GAO staff assisted commissions
    that recommended base closures and realignments in 1991, 1993, and
    1995. The staff helped shape the commissions' decisions through
    analyses of issues associated with closing or realigning specific
    installations. Last year, we reported cost reductions of about $6
    billion associated with our work. Updated DOD data indicate further
    cost reductions of $545 million.
        Increasing Use of Excess Property.--GAO reported that $2.7 billion
    worth of military property recorded as shipped to disposal offices was
    never recorded as received, resulting in losses and write-offs of the
    property from the military services' books and inventory records. GAO
    recommended changes that avoided the write-offs and kept the items as
    part of the services' inventory records until the property was actually
    disposed of. As a result, the inventory was available for use by DOD
    customers during the period prior to disposal. For the first 2 years
    that the changes were in effect, they resulted in savings of $526
    million.

                          HUMAN CAPITAL FLEXIBILITIES

        Senator Campbell. You spoke about what you called human
    capital flexibility. What is an example of human capital
    flexibility?
        Mr. Walker. Two comments. First, in calendar 2000, this
    subcommittee was instrumental in helping us to achieve our
    first set of flexibilities. You gave us the authority to offer
    targeted early outs and targeted buyouts to realign our
    workforce rather than downsize our workforce. The Congress, as
    you know, passed a similar provision for the entire executive
    branch as part of the Department of Homeland Security Act. We
    served as a beta or test case for the entire Government.
        As far as looking forward, one of the things that I am
    looking to do, Mr. Chairman, is right now we have to
    automatically follow the executive branch for the across-the-
    board pay increases that are mandated each year. I would like
    some additional flexibility so we do not have to follow them in
    lock-step. I want to make sure that our compensation is geared
    more toward the skills, knowledge, position and performance of
    our employees, rather than the passage of time and the rate of
    inflation.
        Senator Campbell. You are going to have to help me with
    some of this. As I understand it, about one-third of the GAO's
    resources go to support costs, which means activities that are
    not directly in support of the work for Congress. What are some
    of those support costs, and how does that compare with other
    Government organizations?
        Mr. Walker. I would respectfully suggest that everybody
    that works at GAO is contributing to mission, and if they are
    not contributing to mission, then we should not have them. It
    is as simple as that. There are differences, though, between
    the individuals who are actually doing the audits, the
    investigations, the evaluations, rendering the legal opinions,
    and adjudicating the bid protests versus those who are
    providing support services. Our numbers of staff providing
    support services are reasonable, and in line with other
    agencies; in fact, they are coming down.
        One of the things we have done over the last 4 years is
    reduce the number of so-called support services staff by about
    13 percent, while our overall number of staff has only gone up
    about 1 percent. So, we have taken that 13 percent and
    redeployed it to auditors, investigators and evaluators; those
    who are directly providing services to the Congress. We will
    continue to do that to the extent that we can.

                                 FIELD OFFICES

        Senator Campbell. You have 11 locations, including one in
    my State, in Denver.
        Where is GAO's Denver office located?
        Mr. Walker. GAO's Denver field office is located in the
    Cesar E. Chavez Memorial Building at 1244 Speer Boulevard,
    Suite 800, Denver, Colorado.
        We would love to have you any time you want to come.
        Senator Campbell. Maybe I will try to visit that just so I
    can learn a little more about your Denver operation. We have
    terrible deficits and a lot of changes in our budget proposals,
    as you know. Do you intend to keep those 11 open? What are your
    plans, at least for the foreseeable future for your field
    offices?
        Mr. Walker. I do, Mr. Chairman. I think it is important to
    note that back in the early 1980's, GAO had 42 offices,
    including 3 overseas offices. When I came in, we had 16 offices
    and none overseas. I conducted a very extensive review and
    analysis, and we went from 16 to 11. I believe that these 11
    offices are appropriate for the foreseeable future.

                             FIELD OFFICE CLOSURES

        Senator Campbell. Did they just consolidate some of the
    other ones?
        Mr. Walker. We closed five offices, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Campbell. Has that been a substantial savings to do
    that?
        Mr. Walker. These office closures enabled us to free up
    some resources to redeploy for other purposes and, therefore,
    to minimize additional budget requests to the Congress. By the
    way, some of the authorities Congress gave us helped us
    tremendously to achieve that objective as well.

                                WALKER V. CHENEY

        Senator Campbell. Now, I am not an attorney, so I do not
    follow an awful lot of the court cases like some of my
    colleagues, but tell me about the District Court's decision not
    to hear the Walker versus Cheney case. How does that affect
    you?
        Mr. Walker. We do not believe it will have a significant
    adverse effect on GAO and our ability to do our job. That was a
    case in which a Federal District Court Judge in Washington,
    D.C. dismissed the case for lack of standing.
        We believe it was wrongly decided, based in part on
    material factual errors. However, I decided not to appeal the
    case, primarily because it dealt with an area that only
    represents a narrow percentage of our work, namely the work
    dealing directly with the Office of the Vice President. Second,
    this case was viewed by many as being more of a political
    battle, and I do not want to get in the middle of a political
    battle. Third, it would have taken years to pursue, even if we
    had appealed the case. So, my view is the better part of valor
    was to move on and look for a better case in the future. The
    decision has not had an adverse affect on our access authority
    since then.
        Importantly, the judge did not directly address our
    statutory rights to information. He did not decide who was
    right or wrong. He just basically said that the judicial branch
    should not have to decide this dispute between the executive
    and the legislative branches. But we are monitoring the
    situation closely, and to the extent that we believe that we
    have any problems, we will come to the Congress for appropriate
    action.

                         EMERGENCY WARTIME SUPPLEMENTAL

        Senator Campbell. This week the White House submitted a $75
    billion request for this war and homeland security, which
    included $125 million for the legislative branch. Is any of
    that money in there intended to go to the GAO and what would
    you use it for?
        Mr. Walker. Well, Mr. Chairman, I am glad you asked that.
        We did ask for $4.849 million which will be used for
    safety- and security-related improvements, not just for GAO and
    our employees, but as you know, we are also a contingency site
    for the House of Representatives. In fact, we housed the House
    of Representatives during a 2-week period due to the anthrax
    event that occurred in the fall of calendar 2001.
        For the first time in history, OMB did not pass through the
    entire legislative branch request to the Congress. That is
    unprecedented. I believe it is inappropriate; it is a
    separation of powers issue. I would respectfully hope that the
    Congress would include that $4.849 million as part of the
    supplemental, because we believe it is not just necessary for
    GAO, it is also necessary because of our designation as a
    possible contingency site for the U.S. House of
    Representatives.

                                CLOSING REMARKS

        Senator Campbell. Thank you. Was the anthrax issue 2 years
    ago?
        Mr. Walker. Time flies, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Campbell. Okay. I appreciate that. I have no
    further questions.
        Mr. Walker. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I would be happy
    to answer any additional questions for the record.
        Senator Campbell. Thank you. I think we may submit some,
    particularly Senator Durbin, since he is not yet here.
                           GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

    STATEMENT OF BRUCE R. JAMES, PUBLIC PRINTER
    ACCOMPANIED BY:
            GEORGE A. TAYLOR, DEPUTY PUBLIC PRINTER
            FRANK A. PARTLOW, JR., CHIEF OF STAFF
            JUDITH C. RUSSELL, SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS

        Senator Campbell. Our next panel is Mr. Bruce James, the
    Public Printer, and he will be accompanied by Mr. George
    Taylor, Mr. Frank Partlow, and Judith Russell, and I assume Mr.
    James will be the only one making a statement, is that right?
        Mr. James. Well, I am the only one making an opening
    statement, Mr. Chairman, but I may call on my colleagues if
    your questions are too tough.
        Senator Campbell. Go ahead, Mr. James.
        Mr. James. Well, I want to welcome you to the subcommittee,
    too, and I am looking forward to a long and good working
    relationship with you. As you know, I am the new Public
    Printer. I have been here since the beginning of December, just
    a little over 3 months, and have come to the conclusion that
    this is going to be the best job I have ever had. The reason
    is, it is the toughest.
        This is an interesting situation. The first 2 days I was on
    the job I spoke with our employees, gave five speeches over 2
    days. We never close, as you know, so I was in at 4 o'clock in
    the morning, I was in at 10 o'clock at night giving speeches,
    and what I talked to our employees about was the fact that the
    19th century was not going to return, and by that I mean that
    printing as our middle name--the Government Printing Office--
    may well get in the way of how we view ourselves and how we
    viewed ourselves over the years.
        The United States Government Printing Office has a mission
    of making certain that we collect all Government documents, we
    process those documents, we catalog those documents, we
    distribute the documents to depository libraries throughout the
    United States, and we preserve those documents in perpetuity.
    The fact that some of our documents end up with ink on paper is
    not the main purpose of our mission, and what we are seeing for
    the first time is that the amount of material that is printed
    is going to fall below 50 percent. We believe as much as 60
    percent of the Government documents this year will be in
    digital form. They will not see ink on paper.
        It does not mean they will not be printed. They may well be
    printed from a personal computer, but they will not be printed
    at the United States Government Printing Office or by one of
    our printers. Therefore, what that means is that it is
    necessary that we face the future squarely, and that we design
    a business model for the Government Printing Office that is a
    21st century business model, and that is what we are starting
    to do.
        You probably noticed the article in this morning's
    Washington Post which talked about the GPO reorganization. I
    thought it was a good article. I thought they captured the
    spirit of what we are trying to do. We are reorganizing the GPO
    to be more flexible to provide much better customer service, to
    be able to drive decisionmaking in our organization down to
    lower levels, to increase the efficiency.
        We have also embarked on a strategic planning process that
    I think at the end of the day will result in a new GPO that is
    absolutely attuned to the future. It is a three-stage process.
    The first part of the process is what I call fact-finding, and
    what we are doing is, we are talking to our customers, we are
    talking to our employees, we are talking to the printers in the
    United States, we are talking with librarians, and we are
    trying to understand exactly where they are going in the
    future.
        We want to understand what our resources are truly, not
    anecdotally, but what our true resources are, and after we
    gather all these facts together it is my job to get everybody
    on the same page and get everybody to agree that these are the
    facts, and once we have agreement on the facts, then we will
    move forward to make a plan, and we expect that that plan will
    outline, as I say, a new business model for the GPO that will
    be based around a digital infrastructure that will offer to
    Congress solutions for some of the problems that we face
    together.
        As an example, if you today order a paper document from the
    Superintendent of Documents, that document will be delivered to
    you by the United States mail, it will come in a Government-
    franked envelope, the penalty envelope. You tear that envelope
    open, and you have in your hands what you have every right to
    believe is an authentic United States Government document.
        On the other hand, if you download that same document from
    the Internet, you have no way of knowing today that that is an
    authentic document, so one of the problems that we have to
    address and solve is, how can we guarantee that information
    downloaded from a Government Web site is an authentic U.S.
    Government document?
        At the other end of the scale, if we print a document on
    paper, we have every reason to believe that document will be
    here 500, 600, 700, 800 years from now. Unless paper documents
    are exposed to direct sunlight, they will last forever.
        On the other hand, if we record it only on magnetic media,
    it may be gone in 10 years. So as long as Congress charges us
    with the responsibility for making certain this material will
    last in perpetuity, we have got to find a solution to this,
    too, and I believe this will be both a technical solution as
    well as a business solution.
        So we have to end up structuring our organization to take
    advantage of the new technological opportunities to make
    certain that we are not just repeating the past, that we are
    not living in the 19th century. A lot of that has to do with
    reforming our business practices. I think that I can report to
    you that at this point our labor organizations, our unions are
    solidly behind the direction we are going. We are working
    together in partnership to move this forward.
        I can address and I will address our request from you this
    year. As Mr. Walker said, we recognize, too, that Congress is
    going to be limited in what you can appropriate to legislative
    branch agencies this year, and we are mindful of that. We have
    two major areas that we are requesting funds for. One is the
    Congressional Printing and Binding Appropriation. That is to do
    your work. We anticipate that your work this year will result
    in a 1.7 percent increase over last year. That is what we are
    asking for.
        The second area is the Salaries and Expenses Appropriation
    for the Superintendent of Documents, and that is for the
    distribution of Government information throughout the country.
    We are asking for a 3 percent increase there for continuing
    operations, and that is basically to cover mandatory pay and
    benefit increases, as well as slight price level increases.
        We are also asking you to make two investments in the
    Government Printing Office this year. One of those investments
    is a $4.1 million allocation to allow us to replace 10-year-old
    technology, computer technology used to distribute digital
    information over the Internet. We simply have waited almost too
    long to make this kind of investment. We are ready to make it.
    We have the people in place to wisely spend the money.
        The second area we are asking for is a special $10 million
    appropriation to help us readjust our labor force. As you
    undoubtedly know, we have been operating the last few years in
    the red, and as I have examined the reasons why we have been in
    the red, it is very clear that our labor costs are above what
    is required to process the volume of work we have today, the
    volume and mix of work we have today, and we believe that we
    are in a position to reduce the labor force by about 10
    percent, or 300 people.
        We would like to be able to offer an incentive to our labor
    force to induce some of the people that are eligible for
    retirement to retire perhaps earlier than when they expected
    to. We anticipate that a $10 million investment on your part
    will result in an $18 million cost savings next fiscal year to
    us, so those are the two areas that we are asking you to
    participate with us in. I think that particularly these capital
    investments, are modest. They are less than 2 percent of our
    overall budget, probably should be higher than that, but I am
    not going to come to you with any proposition that I cannot see
    a clear payback to, and at this point I can recommend these to
    you. You will get a payback.

                               PREPARED STATEMENT

        I will be happy to answer any questions you might have, Mr.
    Chairman.
        [The statement follows:]

                      Prepared Statement of Bruce R. James

        Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, it is a great honor
    to be here today to present the appropriations request of the U.S.
    Government Printing Office (GPO) for fiscal year 2004. It is also a
    great privilege. There are few posts in the Government and few Federal
    agencies that have stood the test of time as well as that of the Public
    Printer and the GPO. I intend to do my best to uphold the tradition of
    the office while providing the leadership required to guide the GPO
    into a new era, to ensure that it remains as relevant and necessary to
    the information needs of Congress, Federal agencies, and the public in
    the 21st century as it was for the first 140 years of its existence.
    With just over three months on the job, I have begun to carry out that
    promise.
        GPO's Mission.--GPO has a proud history, one built on innovation,
    craftsmanship, scale, flexibility, and a singular dedication to meeting
    the printing needs of the Federal Government and the information needs
    of the American people. It is one of the Nation's oldest and most
    venerable agencies, within which the official version of every great
    American state paper since President Lincoln's time has been produced.
        Today we are responsible for the production and distribution of
    information products and services for all three branches of the Federal
    Government. Many of the Nation's most important information products,
    such as the Congressional Record and all other legislative information
    supporting the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, are produced
    at GPO's main plant, a 1.5 million square foot complex that is the
    largest information processing, printing, and distribution facility in
    the world. Working in partnership with the American printing industry,
    GPO also maintains a pool of private sector vendors nationwide to
    produce print and other information products for the Federal
    Government, ranging from Supreme Court decisions to IRS tax forms and
    crop reports for the Department of Agriculture.
        GPO's middle name--a name we are going to change--gets in the way
    of our true mission, which is keeping America informed by distributing
    the official information products of the Government, thereby sustaining
    one of the keystones of our 200-year old experiment in freedom: an
    enlightened public. This is a mission that traces its origins to our
    Founding Fathers. During the Constitutional Convention, James Wilson of
    Pennsylvania said, ``The people have a right to know what their agents
    are doing or have done, and it should not be in the option of the
    legislature to conceal their proceedings,'' creating the grounds for
    the constitutional requirement in Article I, section 5, that ``Each
    House shall keep a Journal of its Proceedings, and from time to time
    publish the same . . .'' Later, it was James Madison who eloquently
    said:

        A popular Government without popular information, or the means of
    acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy; or perhaps
    both. Knowledge will forever govern ignorance: And a people who mean to
    be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power that
    knowledge gives.

        Congress moved early to establish the ``means of acquiring''
    information that Madison spoke of. GPO's mission today traces its roots
    to an act of the 13th Congress, which provided for the distribution of
    congressional and other Government documents on a regular basis to
    libraries and other institutions in each state for that Congress and
    ``every future Congress.'' This farsighted act established the
    antecedent for the Federal Depository Library Program, a program funded
    through GPO's appropriations, which today serves millions of Americans
    through a network of some 1,200 public, academic, law, and other
    libraries located in virtually every congressional district across the
    Nation. Along with that program, GPO today also provides public access
    to the wealth of official Federal information through public sales,
    through various statutory and reimbursable distribution programs, and--
    most prominently--by posting nearly a quarter of a million Federal
    titles online on GPO Access (www.gpo.gov/gpoaccess), GPO's award-
    winning Web site that is used by the public to retrieve more than 31
    million documents free of charge every month.
        New Strategic Direction.--Just as GPO's middle name gets in the way
    of understanding our true mission, the nature of what we do, printing--
    once the world's only mass communications medium--has been eclipsed by
    revolutionary changes in electronic information technologies,
    principally the Internet. Where once printing predominated as the means
    of communication between the Government and the public, new and ever-
    evolving strategies of communications are not only possible but have
    become mainstream practices, changing how America is kept informed.
        While printing will not disappear in our lifetime, its role in our
    lives--and in the lives of GPO's customers--has been forever changed.
    We are now in a period where we need to sort out what continues to
    belong in print and what best belongs in information retrieval systems
    that allow the public to define their own information needs, then
    search against databases of information that we construct to retrieve
    only what they need, only when they need it. Therein lies the challenge
    for GPO. Like every other manufacturing business in America, GPO must
    reinvent itself if it is to remain relevant and viable for the future.
    We must take a new look at the changing and emerging information needs
    of our customers and develop a deeper understanding of our true
    strengths so that we can plan for and build a new business model that
    will allow us to meet the information demands of our customers in the
    21st century. Then we must convince Congress and our customers to
    support our plan. As Public Printer, I lead this effort.
        To develop a plan that works, our first step is to determine the
    facts regarding GPO's strengths and weaknesses and the problems and
    opportunities facing us. We are already engaged in that process through
    participation in a wide-ranging General Accounting Office study of
    Federal printing and information policy, ordered by the Senate. In a
    related effort, the GAO is also conducting a general management review
    of our operations. When these studies are concluded later this year we
    will have a factual basis on which to build a strategic plan.
        The plan will present a new vision of GPO, establish specific and
    measurable short- and long-term goals and objectives, and contain
    budget and timetable details. Our next task will be to gain support for
    the plan from Congress, the Administration, and our customers, from the
    library and information communities, from the printing industry and the
    labor unions, and from all those who have a stake in the future of the
    goals of Federal information policy first articulated by the Founders.
    Then we must carry out the plan, to transform GPO into an information
    service equipped and staffed to meet the information demands of the
    21st century: an agency whose mission will be to capture digitally,
    organize, maintain, authenticate, distribute, and provide permanent
    public access to, the information products and services of the Federal
    Government.
        Transformation Process Begun.--Since I took office in early
    December, we have begun several initiatives to redirect the GPO's focus
    and begin transforming our operations:
      --Reorganization.--We have implemented an organizational model that
            is relatively new to the Federal Government but widely used in
            industry, wherein the chief executive officer (Public Printer)
            focuses on organizational policy and long-range planning and
            the second in command (Deputy Public Printer) serves as chief
            operating officer focusing on the day-to-day operations of the
            business. Working in collaboration with GPO's senior managers,
            we have rolled out a new top-level organizational structure
            that will be more responsive to the needs of our customers and
            employees and serve in a transition phase over the next two
            years.
      --Focus on Employees.--Through a series of round-the-clock meetings
            to cover all three shifts, I've met with most of our employees
            and their union representatives in our central office, and to
            date I've visited GPO operations in Laurel, Philadelphia,
            Denver, and Pueblo. I've asked for their help in retooling GPO
            from top to bottom into an organization that will make us all
            proud. The response has been highly positive: our employees are
            ready and eager for change, and I continue to be impressed by
            the superior quality of the personnel who staff the GPO. We've
            begun recruiting efforts at colleges and universities around
            the country to begin reversing the decades-long drain on GPO's
            talent. We've implemented the first new employee incentive
            program at GPO in over a decade to reward creativity,
            dedication, and initiative. We've expanded our workforce
            development budget to $3 million--just 1.5 percent of our
            overall budget, but 5 times the amount previously allocated--to
            ensure that no one is left behind as we transform our
            operations, and we've altered our workforce development policy
            to emphasize training that is mission-related, not simply job-
            related. We're expanding the use of digital communications
            internally, and we've created a new Employee Communications
            Office to provide employees with the information they need to
            do their jobs effectively.
      --New Image.--We've redesigned GPO's logo to create a new image that
            moves us away from printing and into the 21st century area of
            digital information processing and multi-media dissemination.
      --Emphasis on Customer Service.--A principal goal is to redirect
            GPO's operations toward customer service--helping our customers
            meet their goals, rather than bending their needs to fit what
            we provide. I've been meeting with Members of Congress, key
            congressional staff, Federal agency heads, the heads of Federal
            operations with congruent missions--such as the Postmaster
            General, Director of the Bureau of Engraving and Printing, and
            Director of the Mint, the library and information communities,
            the printing industry, and others--to win support for the GPO
            and increase our future business opportunities. I am especially
            interested in exploring ways of helping Congress reinvent its
            information products to help expedite its work.
      --Resolution of Printing Controversy.--One of my earliest meetings
            was with Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Mitch
            Daniels, where we reached an agreement to set aside the
            contention between our agencies regarding Federal printing
            policy. Since then, OMB sent the U.S. Budget to GPO for
            production and the proposed policy change in printing has not
            been issued. I have asked Mr. Daniels to walk forward with me
            as we establish the facts about printing and information policy
            and devise a policy that fits the 21st century, and I look
            forward to working with OMB on this important task.
      --Technology Innovation and Partnerships.--I've also been meeting
            with the top management of our suppliers--from printing
            companies to equipment manufacturers--to explore the
            opportunities for the GPO to assume a leadership position in
            technological innovation in the digital information era. As
            part of our reorganization I've created a new Office of
            Innovation and Partnerships to get us moving on technology
            opportunities. It will also guide us in the creation of
            partnerships with other public and private sector entities to
            carry out our mission. Partnerships--the use of which is
            widespread in industry--will be critical to the transformation
            of the GPO.
      --Depository Libraries of the Future.--In meetings with members of
            the library community at the American Library Association
            Midwinter Conference in Philadelphia, and at the upcoming
            Regional Conference of the Depository Library Advisory Council,
            I have challenged all to help us in developing a new depository
            library program model that recognizes that more than 50 percent
            of the information coming into the program is now only in
            electronic form, never reaching ink-on-paper. This is one of
            the biggest challenges that confronts us today, and its
            resolution will directly impact the appropriations that are
            provided annually for this purpose.
      --Contingency Planning.--Part of our reorganization was the creation
            of a Contingency Planning effort, reporting to the Chief of
            Staff, to plan for emergency preparedness, protection of our
            employees, and continuity-of-government operations in concert
            with similar planning efforts in Congress, Federal agencies,
            the District of Columbia, and elsewhere. We are working
            directly with the House and Senate to ensure continuity of
            operations in the event of an emergency, and we are finalizing
            operational improvements funded through the fiscal year 2001
            emergency supplemental.
        GPO's Appropriations.--The transformation of GPO will be a
    collaborative process, one that involves all of GPO's stakeholders,
    especially Congress. With the transformation we will provide Congress,
    Federal agencies, and the public an agency equipped and staffed to
    bring about change in Federal information products and services. In
    order to make the transition happen, however, GPO needs funding not
    only to continue product and service provision, but to begin making the
    investments we know are needed now to position us for the future. Our
    appropriations request for fiscal year 2004 is targeted at these two
    objectives: maintenance of product and service quality, and investment
    in necessary technology improvements and critical workforce
    restructuring initiatives. With the proper funding, we will be able to
    carry out the task of remaking the GPO.
        GPO has three separate appropriation accounts: the Congressional
    Printing and Binding Appropriation, and the Salaries and Expenses
    Appropriation of the Superintendent of Documents, and the Revolving
    Fund.
        The Congressional Printing and Binding Appropriation covers the
    estimated costs of producing the Congressional Record, bills, reports,
    hearings, documents, and related products required for the legislative
    process. This appropriation is critical to the maintenance and
    operation of GPO's in-plant capacity, which is structured to serve
    Congress's information product needs. It also covers database
    preparation work on congressional publications disseminated online via
    GPO Access.
        The Salaries and Expenses Appropriation of the Superintendent of
    Documents is used to pay for costs associated with documents
    distribution and information dissemination functions required by law.
    The majority of the appropriation is for the Federal Depository Library
    Program (FDLP), under which Government publications and information
    products are disseminated to 1,200 Federal depository libraries where
    they are available for the free use of the public. Related statutory
    functions covered by this appropriation are cataloging and indexing,
    by-law distribution, and the international exchange distribution of
    U.S. Government publications. Finally, this appropriation provides the
    majority of funding for the operation of GPO Access.
        The Revolving Fund is structured to provide working capital for
    GPO's operations, and to fund routine improvements to equipment and
    facilities. Non-recurring or extraordinary costs are met by
    appropriations to the Revolving Fund for specific purposes.
        Continuation of Services.--For the Congressional Printing and
    Binding Appropriation, we are requesting $91.1 million for fiscal year
    2004, an increase of 1.7 percent over the funding recently approved for
    fiscal year 2003. This amount will cover all estimated congressional
    printing requirements for fiscal year 2004, as detailed in our budget
    submission.
        GPO is fully prepared to assist the Secretary of the Senate, the
    Clerk of the House, the leaderships of both Chambers, and Members,
    committees, and staffs in efforts to improve the utility of
    congressional information products and services to the legislative
    process and reduce costs through the elimination of waste and
    duplication of effort. Rather than solely responding to requests from
    Congress, I view GPO's role as one of providing expert advice and
    assistance to Congress in the area of legislative information products
    and services, and we will be proactive in exercising this role. We are
    also prepared to participate in the Legislative Branch Chief
    Administrative Officers Council mandated by the conferees on the
    Legislative Branch Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (H. Rpt.
    108-10).
        For the Salaries and Expenses Appropriation of the Superintendent
    of Documents, we are requesting an increase of 3 percent, or $871,000,
    over the amount approved for fiscal year 2003 to cover mandatory pay
    and benefits increases as well as price level changes.
        The transition to a more electronic Federal Depository Library
    Program (FDLP) is continuing in fulfillment of direction from Congress
    that ``emphasis should be on streamlining the distribution of
    traditional copies of publications which may include providing online
    access and less expensive electronic formats.'' Nearly 60 percent of
    the 34,800 new FDLP titles made available during fiscal year 2002 were
    disseminated electronically. For fiscal year 2003 to date, nearly 60
    percent of the new titles made available to the public through the FDLP
    have been online. Through its electronic information dissemination
    component, the FDLP now delivers more content to users than ever
    before. However, in order to preserve public access, the distribution
    of tangible formats--defined as print, CD-ROM, and microfiche formats--
    continues for those titles for which there is no acceptable online
    alternative. For fiscal year 2002, we distributed approximately 5
    million copies of 14,000 titles in tangible formats; overall, tangible
    formats comprised about one-third of all titles made available through
    the FDLP.
        Investment in GPO's Future.--To begin essential investment in GPO's
    future, we are requesting additional funds above the levels required
    for continuation of services. These funds, amounting to slightly less
    than 2 percent of GPO's total annual budget, represent a new point of
    departure for GPO.
        An additional $4.1 million is requested for the Salaries and
    Expenses Appropriation to replace obsolete technology used by the GPO
    Access system by upgrading its search and retrieval system, now nearly
    a decade old. These funds will also cover depreciation costs for GPO's
    new Integrated Library System and for our GPO Access mirror site
    operations, which are essential both to load-balancing for this
    heavily-used system as well as continuity of government operations.
    These are information technology investments that will yield proven
    results as two-thirds of all new titles today are electronic and
    significant growth in this area will continue.
        Also essential to GPO's future is $10 million we are requesting to
    be appropriated to the Revolving Fund to cover the costs associated
    with necessary workforce restructuring under retirement incentive
    authority established by law. This is an investment in human capital
    that will enable GPO to manage the size, composition, and skills of our
    workforce as required by our rapidly changing technology. The
    efficiency of operations will depend largely on our ability to increase
    the productivity of the workforce by developing needed skills,
    replacing aging systems, reengineering work processes, and achieving
    the right staffing levels. GPO last conducted a retirement incentive
    program in fiscal year 1994, reducing employment levels by
    approximately 350 at a cost of about $9.5 million.
        Legislative Changes.--Along with our appropriations request, we are
    seeking two technical legislative changes to Title 44, U.S.C., to
    improve our ability to attract and retain leadership talent and give us
    the authority to accept contributions of equipment and services as well
    as transfer or donate surplus equipment to appropriate entities. Both
    changes would significantly assist my vision of transforming the GPO.
      --We have submitted language requesting a revision to 44 U.S.C. 303
            to increase the statutory pay levels of the Public Printer and
            Deputy Public Printer. The current levels have been in place
            for more than a decade and are causing pay compression for
            GPO's senior level service. The maximum salary available to
            GPO's senior level service is capped at Executive Level IV,
            $134,000. By contrast, 60 percent of the Senior Executive
            Service in the executive branch is paid at the current cap,
            $142,500 (the same as Executive Level III), according to a
            recent new report from the National Academy of Public
            Administration. Without the ability to compete on a level
            playing field with executive pay for the rest of the Federal
            Government, much less with executive pay in the private sector,
            we will be unable to recruit and retain the talent we need to
            bring change to the GPO.
          While we have submitted language adjusting the pay Executive
            Levels II and III, a more appropriate model exists in the pay
            system for the Director and Deputy Director of the
            Congressional Budget Office (CBO), adopted by Congress in the
            Legislative Branch Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 1999: the
            Director is paid at ``the lower of the highest rate of
            compensation of any officer in the Senate or any officer in the
            House of Representatives.'' The Deputy is paid $1,000 less than
            the Director. This model would satisfy our objective of
            alleviating pay compression without raising the Public
            Printer's pay to the level of the pay Members of Congress
            receive.
      --We are also requesting authority to accept contributions of
            property and services on behalf of the GPO. Currently, GPO is
            not authorized by law to accept uncompensated contributions of
            property and services. This authority will allow us to accept
            the placement of prototype equipment for beta-testing and
            systems trials without requiring a significant Government
            investment, providing us with the flexibility we need to
            evaluate new and emerging technologies onsite in this period of
            rapid technological change. It will also permit us to operate
            intern programs associated with academic printing, technology,
            and management programs, and to work with the private and non-
            profit sector on the development of programs designed to
            increase the public visibility of GPO's operations, such as the
            creation of a printing museum similar to the U.S. Postal
            Service Museum located nearby.
          The authority we are requesting is similar to donation acceptance
            authorities possessed by many Federal agencies, such as the
            Library of Congress, the U.S. Court of Veterans Appeals, the
            Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Consumer
            Product Safety Commission, the Department of Commerce, the
            Administrative Office of United States Courts, and the
            Department of Labor. However, the language we have submitted is
            primarily for placeholder purposes with the recognition that it
            may be subject to further revision. Of course, acceptance of
            contributions of property and services would be subject to the
            usual limitations covering donations to the Government.
      --Finally, we are requesting the authority to transfer or donate
            surplus property. GPO's equipment profile will undergo
            significant change in the coming period, and the appropriate
            disposition of surplus property would be facilitated with the
            authority to transfer or donate surplus property similar to
            that possessed by the Administrator of the General Services
            Administration. Currently, when any GPO property is declared
            surplus it must be sold to the highest competitive bidder. In
            addition to imposing an administrative burden in the conduct of
            the sale, this process often results in a price that is
            extremely low when compared to the actual value of the item
            when in use. We are proposing language that would provide us
            with discretionary authority to transfer or donate surplus GPO
            property to specific governmental and non-profit entities such
            as other Federal entities, educational or non-profit
            institutions as defined by the Internal Revenue Code, or state
            or local governments. In addition, it would allow us to donate
            surplus publications rather than destroying them and selling
            them as scrap paper.
        Representation Allowance.--We are requesting an increase for GPO's
    representation fund. The fund will be important in our effort to
    promote the concept of changing the GPO. We need to re-connect with our
    many vendors and customers as we attempt to regain our momentum and re-
    establish ourselves as the premier agent for the collection,
    dissemination, and preservation of the Government's information. Its
    use also will afford the GPO many first hand opportunities to hear the
    concerns and needs of the people and institutions we serve, especially
    those that will be essential to our future success. The fund will be
    subject to established limitations on its use. We will continue to make
    it available for official councils and groups advising the Public
    Printer, such as the Depository Library Advisory Council.
        Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I truly believe GPO's
    appropriations request for fiscal year 2004 represents a new departure
    for this agency in preparing for the future. I thank you for your
    support and encouragement of change at the GPO, and I look forward to
    working with you and the Appropriations Committees in your review and
    consideration of our request. This concludes my prepared statement, and
    I would be pleased to answer any questions you may have.

        Senator Campbell. I have a couple, but before I do, I would
    like to invite Senator Durbin if he has any comments before we
    go on.
        Senator Durbin. I will just put my opening statement in the
    record.
        Senator Campbell. Your statement will be in the record
    then.
        [The statement follows:]

                Prepared Statement of Senator Richard J. Durbin

        Mr. Chairman, thank you for scheduling today's hearing, the
    first of five budget oversight hearings to be held by the
    Legislative Branch Subcommittee this Spring.
        Mr. Chairman, I am happy to be working with you on this
    important bill this year. I had a great working relationship
    with your predecessor, Senator Bennett, and I am sure you and I
    will work very well together, too.
        This is an important Subcommittee. There are 12 other
    Appropriations Subcommittees that fund all of the Executive
    Branch Agencies and Departments. The Legislative Branch has
    this one Subcommittee in which we need to fund all of the tools
    and resources required of a co-equal branch of government.
        As you know, I was Chairman of this Subcommittee for most
    of the 107th Congress and believe that Senator Bennett, the
    other Subcommittee Members, and I accomplished many great
    things during the last few years.
        In fact, one of my accomplishments as a Senator that I take
    the most pride in is the student loan reimbursement program for
    Congressional staff that was initiated by this Subcommittee.
        We ask for tremendous sacrifices on the part of our staffs
    up here. The hours are long and highly unpredictable. The work
    is very demanding. And, frankly, the pay is not that great.
        Despite all of that, Hill staff are the most loyal,
    dedicated, and talented group of people I have ever met.
    Anything we can do, however small, to encourage young people to
    make public service a career is worth pursuing.
        More and more Member Offices and Committees are taking
    advantage of the student loan reimbursement program each year
    and that pleases me to no end.
        Today we are going to hear from three important Legislative
    Branch agencies, the General Accounting Office, the Government
    Printing Office, and the Congressional Budget Office. I join
    Chairman Campbell in welcoming David Walker, the Comptroller
    General of the United States, Bruce James, the U.S. Public
    Printer, and Douglas Holtz-Eakin, the Director of the
    Congressional Budget Office to today's hearing.
        Gentlemen, all of you seem to be requesting, with one or
    two exceptions, relatively modest cost-of-living increases for
    your organizations this year. Obviously, this is prudent, up to
    a point, during a time of both recession and war.
        However, it is important to the Members of this
    Subcommittee that you have the resources you need to do your
    jobs effectively and efficiently.
        To the extent that any of your budgets request have holes
    in them that are going to negatively impact your performance
    during fiscal year 2004, I hope you will share those concerns
    with us.
        Two points before I wrap up:
        First, Mr. Walker, I hope you will spend several minutes
    today discussing whatever plans or thoughts you have concerning
    access to executive branch information in light of the recent
    events surrounding the Cheney suit. We need to know what you
    need from Congress in order for you to be able to continue to
    be effective in your role as the investigative arm of Congress.
        Let me also say that I appreciate the way you have chosen
    to work with Congress on such a sensitive issue. This was a
    very delicate matter and I thought you navigated it pretty well
    under difficult circumstances.
        Second, Mr. James, I want to express my appreciation to you
    for your dogged determination to work with the OMB to try to
    get a truce declared in their on-going war against public
    printing. It seems that you are being given some time to make
    your case to the Budget Director, so, for the moment, I am
    willing to stand down on this issue. You showed up ready to
    work on Day 1 as the Public Printer and I respect that.
        I am looking forward to hearing your testimony about your
    plans to modernize the Government Printing Office.
        Mr. Chairman, I will conclude here and request that my
    entire statement, as well as a series of questions, be made a
    part of the record.
        Once again, congratulations on becoming Chair of this
    important Subcommittee.
        Thank you.

                                 REVOLVING FUND

        Senator Campbell. Since we have one more witness before we
    run to vote, let me just do a couple of short ones. You talked
    about the losses you had and, as I understand it, those losses
    have totaled, since 1988 through 2002--$44.6 million. How do
    you operate with that many shortfalls over that number of
    years, and I know you just came on board. You might not know
    the total answer to that, but give me an idea.
        Mr. James. I can certainly explain to you where the money
    is coming from.
        Senator Campbell. I can, too, from here.
        Mr. James. I absolutely shake my head when I look back and
    see the losses and the fact that they have continued year after
    year after year. The enterprise has not been run as a business,
    as you might expect, when you see these losses.
        Senator Campbell. Is that what you would consider a major
    weakness, that it has not been run like a business?
        Mr. James. Absolutely. Absolutely. The losses have been
    funded by our revolving fund. The revolving fund consists of
    retained earnings. Those are earnings that have been built up
    over 50 years. The purpose of those retained earnings is to
    replace obsolete equipment, and what we have been doing instead
    is funding these losses year after year and, in essence, eating
    into our future.

                                 GPO WORKFORCE

        Senator Campbell. I understand about half of your workforce
    is eligible for retirement. You talked a little bit about that,
    but if you have that many that are eligible for retirement,
    that means if you downsize on the number of people, you will
    just not hire replacements. It will be kind of a painless way
    of downsizing for the people that are working there, I assume.
    Is that right?
        Mr. James. Exactly. We are looking for a painless way to
    downsize. Now, clearly we will be adding people back into the
    organization, and I want to emphasize that, because for a
    period of 20 years the GPO dropped from 9,000 to 3,000 folks,
    and during that period they added almost no one into the
    organization, so today I have almost no one from 30 to 50 who
    is a manager in the organization, and that is seriously hurting
    succession, so while we are reducing the force in total, we
    will be selectively adding back in the skills that are required
    for the future.

                                   TECHNOLOGY

        Senator Campbell. You also mentioned something about the
    19th century practices. I am not a real high-tech guy, but I
    will tell you that it seems to me every 2 years or 3 years the
    things you were using 2 or 3 years ago are already obsolete, so
    I can understand in your Department you are going to have to
    have a major effort to stay ahead of the curve on new
    technology.
        I will submit the rest of my questions to you in writing if
    it is all right with you, Mr. James.
        I would like to invite my colleague and friend, if there
    are any questions he has.
        Senator Durbin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is good to be
    with you in your new capacity, and I look forward to working
    with you, and you have a great assistant there who has helped
    all of us over the years. Let me ask you, Mr. James, it sounds
    like when you get to the GPO, coming out of the private sector,
    it is not a business that you would have wanted to buy.
        Mr. James. I would have not bought it except for the
    opportunity. There is a tremendous opportunity here. It is what
    got me to leave the hills of northern Nevada and a wonderful
    living condition, the opportunity to come in here and look at
    this enterprise and figure out how to take it into the 21st
    century. What the Government Printing Office has accomplished
    on behalf of the country in the last 150 years is truly
    amazing.
        If you think about this, we have the record of the
    Government spread throughout the United States. There is no one
    action that could ever wipe out the record of the Government.
    We have people in every State in this Nation in the principal
    population areas able to walk into a library and access any
    document the Government has produced. It is a tremendous
    legacy, and my fear is that if we are not very careful, that we
    will leave this behind as we move into the digital world, and
    we may well lose the record of the Government. It is worth
    coming in and trying to figure this out.

                                 PRIVATIZATION

        Senator Durbin. So the people who say, privatize it, get
    rid of it, it was inefficient and we can do this by contracting
    out, would you disagree with that conclusion?
        Mr. James. Well, I think they may be not well-informed, and
    I say this to you, Senator, actually during the Second World
    War the Government Printing Office became overwhelmed with the
    amount of work they had, and for the first time began to
    contract printing out to the private sector. They were amazed
    at how well that went, and it has continued ever since. Today,
    we contract out about 80 percent of the Government's printing
    requirements to the private sector. Last year, we had more than
    2,500 printing companies throughout the country in every State
    as contractors to the Government Printing Office.
        Senator Durbin. When you decided to bid on the 2004 Federal
    budget and turned in a bid, according to the news reports, 24
    percent lower than last year, was that to make a point, take a
    bath, or did you find that much efficiency?
        Mr. James. Let me say this, this transpired before I took
    office. The bidding process was completed when I came in, and I
    did have an opportunity to talk to Mr. Daniels about this
    before he made a final decision.
        In reviewing the bid that the Government Printing Office
    made, I thought it was a very intelligent bid. You know, there
    are two prices for a piece of printing. The first price is that
    when you give a printer a set of specifications you say, I want
    to print a 100-page book, it will be black and white, it will
    have this number of copies, this is what the manuscript will
    look like, and this is the date I need it.
        The final price is based on how many pages there actually
    were, how many changes you made to that manuscript, what kind
    of overtime you required for it. So what the Government
    Printing Office did was give the OMB a price for the
    specifications that they gave us. It happened to be about
    $100,000 below the year before. When the final bill is
    rendered, my guess is it will be similar to what it was last
    year.
        Senator Durbin. Thanks a lot. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.

                         ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

        Senator Campbell. Thank you, and as I mentioned before, Mr.
    James, we will probably submit some questions in writing too,
    if you could answer them, we would appreciate it.
        Mr. James. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Campbell. Give my regards to all our friends in
    Reno, too.
        Mr. James. I will definitely do that.
        [The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
    were submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the
    hearing:]
             Questions Submitted by Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell

                               CHALLENGES AT GPO

        Question. GPO faces many challenges--half of its workforce is
    eligible for retirement, more agencies are using electronic means of
    producing information rather than printed materials, the Administration
    last year challenged the legal requirement that all government printing
    be done through GPO.
        How do you plan to address these issues and what is your vision for
    GPO's future?
        Answer. We have begun to transform the Government Printing Office
    into an information service facility for the 21st century. With your
    support, we will restore GPO's leadership in the graphic arts industry
    and make GPO a reliable and responsive provider of Government
    information. Through an inclusive process, we are redefining GPO's
    mission and strategy to meet the challenges of today and the future. We
    are working with our customers and stakeholders to identify their needs
    and concerns. The demands of Congress, the agencies, and the public
    will guide us in identifying the optimal technologies to employ to meet
    those requirements. The GAO is presently conducting a congressionally-
    mandated study of Federal Government information dissemination. The GAO
    is also conducting a management audit of GPO, which I requested. These
    studies will help us to focus on needed changes. The transformation of
    GPO will require investment in people and systems. The results will be
    improved effectiveness and efficiency and increased value to the
    customers we serve.
        Regarding OMB's challenge to the legal requirement to use GPO, I
    have asked OMB to cooperate with us in leading the GPO into the 21st
    century by addressing the issues most important to the future. For OMB
    to allow agencies to by-pass GPO would be a policy change geared to
    addressing the 19th century, not the 21st century. It is to the
    public's benefit to keep the GPO intact to lead in the transformation
    of the government's printing and information policy.
        While printing technology and practices are changing, librarians,
    historians, researchers, Members of Congress, and citizens will
    continue to need an easy to use, organized, predictable gateway to
    authenticated Government information and the knowledge that the
    information will be available to the public in perpetuity. OMB and GPO
    should cooperate in redesigning GPO to ensure the best interests of
    taxpayers are met.
        Question. How would you assess GPO's strengths and weaknesses? What
    gaps does GPO face in the number, skills, and competencies of its
    employees?
        Answer. GPO has great strength in the quality of employees and
    their dedication to GPO's mission. However, we need to ensure that GPO
    employees are trained in the right skills and motivated by an
    organization that promotes change, encourages initiative, and
    recognizes accomplishments. I have increased employee training
    significantly and we are now rewarding performance and initiative. Our
    workforce needs to develop more of the skills required to use the best
    available technologies to meet customer needs. This requires that the
    workforce become more highly trained with emphasis on digital formats,
    databases, and electronic communications. We have also begun to examine
    the constraints and excess costs associated with the building in which
    we operate. It is not suitable to efficient manufacturing operations.
        Question. How do you see the mission of GPO evolving in response to
    changing technology?
        Answer. GPO ensures the public's access to Government information.
    Since 1813 the Government has been gathering its information and
    documents, organizing and cataloging them, and making them available to
    the general public. GPO has carried out this mission with printing,
    then microfiche, later CD-ROMs, and now with online distribution of
    digital titles. Our mission is unique; no other agency of the Federal
    Government is charged with this responsibility or would begin to
    understand how to collect documents from all three branches, how to
    organize and catalog the documents so they are usable, how to
    distribute them to the 1,200 depository libraries, how to sell them to
    the public, and how to preserve permanent public access to Federal
    information and documents. We see a continued decline in the volume of
    paper documents and an increase in the use of electronic databases to
    access Government information. Increasingly, our role will be to
    capture digitally, store, authenticate, convert, and channel Government
    information to the public in all relevant media.
        Question. How will your interim reorganization help GPO move in the
    right direction? What are the objectives of the reorganization and how
    it will impact the services provided to Congress?
        Answer. The reorganization is designed to provide a greater
    customer focus, delegate decision-making, provide an enterprise view of
    technology, and make GPO more adaptable to change. Our principal goal
    is to redirect GPO's operations toward customer service--helping our
    customers meet their goals, rather than bending their needs to fit what
    we provide. We are especially interested in pursuing our vision of
    helping Congress to reinvent its information products to help expedite
    its work.
        Question. What actions will you take to make GPO operate in a more
    business-like manner?
        Answer. At this Committee's request, GAO is presently conducting a
    study of Federal Government printing and information policy. The GAO is
    also conducting a management audit of GPO, which we requested. These
    studies will help us to focus on needed changes. Over the next several
    years, the transformation of GPO will require investments in people and
    systems. The results will be improved effectiveness and efficiency and
    increased value to the customers we serve. We are implementing a buy-
    out program to increase efficiency.
        Question. What actions does Congress need to take to help GPO
    operate in a more business-like manner?
        Answer. We urge that Congress support our request for $10 million
    for a separation incentive program that will result in a reduction of
    300 positions. More than half our workforce is eligible to retire. This
    investment is necessary to reduce costs and will result in a savings of
    about $18 million per year. An additional $4.1 million is requested for
    the Salaries and Expenses Appropriation to replace obsolete technology
    used by the GPO Access system by upgrading its search and retrieval
    system, now nearly a decade old. A new search engine must be acquired
    and the databases brought forward to take advantage of the new
    technologies and ensure that data will not be lost through
    technological obsolescence.

                            GPO OPERATING AT A LOSS

        Question. GPO is losing money in each of its business lines--a
    total of $44.6 million since 1988 through 2002, and $3.8 million for
    the first quarter of fiscal year 2003.
        How do you operate with these shortfalls?
        Answer. The shortfalls were funded from retained earnings, which
    otherwise would have been available to replace and modernize equipment
    and systems.
        Question. What are the principal reasons for your losses?
        Answer. The principle reason for the losses in the past was GPO's
    inability to adapt its operations and cost structure fast enough to
    respond to the rapid pace of changes in technology and how customers
    produce and access Government information. Moreover, GPO's building is
    not suited to the purposes employed, causing excess cost to be
    incurred.
        Question. When will you run out of money in the revolving fund?
        Answer. If we did nothing, GPO would run out of available cash in
    about 12-15 months. GPO is adopting new business models, proposing a
    separation incentive program, and taking other actions to bring revenue
    and expense into balance.
        Question. What assurance can you provide that appropriated funds
    are not supplementing the cost of providing printing services to
    executive agencies?
        Answer. An independent CPA firm audits GPO financial statements
    annually. GPO receives unqualified opinions--the highest assurance an
    auditor can give. GPO has an accounting system, that properly controls
    cost reporting in the revolving fund and maintains separate accounting
    over each of its appropriations.

                               CONTRACTING COSTS

        Question. GPO contracts out more than 80 percent of its work to
    private contractors.
        What is the basis for GPO's 7 percent surcharge for the
    administrative expenses it occurs for contracting on behalf of
    agencies?
        Answer. The surcharge covers all GPO expenses to administer our
    Printing Procurement Program. No funds are appropriated by Congress
    directly to GPO to support this program. GPO printing contracts are
    developed and carried out by knowledgeable printing experts via a
    package of procurement support services. This program saves agencies
    much more than the surcharge.
        The surcharge covers the cost of a wide variety of services: GPO
    reviews requisitions and offers suggestions for economizing; develops
    specifications; competes, awards, and administers contracts; performs
    press inspections and other on-site reviews to assure quality; performs
    quality control reviews utilizing a unique program that quantifies
    quality ranking factors that has become widely recognized throughout
    the industry; provides voucher examination and payment services;
    provides legal advice on contracting; and makes available a dispute
    resolution service through GPO's Board of Contract Appeals. These same
    services would have to be provided by each executive agency if they
    procured printing themselves, leading to huge additional costs for
    duplication of effort.
        Question. I understand this surcharge does not cover your costs in
    the procurement program. Why?
        Answer. In fiscal year 2002, our Printing Procurement Program lost
    $3.8 million on revenue of $470 million, a loss of about eight-tenths
    of one percent. This loss is because GPO has not reduced operating
    costs commensurate with the decline in printing procurement volume of
    over 30 percent in the past three years. Our plans are to reduce costs
    to turn these results around. We are developing a new business model
    that involves replacing legacy systems and implementing electronic
    commerce. Our planned separation incentive program will also help to
    reduce costs.
        Question. Is GPO exploring increased use of streamlined procurement
    vehicles to reduce GPO's transaction costs for smaller print
    procurements?
        Answer. We purchase excess press capacity throughout the Nation by
    allowing any of 13,000 GPO certified printers to compete for any job
    they are equipped to handle. The result is very inexpensive printing,
    perhaps less than half the cost that would be paid by a private sector
    purchaser or Government agency acting in its own behalf. The difficulty
    in purchasing extremely low cost printing as the GPO has traditionally
    done is that the originating Government customer can't pick the vendor
    nor the location where it's printed and therefore frequently feels
    isolated from and unable to control the process to ensure their desired
    results.
        Partially as a consequence of this dissatisfaction, GPO four years
    ago launched a test program we call Simplified Purchase Agreement
    (SPA). This program allows agencies to directly bid and purchase
    printing up to $2,500 from their choice of local printers without the
    requirement to accept the low bid. GPO provides only a limited palette
    of services such as pre-approving printers, bill payment, and
    depository requirements. Last year, the 43 Federal agencies that have
    adopted this program purchased 12,000 printing jobs directly on their
    own using this system. Early indications are that both agency
    satisfaction and the cost of printing are measurably higher.

                               IN-PLANT CAPACITY

        Question. GPO has a very large in-plant print operation--at least
    half of which is used to serve congressional print needs.
        What percent of the plant's capacity is utilized? What plans do you
    have for downsizing GPO's in-plant print capacity to the level
    required? Are GPO's current facilities and equipment sufficient for the
    21st century?
        Answer. Measured on the basis of 24 hours per day, 7 days per week,
    potential availability, capacity utilization of equipment is about 10
    percent. GPO is not staffed to run the equipment on a 24/7 basis but
    this is the predominate metric in the private sector. Our plans are to
    gear capacity to meet peak workload demands of the Congress. This will
    require the elimination of some equipment and this process has already
    begun. New technologies are being explored. It will be necessary to
    substantially retool the agency for the 21st century.

                     OFFICE OF INNOVATION AND PARTNERSHIPS

        Question. Please explain your new Office of Innovation and
    Partnerships, including its goals and approach and how you plan to
    obtain and use external scientific and technological expertise.
        Answer. As part of our reorganization, a recently renamed new
    Office of Innovation and New Technology has been established to
    identify, evaluate, and plan for the adoption of technology
    opportunities. It will also guide us in the creation of associations
    with other public and private sector entities to carry out our mission.
    Such associations, the use of which is widespread in industry, will be
    critical to the transformation of the GPO. We have been meeting with
    the top management of our suppliers--from printing companies to
    equipment manufacturers--to explore the future possibilities for
    technological innovation in the digital information business.

                       FEDERAL DEPOSITORY LIBRARY PROGRAM

        Question. What are the implications for the Federal Depository
    Library Program of the trend towards electronic documents? Why are
    libraries pulling out of this program? What do you see as the future
    for this program?
        Answer. GPO is spending a great deal of time talking to the
    libraries that participate in the program about its future and seeking
    their advice on the essential services that we need to offer to support
    the depository libraries as the FDLP becomes an increasingly electronic
    program. GPO is the only Federal agency charged with cataloging and
    ensuring both timely and permanent public access to the full spectrum
    of Federal information from all three branches of the Government. This
    mission will be increasingly important in an environment where
    Government information is posted to many web sites in many formats,
    making it difficult for the public to locate it initially and over
    time.
        Authentication of electronic Government publications is a key issue
    for all of our depository libraries. GPO is working on Public Key
    Infrastructure (PKI) security services initiative to address this
    concern by enabling Congress, the Judiciary, and Federal agencies to
    identify and mark official documents. This would enable users inside of
    Government and elsewhere, including depository libraries, to confirm
    the validity of the publications GPO makes available on the Internet
    for permanent public access. PKI technology will also enable secure
    electronic transactions among agencies as well as with consumers of
    Government services and make it easier to safeguard official Federal
    Government information.
        Fugitive documents are an increasing problem as fewer documents are
    printed through GPO and we must reach out to locate digital copies on
    agency web sites and through other sources. In the past, most of the
    documents were identified and obtained through the printing process.
    That is no longer true and, as a result, we need new tools and
    additional staff with different skills to locate and acquire
    publications for the program.
        Maintaining GPO Access as a state-of-the-art service on which
    Congress and other parts of the Government, depository libraries, and
    the public can rely for current and permanent public access is
    essential. When GPO Access began in 1994, GPO identified the necessity
    to refresh periodically the software and hardware that support the
    service and to migrate the data forward to take advantage of future
    generations of technology. The initial platform selected for GPO Access
    has been enhanced and expanded through the years to support the
    service, but it is now at least two generations behind state-of-the-art
    systems. A new search engine must be acquired and the databases brought
    forward to take advantage of the new technologies and ensure that data
    will not be lost through technological obsolescence. GPO is
    establishing and will need to maintain backup and mirror sites to
    ensure public access and to avoid interruptions in service in the event
    of a catastrophe. GPO must also create appropriate metadata to
    facilitate identification and preservation of government information.
    We have requested $4.1 million for that purpose in fiscal year 2004.
        We have 53 regional depository libraries, which receive and
    permanently retain all publications distributed by the FDLP. At their
    own expense, they provide public access and preserve the record of the
    nation as well as ensure permanent public access to the paper and other
    tangible publications distributed by GPO. That critical group of
    libraries has remained stable for many years, but they are increasingly
    feeling economic pressures that cause them to re-evaluate the enormous
    expense of maintaining large paper and microfiche collections of
    Government documents. We have begun a dialog with the regional
    libraries about the value of shared regional collections to reduce the
    burden on individual libraries, a central collection at GPO to assist
    them and serve as a library of last resort, and retrospective
    cataloging and digitization projects that would increase the
    utilization of the pre-1976 collections and allow selective reduction
    in the paper and microfiche collections.
        We also have about 1,200 other depositories, which take only a
    portion of the tangible items based on the needs of the constituents
    they serve. That group, which we call ``selectives,'' always has some
    fluctuation as the resources of the libraries and needs of their
    communities shift. 48 libraries withdrew from the FDLP between
    September 2000 and February 2003. 30 (62.5 percent) of these libraries
    were small academic and public libraries in economically disadvantaged
    areas. In response to this data, we are developing a pilot project that
    will help comparable libraries that remain in the FDLP to focus their
    collection and services on Government publications that are
    specifically applicable to community economic development. We will
    combine that recommended collection with specialized training on the
    utilization of the resources and seek training and other assistance
    from agencies with responsibility for small and minority business
    development. We may also provide workstations to these libraries since
    they may not be able to afford the initial investment in appropriate
    equipment. We hope this program will provide a strong economic benefit
    and real incentive for such libraries to remain in the program and
    utilize information available from the Federal Government to assist
    their communities.
        We have just returned from Reno, Nevada, where we participated in a
    meeting of the Depository Library Council and over 250 other members of
    the depository library community. That meeting focused heavily on the
    future of the program and the range of products and services that GPO
    needs to offer in the 21st century. On the way to Reno we stopped in
    Tucson to visit the University of Arizona, which has a major initiative
    underway to become the first all electronic depository library. The
    rapid transition to electronic publications, which now make up over 60
    percent of all items available through the FDLP, has challenged the
    depository libraries. The response has varied from library to library.
    Given the range of types and sizes of libraries in the program, it is
    not surprising that some have adapted rapidly and well while others are
    still struggling to adjust to the increased demands for training and
    user support necessitated by searching databases and handling
    electronic files in a wide variety of formats. We are providing as much
    support and training as we can, and we are planning a pilot project to
    place GPO staff in the field to work more directly with libraries to
    meet their training needs and advise them about best practices for
    managing a depository library.

                         ADDITIONAL SUBMITTED STATEMENT

        [Clerk's Note.--The subcommittee has received a statement
    from the American Association of Law Libraries, American
    Library Association, and Association of Research Libraries
    which will be placed in the record at this point.]

       Prepared Statement of the American Association of Law Libraries,
      American Library Association, and Association of Research Libraries

        On behalf of the American Association of Law Libraries (AALL), the
    Association of Research Libraries (ARL) and the American Library
    Association (ALA), we write in support of the fiscal year 2004 budget
    request of the Government Printing Office (GPO). Collectively, these
    three associations represent thousands of individuals and institutions
    serving communities throughout the Nation, including the nearly 1,300
    federal depository libraries located in nearly every congressional
    district.
        AALL is a nonprofit educational organization with over 5,000
    members dedicated to promoting and enhancing the value of law
    libraries, fostering law librarianship and providing leadership and
    advocacy in the field of legal information and information policy. ARL
    is an Association of 123 research libraries in North America. ARL
    programs and services promote equitable access to and effective use of
    recorded knowledge in support of teaching, research. ALA is a nonprofit
    educational organization of 64,000 librarians, library trustees, and
    other friends of libraries dedicated to improving library services and
    promoting the public interest in a free and open information society.
    Fiscal Year 2004 Budget Request Essential
        We are pleased to submit a statement for the record on the fiscal
    year 2004 appropriations for the Government Printing Office and the
    Superintendent of Documents Salaries and Expenses. We urge your support
    for the Public Printer's fiscal year 2004 budget request of
    $135,567,000 for the GPO that includes $34,456,000 for the Salaries and
    Expenses (S&E) Appropriation of the Superintendent of Documents and
    $91,111,000 for the Congressional Printing and Binding (CP&B)
    Appropriation. The S&E request includes $28.5 million to fund the
    Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP), $4.9 million for the
    Cataloging and Indexing Program, $.8 million for the International
    Exchange Program and $.2 million for the By-Law Distribution Program.
    This amount includes necessary increases to support the continued
    operation of the FDLP, its continuing electronic transition plans and
    the increased demands upon GPO Access.
        We urge you to approve the full S&E appropriations request for
    fiscal year 2004. The majority of the S&E appropriation is for the
    Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP), by which congressional and
    other important Government publications and information products are
    disseminated to the nearly 1,300 participating academic, public,
    Federal, law and other libraries nationwide. We find the request of
    $4.1 million to replace obsolete technology and upgrade the retrieval
    system for GPO Access to be of crucial importance, since each day
    thousands of Americans rely on the GPO Access system to locate the
    important electronic government information they need.
        The FDLP and GPO Access are vital to the dissemination and access
    of Federal government information to our citizens. We believe that the
    fiscal year 2004 S&E budget request is essential to the continued
    transition to a more electronic program and the continued success of
    GPO Access. Since GPO is responsible for permanent public access to the
    content of its Electronic Collection, funding to strengthen digital
    archiving and migration capabilities is a critically important
    component.

    Growth of GPO Access and the Electronic Collection Impressive
        The FDLP is a unique program and one of the most effective,
    efficient and successful partnerships between Congress and the American
    public. The FDLP provides your constituents with equitable, ready,
    efficient and no-fee access to Federal government information in an
    increasingly electronic environment. Today Congress, government
    agencies and the courts increasingly are relying on state-of-the-art
    technologies to create and disseminate government information through
    the Internet.
        One of the critical keys to GPO's successful transition to a more
    electronic program has been the growth of the GPO Access system, a
    central access point within the GPO for electronic government
    information that today makes available to the public approximately
    225,000 titles. Created by Public Law 103-40, GPO Access has grown into
    a unique digital collection of official government databases from all
    three branches of government including the Congressional Record, the
    Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations. Currently an
    average of 31 million documents are downloaded by the public each
    month, a substantial increase from last year that attests to the
    importance and value of this award-winning system to the American
    public.
        GPO has continued to make excellent progress over the past year in
    enhancing its Electronic Collection. GPO constantly adds new data and
    products to the system, building a current collection of valuable new
    electronic resources. At the same time, GPO provides permanent access
    to core legislative and regulatory information and to agency
    information managed by GPO on GPO servers. Each year, this historic
    electronic collection grows, requiring GPO to meet its responsibility
    for ensuring permanent public access. This function presents probably
    the most difficult challenge of the networked electronic environment.
    Just as the government has an affirmative obligation to provide current
    access to its information, in the digital arena this obligation extends
    to ensuring the preservation of and permanent public access to
    electronic government publications.

    FDLP Libraries' Significant Services and Investments
        Each participating federal depository library makes significant
    investments to ensure that the public has effective access to
    government information. For example, FDLP libraries invest in
    technologies to assist in accessing electronic government information.
    These investments exemplify the substantial costs that participating
    depository libraries incur in order to provide your constituents with
    equitable, ready, efficient and no-fee access to government information
    in both print and electronic formats. These costs include providing
    highly trained staff, adequate space, necessary additional materials,
    expensive equipment and Internet connections. The success of GPO Access
    cannot be measured without acknowledging the substantial costs covered
    by libraries.
        Federal depository libraries serve as important channels of public
    access to government publications and contribute significantly to the
    success of this Program. The government's responsibility to make
    government publications in both tangible and electronic formats
    available to depository libraries is successful because of the
    necessary partnerships developed between the Federal government, the
    GPO, and the Federal depository libraries. In order for GPO to continue
    to increase the amount of government information available for current
    and future public access through the Internet and in order for the
    Federal Government to fulfill its responsibilities for this
    partnership, it is critically important that Congress provide adequate
    funds to support the transition to a more electronic program.

    Importance of Full Funding for the CP&B
        We also urge your support for the Public Printer's request of
    $91,111,000 for the Congressional Printing and Binding (CP&B)
    appropriation. Broad public access to legislative information,
    including the Congressional Record, the text of bills, as well as
    committee hearings, reports, documents and other legislative materials,
    is crucial to the ability of our citizenry to engage in the political
    process. Indeed, recent polls have demonstrated the public's increasing
    awareness of and thirst for information from their government,
    including Congress. Full support for the CP&B request will ensure the
    necessary electronic infrastructure to make congressional materials
    available in a timely manner for permanent accessibility through GPO
    Access and will maintain GPO's inplant printing operation for Congress.
        Chairman Campbell, we are very grateful to you and to members of
    the Subcommittee for your past support of GPO Access, the Federal
    Depository Library Program and GPO's Congressional Printing and Binding
    services. The investment in systems and services to provide the public
    with government publications in all formats will ensure that valuable
    electronic government information created today will be available and
    preserved for future generations. We respectfully urge your continued
    support by approving the Government Printing Office's fiscal year 2004
    appropriations request in its entirety. We ask that you please include
    this statement as part of the recent hearing record. Thank you very
    much.
                          CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE

    STATEMENT OF DOUGLAS HOLTZ-EAKIN, DIRECTOR
    ACCOMPANIED BY BARRY B. ANDERSON, DEPUTY DIRECTOR

        Senator Campbell. And our third and last panel will be Mr.
    Douglas Holtz-Eakin, Director of the Congressional Budget
    Office, accompanied by Barry Anderson, his Deputy Director,
    too. As with the other panels, Mr. Holtz-Eakin, if you would
    like to just make a verbal statement, we will put your complete
    written statement in the record.

          OVERVIEW OF THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE'S BUDGET REQUEST

        Mr. Holtz-Eakin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will submit my
    written statement for the record and just summarize briefly.
    You have our request before you. You know it is for just under
    $34 million, which represents a 6.6 percent increase over the
    previous year. I should note, however, that of that request,
    1.1 percent is funding for our contribution to a partnership in
    the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board. Excluding
    that, we have a core increase of 5.5 percent devoted to current
    baseline increases of 3.8 percent and then additional resources
    of 1.7 percent.
        Stepping back a bit, if you look at the CBO budget as a
    whole, what you see is the budget basically covers people, and
    our budget submission is configured to ensure that those people
    can be put in a position to meet our congressional customers'
    needs in what I think is a timely, flexible, and high-quality
    fashion.
        We have attempted to make sure that we devote enough
    resources to our baseline receipts estimation so as to overcome
    the difficulties over the last few years in anticipating
    fluctuations in tax receipts that are not fully explained by
    the status of the economy, and I can explore that in greater
    detail with you.
        We have tried to devote resources to ensure that we can
    hire in a successful fashion in some areas of the labor market
    which are quite difficult, in particular, specialists in the
    areas of health economics and financial economics. We have
    attempted to make arrangements so that we have flexibility with
    respect to visiting scholars, post-doctoral fellows, and a
    variety of intern kinds of appointments.
        This allows us to redeploy resources quickly as
    congressional needs require, develop relationships with
    possible sources of permanent hires, and improve our ability to
    maintain the kind of workforce that is essential for the
    Congressional Budget Office. And then we continually attempt to
    improve the level of communication with Congress. This year, we
    have undertaken to designate a senior member of the
    Congressional Budget Office staff, Sandy Davis, to a job as
    special assistant to the director, where he has primary
    responsibility for ensuring that we are in continuous and top-
    flight communication with Congress on its needs and on
    timetables so that we can be responsive with the different work
    products that are important to Congress and be timely in our
    responses.
        We hope to build that enhanced communication into a
    strategic plan so that we are looking ahead to Congress' needs,
    building those anticipated needs into our work plans in a
    systematic fashion, and trying to upgrade the traditional
    practice of making sure that staff stay in communication--to
    regularize this process and to feed it into both the hiring
    process and decisions on things like visiting scholars.
        And finally, a portion of the budget is devoted to
    supporting our people at CBO in the areas of technology, where,
    in fact, the budget reveals cost savings from movements to more
    advanced forms of technology; disaster recovery, should we need
    to continue operations in unfortunate circumstances; and
    ongoing training and management training as well. So I think if
    you step back from the particulars of each of the budget items,
    what you will see is a budget that is really about the people
    at the Congressional Budget Office, and our strategy in
    constructing that budget is to make sure that those people
    respond quickly, accurately, and flexibly to the needs of
    Congress in fulfilling the job of the CBO.

                               PREPARED STATEMENT

        And with that quick overview, I would be happy to take your
    questions.
        [The statement follows:]

                   Prepared Statement of Douglas Holtz-Eakin

        Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I am pleased to
    present the fiscal year 2004 budget request for the Congressional
    Budget Office. The mission of CBO is to provide the Congress with the
    objective, timely, nonpartisan analysis it needs about the economy and
    the budget and to furnish the information and cost estimates required
    for the Congressional budget process.

             OVERVIEW OF CBO'S BUDGET REQUEST FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004

        The Congressional Budget Office's fiscal year 2004 budget continues
    to be driven by the need to be competitive in a specialized labor
    market, with the added challenge of completing and maintaining an
    effective disaster recovery process. We are requesting $33,628,000 for
    CBO's operations during fiscal year 2004, an increase of 5.5 percent
    over 2003. In addition, funding CBO's portion of the cost of operating
    the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board (FASAB) adds 1.1
    percent (or $365,000) to our request, but that expense should be offset
    by cost reductions for other sponsoring agencies--the Treasury, GAO,
    and OMB--whose annual contributions will decrease. Together, those
    requirements total $33,993,000, or a 6.6 percent increase over our
    appropriation for fiscal year 2003.
        Of the 5.5 percent increase needed for CBO operations, 3.8
    percentage points represent a current-services baseline, while the
    remaining rise of 1.7 percentage points would fund three new positions
    and allow us to focus more resources on improving our economic
    forecasts and baseline projections of tax receipts. Mandatory increases
    in personnel costs alone would have required a 5.2 percent baseline
    budget increase, but they were offset somewhat by a 1.4 percent
    decrease resulting from savings in technology spending and other
    operating costs.
        In fiscal year 2004, CBO will focus on its core functions of
    scorekeeping, budget analysis, and economic and revenue forecasting.
    Our request will allow us to fund 236 positions--the same level
    originally requested for 2003. The three additional positions, along
    with some reallocation of existing positions, will allow us to increase
    the level of effort applied to improving our receipts baseline and
    enhancing our responsiveness to the Congress. We will also continue our
    visiting scholars program for postdoctoral fellows and midcareer
    academics with expertise in areas such as health economics, financial
    analysis, and macroeconomics. And we will continue to pursue a number
    of internal management initiatives to improve our human resources
    management, technology, publication quality, facilities, and business
    processes.
        Specifically, the fiscal year 2004 budget would:
      --Support a workload estimated at 2,300 legislative cost estimates
            and mandate cost statements, 30 major analytical reports, and
            40 other publications, and allow us to meet our obligations for
            Congressional testimony.
      --Fund 236 full-time-equivalent positions (FTEs), adding three
            positions for staff and visiting scholars to improve our
            ability to make economic forecasts and project tax receipts.
      --Provide a pay adjustment of 3.7 percent for staff below the level
            of senior analyst, consistent with the increase requested by
            other legislative branch agencies and providing parity with the
            military pay raise.
      --Fund a combination of promotions and merit increases for staff and
            provide performance-based pay increases for managers and senior
            analysts who no longer receive automatic annual across-the-
            board increases.
      --Continue to support process redesign and automation initiatives in
            publishing, human resources, financial management, and other
            areas.
      --Use reductions in spending for technology and equipment to offset
            the cost of the three new positions and a portion of projected
            price increases for administrative expenses.
      --Enable us to complete tasks related to our disaster recovery
            strategy, including purchasing some equipment and moving
            mission-critical servers and other IT infrastructure to the
            Legislative Branch Alternative Computing Facility early in
            fiscal year 2004.
        This request also includes a change in our legislative authority
    that would allow our appropriation to be available to pay an
    appropriate share ($365,000) of the costs of operating the Federal
    Accounting Standards Advisory Board.

              SUMMARY OF CBO'S BUDGET REQUEST FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004
                             [Dollars in thousands]
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Staff       Amount
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Calculation of Base Appropriation, Fiscal Year          233     $32,101
     2003..........................................
        Plus Supplementals.........................  ..........  ...........
        Minus Rescissions..........................  ..........        (209)
                                                    ------------------------
          Budget Base, Fiscal Year 2003............         233      31,892
                                                    ========================
    Proposed Changes for Fiscal Year 2004:
        Mandatory Pay and Related Costs............  ..........       1,668
        Price-Level Changes........................  ..........          89
        Program-Type Changes:
            Legislation............................  ..........  ...........
            Workload:
                Improve revenue estimates..........           3         519
                FASAB expenses.....................  ..........         365
                Net of other changes...............  ..........        (518)
        Equipment, Alterations, Maintenance,         ..........         (22)
         Repairs, etc..............................
                                                    ------------------------
          Total Proposed Changes...................           3       2,101
                                                    ========================
          Fiscal Year 2004 Budget Request..........         236      33,993
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Note: Columns and rows may not add up to totals because of rounding.

        The total fiscal year 2004 budget request in this table is $543,000
    higher than the amount submitted to OMB for inclusion in the
    President's budget as a result of information available after the OMB
    deadline. CBO will submit an amendment to OMB to reflect the change in
    our request.

                      ACCOMPLISHMENTS IN FISCAL YEAR 2002

        In fiscal year 2002, as part of its contributions to the
    Congressional budget process, CBO issued its annual report on the
    budget and economic outlook in January, which was based on the first of
    three sets of baseline budget projections prepared during the year. The
    outlook was followed by an analysis of the President's budgetary
    proposals.
        CBO also prepared about 750 formal cost estimates during 2002 and
    an even larger number of informal estimates for proposals or options
    being considered by the Congress. Legislation with a significant
    budgetary impact included the Economic Security and Assistance for
    American Workers Act of 2001, the Farm Security and Rural Investment
    Act of 2002, the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for
    Fiscal Year 2003, the Medicare Modernization and Prescription Drug Act
    of 2002, the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002, and the Energy
    Policy Act of 2002.
        At the request of the Senate Budget Committee, we prepared a
    special analysis of the estimated cost of activities related to U.S.
    military operations in Afghanistan. In addition, we developed estimates
    of the cost of possible military operations in Iraq. We assisted the
    Budget Committees in their development of proposals for a Congressional
    budget resolution for fiscal year 2003.
        Our staff also responded to numerous committee requests during 2002
    on the status of obligations and outlays for funding provided in 2001
    for homeland security and for assistance to New York in the aftermath
    of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
        We also provided regular economic forecasts and detailed analyses
    of the state of the economy and of the Administration's economic
    forecast to the House and Senate Budget Committees as well as to other
    committees. A major focus was on how changes in taxes affect the
    economy.
        CBO testified before the Congress 16 times in fiscal year 2002 on a
    variety of budgetary and economic issues. A few examples are the Budget
    and Economic Outlook for the House Budget Committee, Projections of
    Medicare and Prescription Drug Spending for the Senate Finance
    Committee, and Social Security: The Challenges of an Aging Population
    for the Senate Special Committee on Aging.
        Responding to requests from Congressional committees for analyses
    of budgetary, economic, and programmatic issues is an important
    function of the agency. CBO studied a broad range of policy initiatives
    and legislative proposals in 2002 and issued 23 program analysis
    reports and more than 40 other publications.
        Medicare and Other Health Issues.--This area continues to put great
    demands on CBO, particularly work related to Medicare reform and
    prescription drug benefits for seniors and low-income individuals. To
    respond, we have reallocated resources from elsewhere in CBO. In 2002,
    we increased the number of analysts working full time on health care
    from 19 to 21 and concentrated more effort on Medicare reform and
    prescription drug issues. We also increased contractual support and
    spending for data. We now have 24 analysts devoted to health care and
    are working to increase that number to 27 (a net gain of eight analysts
    over 2001). We will also continue to shift more of the health staff to
    Medicare and drug-related work and by year-end will have nearly doubled
    the resources devoted to those priority areas as compared with 2001.
        In fiscal year 2002, a major effort was the examination of several
    complex proposals to add a new prescription drug benefit to Medicare,
    ``modernize'' other features of Medicare's benefit package, and promote
    competition among providers of Medicare services. CBO provided
    information to committee staffs in both the House and Senate on the
    impacts of those options on federal costs and the consequences for
    other parties. CBO also presented testimony on prescription drug
    spending and prepared an important study, Issues in Designing a
    Prescription Drug Benefit for Medicare, which was released in October
    2002.
        In addition, we analyzed several other important health issues,
    including proposals to reform market-exclusivity rules in the
    prescription drug market to promote quicker entry by generic drugs; the
    federal costs and revenues and the effects on malpractice and health
    insurance premiums of options to reform the nation's medical
    malpractice tort system; and the federal budgetary and private-sector
    effects of proposals to regulate the operation of private health plans
    and health insurance providers (for example, ``patients' bill of
    rights'' legislation and parity in the coverage of mental health and
    medical/surgical benefits.)
        Social Security.--In fiscal year 2002, CBO continued to develop an
    analytical framework for examining proposals to restructure and
    partially privatize Social Security. In addition to using standard
    actuarial projection techniques (such as those employed by the Social
    Security Administration), we made significant progress in constructing
    a dynamic microsimulation model to produce long-term budget
    projections. The model helped CBO prepare several of its Fiscal Policy
    Briefs, prepare Congressional testimony on the long-term budget
    outlook, and analyze long-term options for CBO's 2003 Budget Options
    volume.
        National Security.--Defense-related accomplishments during fiscal
    year 2002 included supporting the Congress through direct assistance
    and published reports. Published reported included The Long-Term
    Implications of Current Defense Plans, an analysis for the Senate
    Defense Appropriations Subcommittee; Estimated Costs and Technical
    Characteristics of Selected National Missile Defense Systems;
    Increasing the Mission Capability of the Attack Submarine Force, a
    study of alternatives for that force produced at the request from the
    Senate Armed Services Committee; Accrual Budgeting for Military
    Retirees' Health Care, a paper for the House Budget Committee;
    Estimated Costs of a Potential Conflict with Iraq, an analysis for
    Senator Conrad and Congressman Spratt; and The Budgetary Treatment of
    Leases and Public/Private Ventures.
        Domestic Economic, Tax, and Financial Issues.--Significant
    publications in this area included a policy brief examining the sharp
    drop in revenue collections experienced in 2002; two reports that
    reviewed the effects of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on
    the insurance industry and analyzed proposals for federal reinsurance
    risks from both terrorism and natural disasters; a review of recent
    productivity growth in the economy, its relationship to improvements in
    computer technology, and the prospects for such growth in the future;
    estimates of future investment needs for drinking water and wastewater
    infrastructure; the risks facing U.S. banks from their exposure to
    foreign financial losses; and the implications for banks and depositors
    of raising the limit on federal deposit insurance coverage.

                   PRIORITIES FOR FISCAL YEARS 2003 AND 2004

        CBO's primary objectives will, as always, be to provide technical
    assistance and analytical support to the Congress in its work on annual
    budgets. That effort will include the preparation of baseline spending
    and revenue projections, analyses of the condition of the economy, cost
    estimates for authorization and direct spending legislation, and outlay
    estimates for appropriation bills. CBO will undertake studies of
    budgetary, economic, and programmatic issues that meet the needs of
    individual committees. During the next two years, CBO will also
    undertake major efforts to improve its baseline projections of tax
    receipts, to become more responsive to our Congressional clients, and
    to continue internal management improvements, including strengthening
    our planning process.

    Improving Economic Forecasts and Baseline Projections of Tax Receipts
        The drastic swings in federal revenues that have occurred over the
    past decade have placed a premium on improving the state of the art in
    receipts forecasting. In the second half of the 1990s, when receipts
    rose faster than anticipated, and in the early 2000s, when the opposite
    occurred, CBO labored (along with other forecasters) to revise its
    revenue models and estimating methods. But we (and others) were
    hampered by the long lags between revenue collections and the
    availability of useful data on the nature of those collections, and by
    the fact that relationships between incomes and tax collections are
    more complex than previously appreciated. During 2003 and 2004, we plan
    further efforts toward improvement in that area and will add at least
    three staff-years in 2004 by hiring permanent staff, adding expert
    consultants, reallocating resources, and utilizing visiting scholars.
    Specifically, we will:
      --Review our current revenue models and estimating methods to
            determine whether better procedures are available and identify
            areas for further development.
      --Acquire additional expertise in the areas of revenue estimating and
            related macroeconomic issues through additional hiring,
            visiting scholars, and consultation with outside experts.
      --Attempt to get better and quicker access to IRS tax data and
            utilize private-sector financial information to improve our
            understanding of how changes in the economy and the markets
            influence federal receipts.
      --Consult broadly with federal, state, and private forecasters who
            are working on the same problem. For example, we will explore
            bringing in a visiting scholar who has experience with
            projecting tax receipts in a large state such as New York or
            California.
        We will emphasize transparency in all of our analyses, estimates,
    and projections, but particularly in the revenue area, so that external
    experts can understand and critique our methods.

    Responsiveness and Communications with Congressional Committees
        Another area we will begin to emphasize in 2003 will be our direct
    assistance to the Congress. We plan to do that in several ways:
      --Assigning a senior analyst with a broad knowledge of budget
            analysis and the budget process to provide liaison to the
            Congressional committees with whom CBO works.
      --Involving the Budget, Appropriations, House Ways and Means, and
            Senate Finance Committees, as well as other frequent users of
            CBO's services, in substantive discussions during our planning
            process.
      --More generally, taking careful note of the timing and information
            needs of all of our customers, working hard to meet delivery
            dates, and keeping all committees for whom we work advised of
            the status and progress of projects of interest to them.

    Strategic Planning
        During the past few years, we have experimented with a variety of
    planning approaches for our mission work, as well as for our internal
    management agenda. The results of those planning efforts, as well as
    the resulting accomplishments, have been reflected in internal plans
    and to some extent in our annual budgets, appropriation testimony, and
    the fiscal year 2002 operating plan. During the next six months, we
    will begin a more deliberate strategic-planning process that will
    involve a comprehensive and careful assessment of customer needs, a
    deliberate weighing of customer priorities in relation to CBO's mission
    and capabilities, the selection of broad work areas and individual
    projects, and the setting of supportive internal management goals. We
    expect to have our plan available for inclusion with the submission of
    our 2005 budget.

    Specific Work Priorities for Fiscal Years 2003 and 2004
        Medicare and Other Health Issues.--Reforming the Medicare program
    appears to be a continuing focus of Congressional interest. We expect
    to analyze a wide range of legislative proposals both to expand
    Medicare benefits and to modify existing program rules. Topics are
    likely to include adding a prescription drug benefit to Medicare,
    promoting greater competition among health plans in the program, and
    modifying Medicare's payments to providers in the traditional fee-for-
    service sector. With Medicare's long-term budgetary difficulties
    gaining greater prominence, we also plan to focus efforts on developing
    a long-term model for estimating Medicare's future costs.
        Options for expanding health insurance coverage are also likely to
    be a major focus of legislative interest. We will issue a report
    providing alternative estimates of the number of people without
    coverage, and we expect to be called on to analyze a range of specific
    proposals in the areas of providing tax inducements for insurance
    coverage, expanding Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance
    Program, reforming rules regulating private health insurance, and
    requiring employers to offer coverage.
        Social Security and Employment Policy.--CBO continues to develop
    its capacity to produce cost estimates and impact analyses of Social
    Security for both current-law and reform proposals. With recent
    extensions of temporary unemployment benefits and the scheduled
    reauthorization of the Workforce Investment Act, CBO expects to
    continue to provide the Congress with analyses of legislative options
    to extend unemployment insurance benefits.
        Homeland Security.--Providing for homeland security and the
    creation of the Department of Homeland Security remain challenges for
    the Congress and priorities at CBO. We will continue to track homeland
    security spending through the budget and appropriations processes and
    will assist the Congress in making such spending transparent. We will
    also examine a number of issues related to public spending for homeland
    security and the provision of incentives to the private sector to
    mitigate risks associated with terrorist attacks.
        National Security.--Current work is focused on several broad themes
    and individual projects:
      --Expeditionary Forces.--Analyzing alternative approaches to
            replacing current overseas forward basing of U.S. forces with
            so-called expeditionary forces.
      --Aftermath of a Conflict with Iraq.--Assessing the implications of a
            long-term occupation of Iraq for active-duty and reserve U.S.
            military force structure.
      --Army Transformation.--Examining the Army's plans to transform its
            forces to meet 21st-century threats, and alternatives to those
            plans that might mitigate technical and budgetary risks.
      --Long-Range Strike Capacity.--Analyzing the cost-effectiveness of
            alternatives to improve the ability to strike large numbers of
            targets at long range.
        We will also study the effects of reform initiatives on aircraft
    logistics management and analyze the budgetary implications of trends
    in the use of contractors to perform military support functions.
        Tax Issues.--Work on federal tax policies will examine and report
    on a wide variety of issues involving the efficiency, complexity, and
    equity of the income tax system, including the growing effect of the
    alternative minimum tax and the use of tuition tax credits versus other
    alternatives for supporting higher education.
        Other Domestic Economic and Financial Issues.--Examples of current
    and planned work are:
      --Climate Change.--A report on the economics of climate change will
            be issued soon, while ongoing work examines the macroeconomic
            effects of reducing emissions of greenhouse gases.
      --Resources for Baby Boomers in Retirement.--This report will
            describe sources of funds available to the baby boomers in
            retirement and put in context concerns about the cost of Social
            Security and Medicaid.
      --Transportation.--A report is being prepared on options for
            passenger rail. Work will support Congressional committees as
            they reauthorize federal highway, transit, and aviation
            programs.
      --Administrative Costs of Private Retirement Accounts.--Nearing
            completion, this paper analyzes how program design can raise or
            lower the administrative costs of private accounts intended to
            supplement or replace Social Security.
      --The Internet and Intellectual Property.--Two studies are ongoing.
            The first analyzes policy proposals to speed deployment of
            high-speed Internet connections. The second looks at possible
            changes to copyright law in light of the growth of digital
            technology.
      --Tort Reform.--Topics being studied include the economic costs and
            benefits of the tort system, the implications of tort reform
            for economic growth, and an assessment of the economic effects
            of state-level tort reforms undertaken from the mid-1980s to
            the present.

    INTERNAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY: PROGRESS AND PRIORITIES FOR FISCAL YEARS
                                 2003 AND 2004

       In addition to focusing directly on its mission, CBO, like any
    successful organization, must devote resources to attracting talented
    people, developing their skills, and equipping them properly. It must
    also organize its key work processes to be as efficient as possible and
    capitalize on technology whenever possible.
    Enhancing Recruitment and Retention
        During fiscal years 2003 and 2004, we will continue to pursue the
    same goals and initiatives in order to identify, hire, and retain a
    highly talented and diverse workforce.
        1. Strengthen Recruitment Strategy.--Our goal has been to focus our
    efforts on quickly filling key vacancies, particularly in hard-to-
    attract disciplines, while building a more diverse workforce.
        Our emphasis here stems from the general difficulty of filling very
    specialized positions with highly qualified staff and from the
    experience of the late 1990s, when CBO experienced an unusual number of
    vacancies and was unable to replace employees quickly. As a result, we
    devised a recruitment and retention strategy that allowed us to fill
    vacancies faster and begin meeting our annual staffing goals. To
    achieve those ends, we raised offering salaries for new Ph.D. and
    master's degree candidates, simplified our application process and
    drastically shortened the time from application to job offer,
    advertised critical vacancies more aggressively, began using
    recruitment bonuses for hard-to-fill specialities, and implemented an
    awards program for outstanding performers.
        In fiscal years 2003 and 2004, our college and university
    recruitment program will remain focused on graduate students in
    economics, public policy, and related programs at a variety of schools
    and continue to add more schools with diverse student populations. We
    will also:
      --Continue to develop and expand our competitive ``scholars,''
            focusing on hard-to-staff areas such as macroeconomics,
            financial economics, tax, and health economics;
      --Provide training to managers and staff on effective recruitment
            techniques and interviewing skills; and
      --Add an on-line job-application module and additional job
            information to our Web site.
        2. Improve CBO's Training Program.--Our goal is to improve
    management and job skills by investing in our people through training,
    education, and professional development.
        CBO has always invested in the job skills of its employees, but the
    amount we spend on job training and professional development has been
    far less than that of other high-impact organizations, and much less
    than management and training experts recommend. In recent years, we
    have increased our training expenditures by 30 to 40 percent while
    eliminating less cost-effective training and providing skill training
    to a much higher percentage of our staff. In fiscal year 2002, roughly
    70 percent of CBO employees received training. And during the past
    three years, we have provided more than two-thirds of our managers with
    training in leadership and communications skills.
        During fiscal years 2003 and 2004, we will:
      --Continue to provide management training to our senior staff and
            provide management-development training to up to a dozen high-
            performing analysts with leadership potential;
      --Develop training plans for new employees and find ways to deliver
            critical skills training to newer employees more quickly.
        3. Modernize and Revitalize the Working Environment.--Our goal has
    been to reconfigure and renovate much of our space to use it more
    efficiently and provide a high-quality work environment for new
    employees and those who were in inadequate space.
        Most of CBO's space was configured shortly after the agency's
    creation over 25 years ago--in a building designed primarily for file
    storage. At that time, there were no desktop computers, many more
    support staff, less specialization, and a less competitive employment
    marketplace. Consequently, a significant percentage of our space was
    configured for clerical staff, and many analysts had work space that
    was in passageways or open bays. In cooperation with staff of the
    Architect of the Capitol and the Superintendent of House Office
    Buildings, we developed strategies to address our space problems with
    modest expenditures. Thus, by the end of December 2002, we finished
    reconfiguring roughly 57 percent of our usable floor space. The result
    is about 134 offices renovated, with a net gain of 47 private offices
    and three conference rooms with modern audio-visual equipment.
        During fiscal years 2003 and 2004, we plan to renovate another 50
    offices and, in the process, essentially eliminate remaining
    substandard offices, while realizing a net gain of 10 private offices.
    Streamlining Operations and Redesigning Key Processes
        As mentioned above, we have also devoted significant attention to
    automating and modernizing our internal processes.
        4. Process Redesign and Automation.--Our goal has been to modernize
    and automate key internal processes to provide better services and
    information electronically, while reducing the time needed to use and
    support administrative functions.
        In fiscal year 2002, we began a major thrust to modernize our work
    processes, with a wide range of process redesign and automated system
    development efforts. Several new systems were completed during the
    year, including a tracking system for projects, a Web-based ordering
    system for supplies, a reservation system for our conference rooms, and
    a tracking system for job applicants. We also implemented an innovative
    Intranet site, which is now our primary information source for internal
    policy guidance, new application programs, internal services,
    databases, and Internet-based journals and research tools.
        In fiscal years 2003 and 2004, we will:
      --Develop and implement a new publication distribution system;
      --Design and implement a Human Resources Information System (HRIS);
      --Install an asset management system;
      --Implement a service-request software system for computer
            assistance; and
      --Upgrade our financial management system in cooperation with the
            Library of Congress.
    Publishing and Communications Priorities
        The value of CBO's work to the Congress and the public derives from
    the quality, readability, and availability of its publications.
    Although the demand for printed publications remains strong, the use of
    electronic versions is growing every year.
        5. CBO's Publications and Production Processes.--Our goal is to
    produce high-quality publications that are easily identifiable as CBO
    products and to reengineer our production processes to become more
    timely and efficient.
        As usage of CBO's Web site has increased, we have been able to
    print fewer copies of reports and reduce inventory costs. Increasingly,
    we are targeting the distribution of our reports to put them in the
    hands of policymakers and other interested readers but avoid excess
    printing. Instead, we are relying more on electronic notification and
    distribution. To provide Congressional offices with advance access, we
    began e-mailing them some shorter publications and Internet links to
    some longer documents. We also finished modernizing the format and
    production process for our reports so that they all have a consistent
    and professional look readily identified with CBO. We also designed and
    began issuing a new product line--Policy Briefs--which capture the
    important aspects of major policy issues, such as the budgetary impact
    of society's aging population, in just a few pages, for use by busy
    staff and Members.
        In fiscal years 2003 and 2004, we will implement a PC-based report
    distribution system to replace the current mainframe system. The new
    distribution system will target distribution more precisely, to those
    who want specific kinds of publications; improve staff productivity;
    and support e-mail notification and distribution of reports. We also
    plan to further improve our graphics production process, take advantage
    of the improved print quality made possible by printing directly from
    electronic files, and eliminate some production rework. In addition, we
    will expand the use of Policy Briefs to cover more areas of CBO work
    and issue them more frequently. Finally, we plan to survey users of CBO
    documents to glean suggestions for additional improvements in our
    written products.
        6. CBO's Web Site (www.cbo.gov).--Our goals are to respond to the
    growing demand for electronic products and to enhance the site's
    functionality and accessibility.
        Use of CBO's Web site continues to increase dramatically each year,
    from about 2.3 million page requests in 2001 to about 4.9 million last
    year. Although the site was quite serviceable, we undertook a
    comprehensive redesign. On the basis of suggestions from users, we
    developed a better search function, recatalogued publications on the
    site, and improved navigation.
        In fiscal years 2003 and 2004, our Web site will continue to
    evolve. Anticipated improvements include adding new sections, such as
    one with extensive information on the federal budget, a notification
    system for job applicants, and a comprehensive searchable archive of
    all CBO publications dating back to 1975. That archive will make some
    1,100 reports and nearly 900 testimonies available on-line and on CD
    and will allow us to ``print on demand'' as Members, staff, and the
    public request hard copies. Our redesign of the on-line versions of our
    various publications will also be completed.
    Technology
        Highly effective organizations must build a staff of skilled
    employees and then provide them with the technology they need to do
    their work. That is especially critical at CBO because the broad scope
    of our work and the tight deadlines under which we often operate
    necessitate modern information and computing tools.
        7. Maintain CBO's Technological Edge.--Our goal is to use the best
    technology systems economically available to support the agency's
    mission while improving the performance of those systems and raising
    employees' productivity and satisfaction.
        In fiscal year 2002, we replaced our oldest desktop systems,
    upgraded network infrastructure, and improved network security. To
    reduce timesharing costs, we moved most statistical processing and data
    storage from the Library of Congress to an in-house platform. We also
    made substantial progress in replacing our mission-critical Budget
    Analysis Data System, which is more than 20 years old, with a PC-based
    application. That new application will provide improved capability and
    yield operating-cost savings.
        In fiscal years 2003 and 2004, we plan to:
      --Complete the redesign and implementation of the Budget Analysis
            Data System during 2003; and
      --Consolidate a variety of existing data backup processes into one
            enterprise-wide backup system.
        We will also continue to replace our oldest workstation hardware
    and software, upgrade important routers and switches, replace some
    high-speed printers, and continue to support process redesign and
    automation efforts with programming assistance.
        8. Prepare for Disaster Recovery.--Our goal is to refine existing
    plans and develop resources that would allow the prompt restoration of
    CBO's mission-critical support to the Congress.
        The events of September 11, 2001, and the closure of the Ford House
    Office Building a month later reemphasized the importance of disaster
    recovery. Those events caused us to rethink our response strategy. The
    nature of the closure of the Ford building left our network, systems,
    and data intact, permitting us to quickly restore essential services to
    the Congress, but with considerable difficulty. In 2002, we improved
    our data system backup, moved surplus IT equipment to off-site storage,
    and devised a robust emergency recovery strategy.
        In fiscal years 2003 and 2004, we will complete the implementation
    of that strategy as we:
      --Mirror our CBO Web site, our internal Intranet, and other mission-
            critical databases and programs at a secure off-site facility;
      --Provide staff with highly secure remote access to e-mail
            application programs, analytical data, and the CBO Intranet,
            which contains hundreds of journals, research tools, and useful
            Internet links;
      --Strengthen our emergency wireless communication capabilities; and
      --Upgrade our e-mail and network operating systems to be more fault-
            tolerant.
        We will also complete the planning for and make the move to the
    Legislative Branch Alternative Computing Facility, establish reciprocal
    agreements for emergency work centers with the Library of Congress and
    other federal entities, and increase the quantity of off-site
    emergency-use hardware we have available.
        9. Enhance Network Security.--Our goal is to strengthen network
    security for the core network as well as for the separate network
    established to store and process sensitive data from the IRS, Social
    Security Administration, and Department of Health and Human Services.
        Some of CBO's analyses and model-development efforts require access
    to sensitive government data. Generally, that sensitivity forces us to
    adhere to strict security procedures dictated by the providing agency.
    As our use of sensitive data has grown, so has our need to increase
    security measures.
        In fiscal year 2003, we plan to substantially complete this effort
    by implementing automated auditing of secure data access to ensure that
    we are complying with all data- use agreements, completing an internal
    audit of network security and addressing any issues identified, and
    verifying that remote work sites are adequately safeguarded. We will
    then periodically perform data-security audits.

                                   CONCLUSION

        Mr. Chairman, in recent years, CBO has worked very hard to meet the
    needs of the Congress and to rebuild its staff during a period of great
    competition in the labor market. To do so, we have raised starting
    salaries for new graduates and undertaken a variety of efforts to make
    CBO a more desirable employer for talented economists and policy
    analysts. The recent budget increases provided by this Committee, along
    with our extensive efforts to reduce our nonpayroll costs, have allowed
    us to return to full strength while modernizing our products,
    processes, technology, and facilities.
        Nonetheless, we continue to have the same concerns as all federal
    employers: our salaries are not always competitive, many new graduates
    shun government service, anticipated retirements are worrisome, and
    replacing staff in high-demand disciplines is neither easy nor quick.
    Our new recruitment and retention initiatives, for which we need your
    continued support--the visiting scholars' program, performance and
    recruitment bonuses, training and professional development authority,
    and student loan repayment--will provide us with additional tools we
    can use in our efforts to attract the best and the brightest to serve
    the Congress.
        Finally, the additional staff resources that we have requested are
    critical to my efforts to improve CBO's economic forecasts and revenue-
    estimating processes.

                        CHANGES SINCE TERRORIST ATTACKS

        Senator Campbell. It seems to me that almost every agency
    that we deal with has had some major changes since 9/11, kind
    of foisted on them, obviously, but CBO has a little bit more of
    a buffered existence. Have there been any major changes with
    your workload or internal agency changes since 9/11, as there
    has been with so many other agencies?
        Mr. Holtz-Eakin. Well, I can let Barry Anderson, who has
    actually been at the Congressional Budget Office during the
    entire period, respond to that most directly.
        Mr. Anderson. The workload, no. I would have to say our
    workload is about the same. We have answered more requests,
    about, for example, the potential cost of the war in Iraq, and
    we also were called by the budget committees--and, in fact,
    volunteered to them right after 9/11--to talk about the
    potential economic damage that 9/11 could have caused for the
    economy. But that was a relatively small amount of work with
    respect to the entire workload. The budget process, Mr.
    Chairman, just seems to go on and on, ever more complex, but
    not much impacted by that.
        With respect to the actual working conditions, though, it
    has, I would say, relatively dramatically affected the staff.
    First of all, it has affected them psychologically. The fact
    that we work on Capitol Hill--the fact that one of those planes
    could have been headed directly our way--has had a major
    impact. In the Ford House Office Building in which we are
    located, there is a day care center, and that really has had an
    impact, particularly right after the event.
        Senator Campbell. Is that day care center still there?
        Mr. Anderson. It is still there, and there have been a
    number of security provisions implemented in the building and
    in the area around it that were not in effect on 9/11; and
    people see that, and they recognize that, and they act
    differently.
        Second of all, right after 9/11, as you may recall, there
    was the anthrax, and we were out of our building for almost 3
    weeks because of that, too. That dramatically changed our
    disaster recovery procedures. When that happened back in
    October of 2001, I think we had only three or four laptops in
    the agency. Now we have 60 or 70.
        Senator Campbell. Where were you working when you had to
    vacate your offices during the anthrax scare?
        Mr. Anderson. We had six different locations. We went, hat
    in hand, to agencies, almost every one of which was very
    generous with us in giving us space.
        Senator Campbell. They were all downtown here somewhere?
        Mr. Anderson. Some of them--the Library of Congress
    provided some; the Department of the Interior, NASA,
    International Trade provided some. OMB staff had a space that
    they had vacated, that they had reserved in case they had to
    vacate the Old Executive Office Building, an entire floor of
    1800 G Street, and that provided the biggest amount of space. A
    third or more of our staff were there for several weeks.
    However, the space was one thing; the computers were another.
    And I would have to say, looking back, that is where we were
    least prepared. We were able, sort of by the skin of our teeth,
    to continue to provide services to the Congress during that
    time. Were that or anything like that to happen again, we would
    be so much better prepared now. It has drastically changed the
    way we think about things--backing up materials, backing up
    databases, being able to access materials off-site, those types
    of thing.
        Senator Campbell. Thank you. Senator Durbin.

                   RESOURCES TO IMPROVE BASELINE FORECASTING

        Senator Durbin. Thank you very much.
        Mr. Holtz-Eakin, may I ask you, in your statement, you said
    that you are going to devote more resources to improving
    economic forecasts and projections of tax receipts. I would
    like to ask how much of that is just an effort to be more
    accurate and how much of that reflects this new philosophy of
    dynamic scoring, where we have to look at the world through
    different eyes than we have during the course of the history of
    the Republic?
        Mr. Holtz-Eakin. This really reflects an effort to be
    better in our baseline forecasting, independent of any issues
    associated with dynamic scoring. The revenue swings over the
    late 1990s and the most recent couple of years involve a nexus
    of macroeconomic performance (a boom and a bust), financial
    performance (changing compensation patterns, movements toward
    more bonuses, options, profit-sharing plans), and integration
    of the receipts from the corporate and individual income taxes
    and from their respective alternative minimum taxes. This has
    presented a really difficult technical challenge in trying to
    anticipate receipts in each year. The request is meant to
    reflect our needs for specialists in those areas, including
    those visiting scholars who may bring to us some wisdom from
    the States that rely heavily on those kinds of receipts,
    California and New York.
        Senator Durbin. So virtually all the forecasters have been
    wrong pretty consistently. Has the CBO been more in error or
    less in error than most of the forecasters in the past few
    years?
        Mr. Holtz-Eakin. Although I have been here only 2 months, I
    can proudly say that the CBO's record is outstanding and that
    the agency has made smaller errors in absolute value than most
    forecasters.

                         STUDENT LOAN REPAYMENT PROGRAM

        Senator Durbin. So you do not think any restatement from
    CBO would call for--never mind. I will not go any further with
    that.
        You talked a lot about the brain drain in Federal
    Government. This is not unique to your agency. In fact, Senator
    Voinovich, our colleague, has really focused on this as a major
    part of his Senate activity in the Government Affairs
    Committee, and you also noticed here a student loan repayment
    program, and I might say to the chairman, this is one of the
    things that came out of a year or two of my chairmanship of
    this, or my chairmanship of this subcommittee to try to retain
    and recruit very good people to Government service, where there
    are many disincentives. Student loan repayment turned out to be
    one of the incentives. Now, are you using that now? I see in
    your statement you refer to it.
        Mr. Holtz-Eakin. I want to thank you for your efforts. To
    walk into a situation where you have this kind of recruiting
    tool is a big advantage.
        The repayment provisions have not yet been used. We have
    set up a program where individuals can get up to $6,000 each
    year, a total of $40,000. Should they accept this incentive,
    they would be required to stay at CBO 3 years; otherwise, they
    would have to pay it back.
        During fiscal year 2002, we did not use that. We did not
    have a budget until late in the year, and it was not necessary
    to deploy the incentive. We have built into our 2004 request a
    larger use of the incentive. We are looking for the right
    opportunities in the recruiting process to deploy it in a way
    that enables us to take a relatively modest program at its
    outset and hire strategically, especially in the tough areas I
    mentioned.
        Senator Durbin. I thank you for that, and I think many of
    us are coming to learn, as we look at the debt that our kids
    are carrying out of college, that this is a new reality when it
    comes to job search, and if you do not deal with it, you are
    likely to be a victim of it, and I think it is good that we are
    starting to open our eyes to that.
        Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

                               SUBCOMITTEE RECESS

        Senator Campbell. I want to thank our witnesses. You got
    done just in time. You heard the beepers. We are going to have
    to go vote. We will stand in recess until April 10 at 1:30,
    when we will take testimony from the Library of Congress.
        Thank you so much for being here. The subcommittee is
    recessed.
        [Whereupon, at 2 p.m., Thursday, March 27, the subcommittee
    was recessed, to reconvene at 1:30 p.m., Thursday, April 10.]

             LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004

                                  ----------

                            THURSDAY, APRIL 10, 2003

                                           U.S. Senate,
               Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The subcommittee met at 1:29 p.m., in room SD-116, Dirksen
    Senate Office Building, Hon. Ben Nighthorse Campbell (chairman)
    presiding.
        Present: Senators Campbell, Bennett, Stevens, and Durbin.

                              LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

    STATEMENT OF DR. JAMES H. BILLINGTON, LIBRARIAN OF
                CONGRESS AND CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF
                TRUSTEES FOR THE CENTER FOR RUSSIAN
                LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT
    ACCOMPANIED BY:
            GENERAL DONALD L. SCOTT, DEPUTY LIBRARIAN
            KENNETH E. LOPEZ, DIRECTOR OF SECURITY

              OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL

        Senator Campbell. The subcommittee will come to order.
        Senator Durbin is running a little late. He will be along
    in 10 or 15 minutes. But we will go ahead and start.
        We meet today to hear from Dr. James Billington, the
    Librarian of Congress, on the fiscal year 2004 request for the
    Library of Congress. Dr. Billington is accompanied by Deputy
    Librarian General Donald Scott and a team of others.
        I met both of you in my office. I appreciated that
    opportunity to talk to you.
        The Library's request of $540 million represents an
    increase of $44 million over the current year and 124
    additional staff. As I understand it, the budget request can be
    reduced by the amount of the funds provided in the pending
    fiscal year 2003 supplemental, a total of $7.4 million. Major
    increases are requested for additional security measures,
    particularly new police officers, funds for the ongoing
    establishment of an audiovisual conservation center in
    Culpeper, Virginia, as well as routine increases in payroll and
    that needed for inflation.
        Other areas of emphasis in your budget, Dr. Billington, is
    the alternate computing facility, which is to be operational
    this summer, continuing to reduce the backlog of uncataloged
    items in the Library and increasing the budget for the Veterans
    History Project, to name a few.
        And with that, we will go ahead and start. If you would
    like to submit your complete testimony for the record, that
    will be included. And if you would like to diverge from that,
    that will be fine, too.
        Excuse me. Before we start, I did not realize that Senator
    Stevens had come in.
        Senator Stevens. They were exposed to me yesterday at the
    Rules Committee, Mr. Chairman. So I am here to listen again.
        Senator Campbell. Okay. You have no statement, then,
    Senator?
        Senator Stevens. No, thank you.
        Senator Campbell. Okay. Why do we not go ahead and start?

                     EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS

        Dr. Billington. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you,
    also, for the committee's support of the supplemental
    appropriations request. If it is approved, the Library's next
    budget would be decreased to $29.9 million, rather than $44
    million, which would be only a 5.5 percent increase. Most of
    that 5.5 percent, 79 percent, would be for mandatory pay and
    price level increases.

                              UPCOMING CHALLENGES

        The Library is, in effect, in the process of superimposing
    a massive digital electronic library on what is already the
    world's largest traditional library of artifacts. For fiscal
    year 2004, we will face special challenges in implementing new
    security measures, a police force merger, and planning to
    replace the 42 percent of our current staff who will become
    eligible to retire in the next 5 years; also requiring and
    preparing this long-awaited, much-needed national audiovisual
    conservation center, most of which is coming to us through a
    very generous donation from the Packard Humanities Institute;
    and finally, acquiring, preserving, and ensuring rights-
    protected access to this explosion of materials that are
    produced in digital format, as well as the continuing pile-up
    of analog items, of which we add 10,000 a day.
        The events of September 11, the constant threat of
    terrorism, war in Iraq, have greatly increased the importance
    of the Library's mission to gather and make accessible the
    world's knowledge for the Nation's good. We serve in many ways
    as the Nation's strategic information reserve. And we provide
    Congress with authentic information, principally through CRS,
    the Congressional Research Service, and the Law Library. Last
    year, CRS experts delivered over 800,000 responses to a wide
    variety of Congressional inquiries.
        The unique global resources also play a special role. One
    of our Middle Eastern experts discovered and translated not so
    long ago a rare 1991 autobiography written by Osama bin Laden,
    which named some of his cohorts. The report was made available
    to the Congress and the Government agencies and is now
    available for research in our African and Middle Eastern
    reading room.
        Another example, our Law Library, which has the largest
    collection of Afghanistan laws in the world, helped reassemble
    that country's laws, most of which were destroyed by the
    Taliban. The Law Library found a unique two-volume set of the
    laws that was unavailable elsewhere, reconstructed it. It has
    been distributed to 1,000 institutions in Afghanistan.
        The final example of this kind is our Federal Research
    Division, which did a study on terrorism in 1999. It was
    commissioned by the National Intelligence Council. And 2 years
    before 9/11, the study noted that members of al Qaeda could
    conceivably crash an aircraft into the Pentagon, CIA
    Headquarters, or The White House. That report is now available
    on our website.
        Our new national plan for digital preservation was approved
    by the Congress last December. And it establishes an approach
    for the capture and preservation of important websites,
    including those that are dealing with issues of urgent
    importance to the Congress. The average life span of a website
    today, Mr. Chairman, is 44 days. So we are taking the lead on
    acquiring and preserving this digital material and will be
    asking eventually to adapt the mandatory deposit requirement of
    the Copyright Act to the digital environment so we can more
    efficiently deposit online materials.

                     LIBRARY OF CONGRESS FUNDING PRIORITIES

        Most of our requested increase, as I have said, is for
    mandatory pay and price increases. The Library does not seek
    support for any new functions. What we are simply doing is
    getting the adequate support for the resources needed to
    perform the historic service in a radically changed and
    increasingly changing environment. That involves improving
    physical security, support collections security and management,
    including the new center at Culpeper. It involves managing our
    growing collections and incorporating the rapidly changing
    technology into all our operations right across the board,
    supporting the Copyright Office's reengineering efforts, for
    instance, and enhancing access by the Congress to CRS products
    wherever and whenever the Congress needs, increased CRS
    research capacity to manipulate the large data sets upon which
    CRS analysts rely, and incentives to enhance staff retention.
        We are requesting funding that will support 4,365 full-time
    equivalent positions, which is an increase of 124 FTEs. That
    number is still 184 fewer FTEs than we had in 1992 before the
    explosion of the Internet, before the great growth of
    collections and security measures that have been required in
    recent years.
        So, Mr. Chairman and Senator Stevens, to whom we continue
    to be indebted in many ways in this institution, we thank you,
    especially for your support in recent years, but also for the
    Congress over 203 years. The Congress of the United States has
    been the greatest single patron of the Library in the history
    of the world. And it has created and sustained the largest
    repository of human knowledge. So we are deeply grateful for
    your confidence and support.
        I would just point out a couple of items. This is the
    strategic plan that was sent to you separately. I testified
    this morning before Senator Lamar Alexander's committee on the
    use of the Library's collections by teachers and students in K
    through 12. There is a brochure here that may be of interest to
    you, which describes all of our online facilities and how they
    are being used educationally.
        You also have a sample of different parts of the website.
    We also did a listing recently of services that we perform for
    the Congress, in addition to the ones you are familiar with in
    CRS, as well as potential ones that we could activate very
    rapidly should the Congress want them. So you may have already
    received copies of this, but we will pass these over.

                                  NEW WEBSITE

        And finally, sir, we wanted to give you the first news of a
    new website that just went up today. It is celebrating the
    100th anniversary of Harley-Davidson.
        Dr. Billington. Hog Heaven----
        Senator Campbell. The Wright Brothers did a little
    something, too, in 1903, as you remember.
        Dr. Billington. This celebrates 100 years, including
    images, posters, all of America's most recognized motorcycle.
    And I brought three special examples from the new web
    presentation, which we thought you might like to have in larger
    scale.
        The first is a photograph from our prints and photographs
    collection of somebody with one of the early motorcycles in
    1910. This one is the 1915 Harley-Davidson advertisement in
    Motorcycle Illustrated. You could buy a motorcycle for $275
    back in those days.
        Senator Campbell. I got my oil changed the other day, and
    it cost that much.
        ``HD'' stands for hundreds of dollars, by the way.
        Dr. Billington. Finally, from the Motion Picture,
    Broadcasting and Recorded Sound we have Jayne Mansfield with
    her Harley in ``Miss Traffic Stopper of 1962.''
        Senator Campbell. I will keep that one.
        Well, thank you. Somebody must have told you how to get my
    attention.
        Dr. Billington. Thank you.
        Senator Campbell. Did General Scott have any additional
    comments for this?
        General Scott. Yes, sir, I do.
        Senator Campbell. All right. I have some questions I would
    like to ask. But I would also like to note with interest the
    former chairman, Senator Bennett, is here. And if Senator
    Bennett or Senator Stevens either has a statement, why, if they
    would like to proceed.
        Senator Bennett. No, sir, Mr. Chairman. We are just
    admiring the expert way in which you are handling----
        Senator Campbell. You mean the way Dr. Billington is
    handling me.
        Senator Stevens. It was Harley-Davidson that the rich folk
    bought. There was another one. It was called the JD, the Junior
    Davis. Did you know about the Junior Davis?
        Dr. Billington. Well, that looks like it will have to be
    another website.
        Senator Stevens. JD. They were, what, 80 horsepower?
        Senator Campbell. Yes, they were small.
        [The statements follow:]

                   Prepared Statements of James H. Billington

        I appreciate the opportunity to discuss the Library of Congress
    budget request for fiscal year 2004. The Congress of the United States
    has created the largest repository of human knowledge in the history of
    the world and has preserved the mint record of American intellectual
    creativity. The Library's mission of making its resources available and
    useful to the Congress and the American people and sustaining and
    preserving a universal collection of knowledge and creativity for
    future generations is more important than ever in today's environment.
        The Library is supporting the war effort by making available to the
    Congress information resources that continue to gain in importance as a
    critical strategic asset as people are turning to on-line digital
    resources for more and more information, and Congress and the nation
    are using the Library of Congress's expanding digital resources at an
    ever-increasing rate. The Library processed more than two billion
    electronic transactions on our Web sites in fiscal year 2002, and that
    number seems likely to exceed three billion in fiscal year 2003.
    Technology has made it possible for the Library to extend its reach far
    beyond the walls of its buildings in Washington to every corner of the
    world.
        Our founding fathers linked governance to learning, and legislation
    to libraries, from the first time the Continental Congress convened--in
    a room opposite a library--in Philadelphia on Monday, September 5,
    1774. Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution was designed to promote
    ``the progress of science and useful arts.'' The first joint committee
    of the Congress in the new capital of Washington, D.C., was created for
    its library. Congress created the world's first nationwide network of
    library-based higher educational institutions in 1862 when the Morrill
    Act built land grant universities--underscoring the basic Jeffersonian
    belief that democracy, to be dynamic, had to be based on more people
    using knowledge in more ways.
        The Library of Congress is uniquely positioned to support the work
    of the Congress and the creative dynamism of America in the early 21st
    century. Three central features of the Library point the way.
      --The Library of Congress (through its Congressional Research Service
            and Law Library) provides the principal research support for
            the Congress. The Library also serves the American people,
            along with other institutions, as a source of knowledge
            navigation for the increasingly chaotic profusion of
            information and knowledge flooding the Internet.
      --The Congress's Library is America's strategic reserve of the
            world's knowledge and information. With more than 126 million
            items in its collections, the Library is the only institution
            in the world that comes anywhere close to acquiring everything
            important for America (except for medicine and agriculture,
            which have their own national libraries) in whatever language
            and format it is produced. The Library's unique web of
            international exchanges, and of overseas procurement offices
            (Islamabad, Cairo, Jakarta, New Delhi, Nairobi, and Rio de
            Janeiro), together with purchases and its U.S. copyright
            deposits, generate an estimated inflow of 22,000 items a day,
            of which we retain 10,000.
      --The Congress's Library is the central hub of two important
            knowledge networks: America's national network of libraries and
            other repositories, and an international network of major
            libraries. The Library of Congress is recognized as a leading
            provider of free, high-quality content on the Internet. Just as
            the Congress endorsed the Library of Congress providing other
            libraries its cataloging data for print material in the early
            20th century, so it has now mandated its Library in the early
            21st century to create the metadata and plan for a distributed
            national network for storing and making accessible digital
            material.
        The Library is a knowledge center for accumulating information and
    helping distill it into scholarly knowledge and practical wisdom. We
    are constructing a national collaborative effort, at Congress's behest,
    to preserve digital materials for our national information reserve. The
    Library submitted a National Digital Information Infrastructure and
    Preservation Program (NDIIPP) plan to the Congress for establishing a
    national network of committed partners who will collaborate in a
    digital preservation architecture with defined roles and
    responsibilities. The plan was approved in December 2002, and the
    Library now plans to launch practical projects and research that will
    develop a national preservation infrastructure. Funding for the NDIIPP
    plan has already been appropriated by the Congress. Most of it will
    require matching private sector contributions.
        Thanks to the continuing support of the Congress, its Library is in
    a position both to sustain its historical mission in the new arena of
    electronic information and to make major new contributions to the
    global and domestic needs of the United States in an increasingly
    competitive and dangerous world. In the new networked world, the
    Library must combine leadership functions that only it can perform with
    catalytic activities relying on new, networked partnerships with both
    other nonprofit repositories and the productive private sector. The
    Library will need the staff, the structures, and the focus to perform
    only those roles that are central to its mission and which it is
    uniquely equipped to perform. To do so the Library must sustain most of
    its present operations but at the same time face three major changes
    that will reach across all aspects of the Library in the next decade.
      --The Library's marvelous workforce must to a large extent be
            retrained or renewed. Facing a disproportionately large number
            of experienced personnel at or nearing retirement age, we must
            create a workforce that will in the aggregate provide an even
            greater diversity of both backgrounds and technical skills. The
            staff for the 21st century must include highly skilled and
            well-trained experts in both new technologies and the
            traditional scholarly and substantive subjects required by the
            richness and variety of the collections. This personnel need
            is, in many ways, the most important single requirement the
            Library will face in the next decade.
      --The Library will have to create new structures, both technical and
            human, of sufficient flexibility to enable the Library to deal
            with the fast-moving ever-changing electronic universe, and to
            integrate digital materials seamlessly into the massive analog
            collections of the Library. These structures must be set up in
            such a way that they can work effectively in an increasingly
            distributed and networked environment, and simultaneously
            guarantee fast and full global coverage for the Congress. The
            Library has been largely able to provide information in the
            analog universe; but it may have to share this responsibility
            with others in the digital network if they can guarantee quick
            responses to Congressional and CRS requests.
      --The Library must concentrate more of its overall energies and
            talents on developing the deep substantive scholarly expertise
            that will enable the staff to navigate, authenticate, and
            analyze knowledge for the Congress and the nation. It will be
            important in the future not only to provide access to the
            Library's collections, but to extend and deepen the objective
            guidance that both the Congress and the scholarly world will
            need in confronting the inundation of unfiltered electronic
            information.
        For fiscal year 2004, the Library continues to face daunting
    challenges in: (1) implementing security measures and a police force
    merger; (2) acquiring, preserving, and storing--and ensuring rights-
    protected access to--the proliferating materials that are produced in
    both analog and digital formats; (3) planning to replace the 42 percent
    of our current staff who will become eligible to retire between now and
    the end of fiscal year 2008; and (4) changing the Library's operations
    by incorporating constantly evolving methods for communicating
    information.
        The Library's budget request is driven primarily by our mission to
    acquire, process, make accessible, and store some three million new
    artifactual items annually, while at the same time harvesting the
    exponential growth of electronic materials. Additional fiscal year 2004
    budget resources are needed mainly for managing our growing
    collections, incorporating rapidly changing technology into our
    operations, and covering mandatory pay raises and unavoidable price
    increases. The Library seeks support in its fiscal year 2004 budget
    request not for any new functions, but simply for the resources needed
    to perform our historic service in a radically changing environment.
        To meet these challenges, the Library requests additional fiscal
    year 2004 budget funds to improve physical security and support
    collections security and management (including the construction of the
    National Audio-Visual Conservation Center at Culpeper, Va.); to support
    the Copyright Office's reengineering efforts; and to enhance access to
    Congressional Research Service (CRS) products and increase CRS research
    capacity in critical areas.
        For fiscal year 2004, the Library of Congress requests a total
    budget of $576.6 million ($540.1 million in net appropriations and
    $36.5 million in authority to use receipts), a net increase of $44.5
    million above the fiscal year 2003 level. The requested increase
    includes $23.6 million for mandatory pay and price-level increases, and
    $48.3 million for program increases, offset by $27.4 million for
    nonrecurring costs. The Library's fiscal year 2004 budget request is a
    net increase of 8.4 percent above fiscal year 2003.
        Requested funding will support 4,365 full-time-equivalent (FTE)
    positions, an increase of 124 FTEs over the fiscal year 2003 target of
    4,241. The Library is assuming staffing at the fiscal year 2003 target
    level and requesting the additional FTEs largely to implement security
    standards and to support the Library's massive artifactual collections.
        The fiscal year 2004 budget increase is needed to fund the
    following major initiatives (which I will address in detail later in
    this statement):
      --Physical Security ($17.5 million and 62 FTEs).--Additional police
            are required to staff new posts and implement Capitol Hill
            security standards. Funding is also required to implement the
            new alternative computer facility, a new public address system,
            and enhanced emergency preparedness procedures.
      --Collections Security and Management ($14.1 million and 30 FTEs).--
            The National Audio-Visual Conservation Center (NAVCC) at
            Culpeper, Va., will enable the Library to redress significant
            limitations in its ability to store, secure, preserve, and
            provide access to more than 900,000 films and 2.6 million audio
            materials. The NAVCC will be constructed in two phases: in
            2004, storage building and infrastructure; and in 2005,
            processing building and nitrate storage. Additional NAVCC
            funding of $11.1 million and 8 FTEs is required in fiscal year
            2004 to maintain the construction schedule. It is essential to
            demonstrate this level of public support if we are to secure
            the unprecedentedly large private-sector support that we expect
            to receive when this facility is conveyed to the U.S.
            Government. The Library also requires $3 million and 22
            temporary FTEs to improve the collections security and
            management of its other vast collections, including reducing
            the arrearage of unprocessed items.
      --Copyright Office ($7.8 million).--Funding is required to restore
            the one-time $5.7 million fiscal year 2003 base reduction
            resulting from the availability of fiscal year 2002
            supplemental no-year funding, and $2.1 million is required to
            support the ongoing reengineering project.
      --Congressional Research Service ($2.7 million).--The Congress must
            have uninterrupted access to the policy expertise and
            information resources needed to address key public policy
            issues. CRS is requesting additional resources to ensure
            continuity of business operations, to enhance capacity for
            database management, and to reform workforce practices that add
            incentives to encourage staff retention, which in turn will
            enhance the quality, access, and timeliness of its
            Congressional research and information services.
      --Other Core Programs and Mandated Projects ($6.2 million and 28
            FTEs).--Several of the Library's core programs require
            additional resources, including the mass deacidification
            program, the Integrated Library System, the Law Library
            acquisitions program, the talking books program, the Office of
            Inspector General, and the Library's space management program.
            In addition, several congressionally mandated programs require
            the resources adequate to accomplish their assigned missions:
            the Veterans History Project; the Meeting of Frontiers program,
            the National Film Preservation Foundation, and the retail sales
            program.
        Concurrent with the submission of this budget request, the Library
    has submitted an fiscal year 2003 supplemental appropriations request
    of $7.4 million for two physical security items that are included in
    our fiscal year 2004 physical security budget request of $17.5 million.
    If approved, the two items would immediately support our emergency
    management program and alternative computer facility, and the Library's
    fiscal year 2004 budget request could be reduced by $7.4 million.

                         THE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS TODAY

        The core of the Library is its incomparable collections and the
    specialists who interpret and share them. The Library's 126 million
    items include almost all languages and media through which knowledge
    and creativity are preserved and communicated.
        The Library has more than 28 million items in its print
    collections, including 5,706 volumes printed before the year 1500; 12.3
    million photographs; 4.9 million maps; 2.6 million audio recordings;
    900,000 motion pictures, including the earliest movies ever made; 5.1
    million pieces of music; and 56.1 million pages of personal papers and
    manuscripts, including those of 23 U.S. Presidents, as well as hundreds
    of thousands of scientific and government documents.
        New treasures are added each year. Notable acquisitions during
    fiscal year 2002 include: one of the earliest maps to identify the
    United States as an independent country (Carte des Etats De L'Amerique
    Suivant le Traite de paix de 1783, Dediee et presentee a s. Excellence
    Mr. Benjamin Franklin), with extensive marginal text reporting the
    military events of the American Revolution; the comprehensive papers of
    Jackie Robinson, including more than 7,000 items on all aspects of his
    life; 26 rare Afghan monographs smuggled out of Afghanistan during the
    Taliban era; 67 North Korean movies and additional North Korean videos;
    and the Prelinger Collection of more than 48,000 historical motion
    pictures, which brings together a variety of American ephemeral
    advertising, educational, industrial, amateur, and documentary films of
    everyday life, culture, and industry in 20th century America.
        Every workday, the Library's staff adds more than 10,000 new items
    to the collections after organizing and cataloging them. The staff then
    shares them with the Congress and the nation--by assisting users in the
    Library's reading rooms, by providing on-line access across the nation
    to many items, and by featuring the Library's collections in cultural
    programs.
        Every year the Library delivers more than 800,000 research
    responses and services to the Congress, registers more than 520,000
    copyright claims, and circulates more than 23 million audio and braille
    books and magazines free of charge to blind and physically handicapped
    individuals all across America. The Library annually catalogs more than
    300,000 books and serials, providing its bibliographic records
    inexpensively to the nation's libraries, thus saving them millions of
    dollars annually.
        The Library also provides Congressional offices, federal agencies,
    libraries, and the public with free on-line access, via the Internet,
    to its automated information files, which contain more than 75 million
    records. The Library's Internet-based systems include major World Wide
    Web services (e.g., Legislative Information System, THOMAS,
    , , Global Legal Information
    Network, the Library of Congress On-line Public Access Catalog
    [], and various file transfer options).

                        FISCAL YEAR 2002 ACCOMPLISHMENTS

        Fiscal year 2002 was an exciting year for the Library of Congress.
    Major achievements include the completion of the congressionally
    mandated National Digital Information Infrastructure and Preservation
    Program plan; the addition of 14 new multimedia historical collections
    to the American Memory Web site, increasing to more than 7.8 million
    the number of items freely available on-line; responding to the
    September 11th terrorist attack and subsequent anthrax incidents by
    providing focused research support for the Congress on terrorism and
    homeland security and by acquiring and preserving historically
    significant items for a worldwide record of the events and their
    aftermath; improving the security of the Library's people, collections,
    and buildings; reducing the Library's arrearage of uncataloged
    collections by more than one million items; and recording more than 2
    billion electronic transactions on the Library's Internet Web sites.

                               PHYSICAL SECURITY

        The Library is requesting a $17.5 million and 62-FTE increase to
    support improved security of the Library's people, collections, and
    buildings. Components of the increase are:
      --Police Staffing.--The Library is requesting $4.8 million and 54
            FTEs as the first increment of increasing the Library's police
            force by 108 FTEs, including four support personnel. The
            increase in police staffing cannot wait until the merger with
            the Capitol Police is completed. Enhanced security and new
            posts require more police to ensure that all building entrances
            are staffed at the standard level, that new and enhanced
            exterior posts are staffed, and that overtime is not excessive.
      --Alternative Computer Facility (ACF).--The Library is requesting
            $2,759,000 and 2 FTEs for ongoing operational costs of the ACF,
            including hardware and software maintenance and networking and
            telecommunications costs. In addition, $1,863,000 is required
            for CRS to implement its portion of the ACF, including the
            purchase of hardware, software, and contract staff to plan,
            design, and establish data linkages with the Library's Capitol
            Hill computer center and to reprogram its request tracking
            system. The Library's computer operations remain vulnerable to
            a Capitol Hill disaster until the ACF is brought on-line.
      --Public Address System.--To provide effective communications for all
            emergency situations, the Library is requesting $5.5 million to
            implement a public address system for its three Capitol Hill
            buildings and for the special facilities center. The current
            inadequate public address system is built into the existing
            fire alarm system, maintained by the Architect of the Capitol
            (AOC). While improvements to the fire alarm system are being
            considered; by 2007, the proposed upgrades would not meet the
            Library's current operational requirements. These include:
            communicating effectively in emergency and non-emergency
            situations; reaching all areas throughout the Library
            buildings; providing accurate and timely information; advising
            staff appropriately to mitigate risk and potential loss of
            life; and evacuating buildings expeditiously and in an orderly
            manner. To protect its staff and visitors in today's uncertain
            environment, the Library needs these improvements now.
      --Security Enhancement Plan Additional Requirements.--The Capitol
            Hill security enhancement implementation plan approved by the
            Congress in 1999 called for the consolidation of the Library's
            two police command centers, the installation of a new intrusion
            detection system, and improved police communications. The
            Library is requesting $2.1 million and one FTE to meet
            additional requirements associated with these tasks, including
            $1 million for additional card readers and door alarms.
      --Emergency Management.--The Library is requesting $511,000 and 5
            FTEs to establish an Office of Emergency Management and create
            a medical emergency coordinator position. The part-time
            collateral duty for the Library's existing staff who perform
            emergency management responsibilities is inadequate for today's
            challenges. The office would coordinate emergency planning,
            training, and operations (response and recovery). The medical
            emergency coordinator would provide research, analysis, and
            interpretation of medical issues. Funding the Library's
            security request will enhance the Library's ability to protect
            its priceless staff and collections and lessen the
            vulnerability of the entire Capitol Hill complex by making the
            Library's security more compatible with that of the complex as
            a whole.

                      COLLECTIONS SECURITY AND MANAGEMENT

        A total of $14.1 million and 30 FTEs is requested for the
    preservation, security, and management of the Library's collections.
    Funding is requested for the following:
      --$11 million for the National Audio-Visual Conservation Center.--The
            National Audio-Visual Conservation Center (NAVCC) located in
            Culpeper, Va., will be a world-class, state-of-the-art
            conservation center that will, for the first time, consolidate
            and integrate the Library's Motion Picture, Broadcasting,
            Recorded Sound Division (MBRS) administrative, acquisitions,
            processing, storage, preservation, laboratory transfer, and
            reformatting activities in one central facility. Audiovisual
            materials contain an ever-increasing percentage of the
            historical record. Principally funded by what will be the
            largest private gift in the history of the Library, it is
            essential at this stage to demonstrate Congressional sustaining
            support for this largely privately funded public resource. The
            NAVCC will enable the Library to redress significant
            limitations in its current ability to store, preserve and
            provide access to its moving image and recorded sound
            collections in the following ways:
        --Collections Storage.--The Library's moving image and sound
                collections are currently housed in storage facilities in
                four states and the District of Columbia. When the NAVCC is
                opened, the Library for the first time will be able to
                consolidate all its collections in a single, centralized
                storage facility that provides space sufficient to house
                projected collections growth for 25 years beyond the NAVCC
                move-in date.
        --Preservation Reformatting.--The NAVCC Film and Sound & Video
                Preservation Laboratories are being designed to increase
                significantly the number of items preserved for all types
                of audiovisual formats. Without the NAVCC, the Library's
                current preservation rate would result in the preservation
                of only 5 percent of its total endangered sound and video
                materials by the year 2015. By contrast, we project that
                the new NAVCC laboratories will enable us to preserve more
                than 50 percent of these endangered collections in the same
                10-year period after move-in.
        --Digital Repository and Access.--The NAVCC will also include a
                Digital Audio-Visual Preservation System that will preserve
                and provide research access to both newly acquired born-
                digital content, as well as analog legacy formats. This new
                system is contributing to the Library's overall development
                of a digital content repository and uses a new paradigm of
                producing and managing computer-based digital data.
          The bulk of the $11 million fiscal year 2004 NAVCC budget request
            is for collections storage shelving. This includes $3.6 million
            for high-density mobile shelving that will be used to fill the
            large vault rooms in the main collections building and $4.1
            million for special shelving to outfit the more than 120
            smaller vaults that will be separately constructed and
            dedicated to the storage of nitrate motion picture film. The
            shelving will maximize storage capacity for the many moving
            image and recorded sound formats held by the MBRS Division. The
            fiscal year 2004 request also includes $1 million for
            telecommunications equipment and cabling; $1,285,000 and 6 FTEs
            for digital preservation; $694,000 for security equipment; and
            $240,000 and 2 FTEs for administrative support. Collections
            shelving, security equipment, and telecommunications cabling
            and equipment (regular Library operational costs) are required
            to maintain the schedule for implementing this critical
            facility, which will ultimately hold more than 900,000 films
            and 2.6 million audio materials. The facility will be
            constructed in two phases: in 2004, non-nitrate storage
            building; in 2005, processing building and nitrate storage.
            Funding this year is critical to meeting this construction
            schedule as well as helping to finalize the private-sector
            investment in this facility, which is estimated to exceed $120
            million. The AOC contribution of $16.5 million for the
            acquisition of the facility has already been appropriated, but
            the AOC requires $1.3 million in additional fiscal year 2004
            resources for operations and maintenance of the facility.
      --$1,900,000 to secure the collections by improved inventory
            management.--The Library's collections security plan requires
            tracking incoming materials using the Library of Congress
            Integrated Library System (LC ILS). The Library has embarked
            upon a multiyear program to enhance the accountability of
            collections serials and several special-format collections.
            Additional contract resources are requested to check in serial
            issues as they are received, create item records for serials as
            individual issues are bound, barcode and link each self-
            contained serial volume and incoming non-rare monographs, and
            convert 10,000 Japanese, Chinese, and Korean serial titles from
            manual files to the LC ILS. Using the LC ILS, the Library also
            proposes to use contract resources to: establish on-line
            records for 2,500 American Folklife Center ethnographic
            collections; achieve effective tracking, circulation, and
            inventory control for the 850,000 items in the collections of
            the Rare Book and Special Collections Division; and prepare
            holdings records for nearly 250,000 manuscript boxes in the
            Manuscript Division.
      --$1,157,000 and 22 FTEs to reduce the Acquisitions Directorate
            arrearage.--The Library has not received a sizable infusion of
            new staff to help meet its obligation to reduce the arrearage
            for more than a decade. The current level of staffing will not
            permit the Library to meet the congressionally mandated
            arrearage reduction goals for fiscal year 2004 and beyond. The
            Library is asking for a three-year extension in meeting its
            non-rare print and non-print arrearage targets, along with the
            temporary staff needed to meet the targets within the revised
            time frame.

                                COPYRIGHT OFFICE

        The Library's Copyright Office promotes creativity and effective
    copyright protection, annually processing more than 520,000 claims.
    Each year, the office transfers about 900,000 works, with an estimated
    value of more than $30 million, to the permanent collections of the
    Library. The office also records more than 10,000 documents referring
    to approximately 250,000 titles and responds to more than 360,000
    requests for information a year.
        In fiscal year 2002, the Copyright Office was provided $7.5 million
    in supplemental appropriations to cover potential receipt shortfalls
    due to the disruption of U.S. mail delivery following the anthrax
    incidents. Once all the mail was processed, at the end of fiscal year
    2002, $5.6 million of the supplemental appropriations remained
    available and was subsequently used to offset the fiscal year 2003
    appropriation, requiring the Copyright Office to use its remaining no-
    year funds for basic operations in fiscal year 2003. For fiscal year
    2004, restoration of the funds is needed to support the Copyright
    Office's operations. The Library also requests $2.1 million to keep the
    Copyright Office's re-engineering project on schedule, which is
    critical to meeting its mission in the digital age. The Copyright
    Office must replace outdated information systems that have evolved over
    the past 20 years with modern technology that promotes the use of
    electronically received applications and works. The Register of
    Copyrights will provide more details about this critical project in her
    statement.

                         CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE

       As a pooled resource of nonpartisan analysis and information, CRS
    is a valuable and cost-effective asset to the Congress. To carry out
    its mission, CRS staff provide a wide range of analytic and research
    services, including close support to the Members and committees
    throughout the legislative process by interdisciplinary research, which
    includes reports and consultations, analyses of alternative legislative
    proposals and their impacts, assistance with hearings and other phases
    of the legislative and oversight processes, and analysis of emerging
    issues and trend data.
        In addition to funding for the CRS portion of the ACF, CRS is
    requesting additional resources in three areas: (1) $1,460,000 to
    develop technical solutions that ensure that the Service's materials
    are available to the Congress whenever and wherever they may be
    required; (2) $759,000 to add specialized technical capacity for
    database management activities; and (3) $535,000 for incentives that
    encourage staff retention. The resources respond to the Congressional
    mandate and will enhance CRS effectiveness and efficiency through
    improved business processes and updated workforce policies. The CRS
    Director will provide more details of the request in his statement.

                   OTHER CORE PROGRAMS AND MANDATED PROJECTS

        The Library is requesting a total increase of $5.2 million and 28
    FTEs for core programs and projects and for congressionally mandated
    projects. Components of the increase are:
    Core Programs
        Mass Deacidification.--The Library requests $919,000 to support the
    fourth of five increments required in our 30-year (one generation) mass
    deacidification program. The Congress approved the first three
    increments of this critical preservation program, and the Library
    requests a planned increase of $919,000 to continue to scale up to $5.7
    million by fiscal year 2005. By 2005, the Library plans to have reached
    the capacity to deacidify 300,000 books and 1,000,000 manuscripts
    annually.
        Law Library Purchase of Materials.--The Library is requesting
    $360,000 to increase the fiscal year 2003 budget of $1.5 million for
    purchasing law materials above the normal inflationary increase. The
    current base is not sufficient to acquire a comprehensive collection to
    support the Congress, and as a result, the Law Library is no longer
    able to respond quickly to key Congressional questions on issues such
    as anti-terrorism, foreign taxation, international criminal court, etc.
        Library of Congress Integrated Library System.--The Library is
    requesting a total fiscal year 2004 budget of $1,289,000 for the LC
    ILS, an increase of $384,000. The increase would support implementation
    of this mission-critical system for collections control and security,
    including additional bar code scanners and printers.
        Space Moves.--The Library is requesting $1.3 million for contract
    services to expand our capacity to handle space moves within the
    Library's three Capitol Hill buildings. As the Library re-engineers its
    business processes, additional capacity is required to make space
    changes to facilitate the new work flows. This additional capacity
    would enable the Library to avoid serious delays in the implementation
    of space improvements, which reduce the effectiveness and efficiency of
    operations.
        Inspector General Computer Security Audits.--The Office of the
    Inspector General (OIG) is requesting an increase of $200,000 and 2
    FTEs to ensure that agency-wide and system-level information technology
    security reviews covering operational and technical controls, policy,
    and management are performed. The new auditors are required to address
    the Library's longstanding weaknesses in information technology
    security.
    Congressionally Mandated Projects
        Veterans History Project (VHP).--In fiscal year 2003, the Congress
    approved $476,000 and 6 FTEs for this massive project. The overwhelming
    nationwide reaction to this popular program has exceeded our
    expectations, and the Library requests an additional $579,000 and 7
    FTEs to respond to the demands of this mandated program for interviews
    of a potential veteran population of 18 million.
        Meeting of Frontiers.--In fiscal year 1999, the Congress
    appropriated $2 million to digitize and place on-line materials from
    both Russia and United States to tell the story of the American
    exploration and settlement of the West, the parallel Russian
    exploration and settlement of Siberia and the Far East, and the meeting
    of the Russian-American frontier in Alaska and the Pacific Northwest.
    To date, the Web site for the project includes about 100,000 images.
    The Library is requesting $375,000 and 3 FTEs to continue the project
    in fiscal year 2004, including digitizing more items and continuing and
    promoting the educational use of the materials in both countries.
        National Film Preservation Foundation.--Authorization for the
    National Film Preservation Board and the National Film Preservation
    Foundation expires on October 11, 2003. As part of the reauthorization
    legislation for the film foundation, the Library is seeking to increase
    the government's matching contributions from $250,000 to $500,000. The
    film foundation has a proven track record of preserving our film
    heritage through matching private-sector grants, which is a cost-
    effective way to address this critical need. The foundation has
    supported a large number of small preservation centers all across
    America.
        Retail Sales Programs.--The Library requests $715,000 and 5 FTEs to
    provide capital for the retail sales program, including the Sales Shop
    and the Photoduplication Service. The added funding would support
    additional e-commerce and marketing efforts designed to generate
    profits from the Library's retail sales program, which would be used to
    benefit the Library's core programs. Without an initial infusion of
    capital, the Library will be able to implement only incremental
    improvements toward making these programs into profit centers that can
    support other Library activities.

       NATIONAL LIBRARY SERVICE FOR THE BLIND AND PHYSICALLY HANDICAPPED

        The Library administers a free national library program of braille
    and recorded materials for blind and physically handicapped persons
    through its National Library Service for the Blind and Physically
    Handicapped (NLS). Under a special provision of the U.S. copyright law
    and with the permission of authors and publishers of works not covered
    by the provision, NLS selects and produces full-length books and
    magazines in braille and on recorded disc and cassette. The Library
    distributes reading materials to a cooperating network of regional and
    subregional (local, nonfederal) libraries, where they are circulated to
    eligible borrowers. Reading materials and playback machines are sent to
    borrowers and returned to libraries by postage-free mail. Established
    by an act of Congress in 1931 to serve blind adults, the NLS program
    was expanded in 1952 to include children, in 1962 to provide music
    materials, and in 1966 to include individuals with other physical
    impairments that prevent the reading of standard print.
        The fiscal year 2004 budget maintains program services by funding
    mandatory pay and price-level increases totaling $1,068,000 and
    restores a $1 million one-time base reduction for purchase of talking
    book machines, which is offset by a $1 million decrease for a one-time
    payment to the National Federation of the Blind. Restoring the one-time
    base cut and funding the fiscal year 2004 increase is necessary to
    ensure that all eligible individuals are provided appropriate reading
    materials and to maintain a level of sound reproduction machines able
    to satisfy basic users' requirements without delays. The budget
    continues to support the exploration of alternative digital
    technologies, which will ultimately lead to a new delivery system to
    replace the current analog cassette tape technology.

                         LIBRARY BUILDINGS AND GROUNDS

        The AOC is responsible for the structural and mechanical care and
    maintenance of the Library's buildings and grounds. In coordination
    with the Library, the AOC has requested a fiscal year 2004 budget of
    $47.1 million, an increase of $9.8 million. The AOC budget includes
    funding totaling $4.2 million in appropriations for four projects that
    were requested by the Library.
        As mentioned earlier in this statement, the National Audio-Visual
    Conservation Center in Culpeper, Va., is being constructed, and the AOC
    requires operations and maintenance funding of $1,263,000 during fiscal
    year 2004 to support this critical project. Assurance of the government
    support is critical in leveraging the far larger amount (which has now
    increased to well over 75 percent of the total) that we are raising
    privately for this project.
        The three other Library-requested projects support the security of
    the Library's collections, the design of a logistics warehouse at Fort
    Meade, Maryland, and space modifications in the James Madison Building.
    Library-requested projects are prioritized based on critical need and
    in accordance with both the security needs and the strategic plan of
    the Library. I urge the committee to support the Architect's Library
    Buildings and Grounds budget, which is critical to the Library's
    mission.

                            AUTOMATED HIRING SYSTEM

        Fiscal year 2002 was the first full year of operation for a new
    hiring process that was implemented to resolve outstanding motions
    pending in the Federal District Court related to the Library's hiring
    and selection procedures for professional, administrative, and
    supervisory technical positions. As I reported last year, the Library
    encountered implementation problems associated with the new hiring
    process, including a new automated hiring system. I am pleased to
    report that significant progress has been made. Managers made 300
    professional, administrative, and supervisory technical competitive
    selections in fiscal year 2002 using the new process. This compares
    favorably with 187 such selections during fiscal year 2001 and a five-
    year average of 190 positions during the period of fiscal year 1996-
    2000. The new process is content-valid (i.e., a strong linkage exists
    among job requirements, application questions, and interview questions
    developed by subject matter experts), and the new process enables the
    Library to reach a wider applicant pool because of its on-line
    capabilities.
        We are absolutely committed to a fair hiring system that meets both
    competitive selection requirements and timeliness goals.

                                FEDLINK PROGRAM

        The Library's FEDLINK revolving fund program coordinates services
    and programs on behalf of federal libraries and information centers,
    including the purchase of library materials. The Faxon Company, a
    FEDLINK vendor that provides subscriptions to participating libraries,
    filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on January 27, 2002. As part
    of the bankruptcy case, the Library has established a claim of
    approximately $2.5 million for unfilled orders for FEDLINK libraries.
        Faxon and its bankrupt parent company, RoweCom, Inc., intend to
    submit a reorganization plan that calls for the purchase of their
    operations by EBSCO Industries and the resumption of service to
    libraries. At the time of the preparation of this statement, the
    ultimate liability for the Library or the FEDLINK revolving fund
    customers is unknown, but the Library believes a substantial portion of
    the orders will be filled and the claim thereby satisfied. The Library
    will continue to update the committee on the status of this issue and
    any potential need for a deficiency supplemental for the FEDLINK
    revolving fund.

                                    SUMMARY

        The Library of Congress is in a critical period when it must, in
    effect, superimpose a select library of digital materials onto its
    traditional artifactual library if it is to continue to be a responsive
    and dynamic force for the Congress and the nation. We are not seeking
    appropriations for any new functions, but rather trying to sustain our
    historic core function of acquiring, preserving, and making accessible
    knowledge and information that is now being generated and communicated
    in a radically new, and particularly impermanent medium.
        Technology change and the growth of our collections will continue
    to drive our budget plans. The Congress deserves great credit for
    supporting all the work that the Library of Congress is doing to
    preserve and make accessible the nation's creative heritage and the
    world's knowledge. Consistently for 203 years, on a bipartisan basis,
    our national legislature has been the greatest single patron of a
    library in the history of the world. As the keeper of America's--and
    much of the world's--creative and intellectual achievements, the
    Library of Congress is keenly aware of the awesome responsibility it
    has been given as we embrace the wonders and opportunities of the
    digital age.
        With Congressional support of our fiscal year 2004 budget, the
    Library of Congress will continue its dedicated service to the work of
    the Congress and to the creative life of the American people.
        On behalf of the Library and all its staff, I thank the Committee
    for its support, and look forward to working for and with the Congress
    to acquire and transmit knowledge for America.

                                     ______

                   Center for Russian Leadership Development

        Chairman Campbell, Senator Durbin and Members of the Subcommittee:
    The Open World Russian Leadership Program began as a pilot exchange
    program in the Library of Congress in 1999 (Public Law 106-31). The
    Open World Program is now conducted by an independent legislative
    branch entity, the Center for Russian Leadership Development--soon to
    be re-named the Open World Leadership Center. June 2003 marks the
    beginning of the fifth year of the program, which already has 6,265
    alumni (as of April 1, 2003) from all 89 political units of the Russian
    Federation.
        Funding for Open World in fiscal year 2003 was finalized only on
    February 20, 2003, in Public Law 108-7, which also authorized a number
    of significant changes. The program's scope was expanded to include the
    11 remaining Freedom Support Act countries, as well as the three Baltic
    states. The Center's name will change on May 15th to the Open World
    Leadership Center to reflect this expanded mission. The scope of the
    Russian program has also been expanded to include cultural, as well as
    political, leaders. The Center's fiscal year 2004 request of $14.8
    million will allow the program to continue to operate in Russia, to
    maintain its efficient operations and low per capita outlay, and to
    develop pilot expansion programs in two to three countries of the
    former Soviet Union and the Baltics if Congress so authorizes after
    Open World pilots are undertaken in fiscal year 2003.
        The Center's proposed expansion pilots must be approved by this
    subcommittee before being implemented. Let me outline for the members
    of the subcommittee the approach we are taking toward this planning and
    what we expect shortly to recommend to the Center's board and
    ultimately to you. The program expansion requires a number of steps
    before and after the subcommittee's approval:
      --strategic assessment of U.S. foreign policy goals and objectives
            for each country, as well as an assessment of past and planned
            U.S. government aid;
      --assessment of success factors, including the availability of
            appropriate nominating and host organizations, and logistical
            and language support;
      --consultation with the Department of State and an assessment of the
            availability of assistance from the U.S. Embassy for each new
            pilot country;
      --publication of grant hosting guidelines and review of submitted
            proposals;
      --grant awards and program implementation, including travel logistics
            and visas;
      --development of appropriate evaluation tools.
        Once approval has been granted to proceed with expansion pilots,
    implementation will take a minimum of 16 weeks. Tightened visa
    regulations in almost all U.S. embassies necessitate a lead time of 12
    weeks, which takes into account the possible need for in-person
    interviews for a substantial number of delegates. We hope to have all
    travel for this year's exchanges completed by October 2003, although
    this target could change depending on when the pilots are approved. In
    our Russia program, we have already brought 357 participants this year
    through April 9, 2003.
        Our implementation schedule will not allow the results of the
    pilots to be considered by this subcommittee before action is expected
    to be completed on the fiscal year 2004 budget. Because the Center's
    appropriation is made to its Treasury Department trust fund, funding is
    not restricted to fiscal year obligations. The Center proposes,
    therefore, to maintain a reserve of $2 million to be available to fund
    additional countries. A total of 1,600 participants would be brought
    from the Russian Federation since the beginning of 2003; a total of 160
    participants would be brought from expansion states with an evaluation
    mechanism sufficient to support a decision with regard to program
    continuation or further expansion. The Open World Program might serve
    as a useful model for programs to accompany significant U.S. aid to
    nations in support of democratic reforms and institutions. A draft
    timetable and assessment chart are included as Attachments A and B,
    respectively.
        We are requesting $14.8 million for fiscal year 2004, an increase
    of 14.8 percent over the fiscal year 2003 funding level in order to be
    able to expand the fiscal year 2003 pilot programs in as many as three
    new countries into more full-fledged programs. The decision on how many
    and which programs will be so developed will be based on our assessment
    of the successes of the pilots, and the need to maintain the hosting of
    Russian civic leaders at a level comparable to previous years. The
    fiscal year 2004 request is also premised on the continued and modest
    growth of the Russian Cultural Leaders program, another element of
    expansion mandated in the appropriations for fiscal year 2003.
    2002 Program Overview and Highlights
        In 2002 Open World welcomed its largest number of participants
    since the program's inception--2,531--more than ten times the number of
    participants in 2001, when the Center was being created as an
    independent entity, and a 58 percent increase over 2000. A fact sheet
    for the Open World Program is included as Attachment C, but let me
    highlight elements of the 2002 program.
      --The program's reach in both the Russian Federation and the United
            States is broad and deep.
      --We continue to find young leaders with increasingly significant
            political experience behind them: 50 percent are working in
            local, regional, and federal government entities; 21 percent,
            in education and the media (an area exploding in both number
            and diversity of outlets in Russia); 17 percent, in Russia's
            still nascent NGO sector.
      --Home hosting in 2002 has been sustained for 85 percent of
            participants and the availability of new American host sites
            continues to expand each year.
        A new theme-focused recruitment effort attracted a higher-caliber
    candidate and allowed host organizations and local host communities to
    develop programs with greater professional benefit for participants.
    This focus increased satisfaction with programs and built professional
    as well as personal ties across the two countries--creating in many
    cases ongoing links that expand the benefit of the 10-day intensive
    training program.
        Eight themes were developed in collaboration with the U.S. Embassy
    in Moscow and with U.S. organizations and foundations working in
    Russia: rule of law, economic development, women as leaders, health,
    education reform, environment, federalism, and youth issues (including
    drug, alcohol, and HIV/AIDS intervention programs). Rule of law (17
    percent) and women as leaders (14 percent) were among the largest
    theme-groupings.
      --2002 Participants represented 47 ethnic groups and 86 of 89 regions
            (total program representation now reaches 55 ethnic groups and
            89 of 89 regions).
      --Average age of delegates in 2002 was 38.
      --The Center hosted 53 arriving groups (on unique travel dates)
            comprised of 464 delegations.
      --Most groups arriving in Washington, D.C., received a political and
            cultural orientation at the Library of Congress.
      --At the suggestion of our Board members and in recognition of the
            importance of including more of the Muslim population of Russia
            in Open World, we have made a significant effort to recruit
            participants from such traditionally Muslim regions as Adigei,
            Bashkortostan, Dagestan, Karachaevo-Cherkesskaia, and
            Tatarstan, and have selectively chosen delegates from Chechnia
            and Ingushetia. The proportion of Open World delegates who are
            Muslim reflects the percentage of Muslims in the Russian
            population, and Open World is prepared to increase its
            recruitment of this population if Members of Congress and our
            Board request such action.
      --Women comprised 54 percent of the delegates, reflecting the
            addition of the ``women as leaders'' theme in 2002.
      --Participants in 2002 were hosted in 372 communities in 48 states
            (including Alaska and Hawaii); overall Open World hosting has
            reached all 50 states.
      --Colorado hosted 113 participants; Illinois, 168; Utah, 91; Alaska,
            59; South Dakota, 24.
      --Eighteen host organizations received grants in 2002 (eight
            organizations were first-time hosts, including the Alaska State
            Legislature. This is the first elected body to serve as a
            collective host. We hope to expand the model to other state
            legislatures as the significance of Russia's regional
            legislatures grows).
      --Grant applications to host in 2003 (with only civic guidelines
            posted) already total 23, with hosting capacity of over 4,200
            participants--and with 10 organizations requesting to host for
            the first time.

    History
        The Open World Russian Leadership Program was initiated as a result
    of a discussion among key Members of Congress in April 1999 and
    launched six weeks later with press announcements in Washington and
    Moscow. The original sponsor of the legislation that created Open World
    (Public Law 106-31) was Senator Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), who now serves
    as Honorary Chair of the Center's Board of Trustees. The program
    continued as a pilot at the Library of Congress until December 2000,
    when Congress created the independent Center for Russian Leadership
    Development (Public Law 106-554) and authorized the Library of Congress
    to continue housing the center and providing administrative support for
    its operations.
        From its inception, Open World has enjoyed strong support from
    Members of Congress. Five members serve on its Board of Trustees
    (Attachment D). This year 34 Members of Congress and five justices of
    the Supreme Court welcomed Open World delegations, joined by 13
    governors; 33 mayors of major cities; state legislators; and community
    and civic leaders in 48 states. At a time when the United States has an
    enhanced understanding of the value of public diplomacy, Open World
    stands as the largest ``people-to-people'' exchange since the
    establishment of the Fulbright-Hays Program and the Peace Corps.
        The Open World Program was created in a few short weeks at a time
    when U.S.-Russian relations were at a particularly difficult point
    during the late spring of 1999. In the intervening years, relations
    between Russia and the United States improved, particularly after the
    tragic events of September 11, 2001.
        Unfortunately, relations between Russia and the United States in
    April 2003 are again strained, and anti-American sentiment is again
    evident in Russia. The percentage of Russians holding unfavorable
    opinions of the United States has risen to a level roughly equivalent
    to opinion tracked during the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia in the spring
    of 1999 (Attachment E). At that time, Congress expressed its judgment
    on the importance of this country's relations with Russia by
    appropriating funds for a new Russian Leadership Program--which the
    Library of Congress organized. We brought 1,975 young emerging
    political leaders from Russia to the United States for the first time
    for brief stays to observe America's democracy and market economy
    firsthand. The participants were active leaders, not scholars; they
    stayed in homes, not hotels; they saw the United States with their own
    eyes and made their own judgments; they immersed themselves in a single
    community.
        Open World participants are the leaders of a struggling but
    emerging democracy in all 89 regions of Russia--not just in Moscow with
    its veneer of fast food restaurants and American television and films.
    Open World participants stay in, and establish often continuing links
    with communities all over America--not just with New York and
    Washington. Thanks to Open World, there are now hundreds of cities and
    towns whose mayors, regional and city legislators, judges, prosecutors,
    educators, entrepreneurs, women leaders, and NGO leaders have been
    welcomed into American communities and homes. While here, these Russian
    leaders have observed and discussed jury trials, health care delivery,
    AIDS prevention, high school drug intervention programs, the nature of
    federalism in emerging democracies, and the financing and building of
    small and medium-sized businesses.

    Then and Now
        The Open World Program was initiated in 1999 and is even more
    important today--because cementing Russia's engagement with the West is
    one of the most critical continuing challenges for American foreign
    policy. Russia has a geopolitical position bordering on many of the
    most potentially threatening regions in the world; and it has one of
    the world's largest stores of weapons of mass destruction and of
    untapped natural resources. It is aggressively trying to replace a long
    authoritarian tradition with a fragile democracy; and surprisingly few
    of its leaders have had any experience of how an open society operates.
        The State Department--with whom we consult and work closely (the
    Open World Program is housed in the U.S. Embassy in Moscow) has
    testified this year that Russia is now well on its way in its
    transition to democratic governance and a market economy. Because
    Freedom Support Act assistance to Russia is being phased out over the
    next several years, in part to devote funding to Central Asia, the
    State Department is looking to other assistance and exchange programs,
    such as Open World, to continue to support fundamental change in
    Russia. It is clearly an important priority for the United States to
    engage in public diplomacy and provide increased aid to the states of
    Central Asia, which have understandably received greater attention
    since September 11, 2001. But the work of Russia's emerging and still
    struggling generation of future leaders is not over--it has scarcely
    begun. Opportunities to bring the next generation of Russian leaders--
    committed to democracy and real progress--remain strong.
        U.S. visits offered by the Open World Program remain the single
    most important and cost-effective means of continuing a positive and
    productive Russian engagement with the United States whatever the
    fluctuations in our diplomatic relations. The program's home in the
    Legislative Branch secures not only the involvement of Members of
    Congress but a direct connection to the communities and states members
    represent--communities that host Russian Open World leaders in
    unprecedented numbers in American homes and that directly reflect
    American values and ideals.
        A closer look at three program areas will help members of the
    subcommittee better appreciate its reach and impact in Russia:

                Rule of Law
        Since launching the Open World specialized rule of law program in
    2001, the Center for Russian Leadership Development has quickly become
    one of the premier organizations working to support Russian jurists as
    they implement judicial reforms. In 2002, 213 Russian judges
    participated in Open World's specialized program in which five Supreme
    Court justices and two Supreme Commercial Court justices participated.
    Each delegation was hosted for a week in the court of a prominent U.S.
    federal or state judge, who planned and participated in the delegate's
    intensive agenda. In 2002, 42 U.S. judges hosted their Russian
    counterparts, and dozens more--including U.S. Supreme Court Chief
    Justice William H. Rehnquist and Associate Justices Sandra Day
    O'Connor, Anthony M. Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Stephen G.
    Breyer--played an active role in the Russian jurists' professional
    programs.
        Activities included observing court proceedings; shadowing American
    judges; visiting corrections facilities, police departments, and law
    schools; and participating in roundtables with judges and other legal
    professionals. Topics covered included judicial ethics and
    independence, court administration and security, case management and
    trial procedures. Several delegations also used their Open World visits
    to establish or strengthen sister-court relationships with their host
    courts. Participants were prepared for their community visits by a two-
    day orientation program in Washington, D.C., conducted by U.S. judges
    and judicial staff with the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts
    and the Federal Judicial Center, the federal courts' research and
    education arm.
        U.S. federal host judges were recruited by, and in many cases
    members of, the International Judicial Relations Committee of the U.S.
    Judicial Conference, the federal courts' policy-making body. State host
    judges were members of the Russian American Rule of Law Consortium, a
    network of partnerships among the legal communities of seven Russian
    regions and seven U.S. states.
        Open World worked closely with the Russian Federation Council of
    Judges (the policy-making body for the country's all-federal courts of
    general jurisdiction) and the Supreme Commercial Court of the Russian
    Federation in selecting candidates for the program.
        A special focus of this Open World rule of law programming in 2002
    was jury-trial procedure. The jury-trial system, which was banned
    throughout the Soviet era, was reinstituted on a pilot basis in the
    early 1990s in nine Russian regions. The recent passage of President
    Putin's judicial reform package includes the nationwide expansion of
    jury trials for serious criminal cases. Judges, prosecutors, and
    defense attorneys throughout Russia must now quickly become familiar
    with jury procedures. In response, Open World 2002 included programming
    and hands-on exposure to observe how American-style jury trials are
    conducted for three delegations made up of teams of prosecuting
    attorneys, defense attorneys, and judges.
        Open World 2002 included a new focus on legal education. Twenty-
    four deans and faculty of Russian law schools participated in visits
    hosted by Cleveland State University College of Law, George Washington
    University Law School, Rutgers Law School, University of the Pacific
    McGeorge School of Law, University of Maine School of Law, and Vermont
    Law School. Court administrators were also included in the Open World
    2002 specialized rule of law programming, with one delegation
    participating in a court management program hosted by the National
    Center for State Courts in Arlington, Virginia, and in Portland, Oregon
    (where they attended the annual meeting of the National Association of
    Court Managers), and several more high-level court administrators
    joined other delegations.

                Women as Leaders
        The women as leaders theme was a major new focus for the 2002 Open
    World Program in recognition of the markedly increased role of women in
    the new generation of emerging Russian leaders. Aiming to promote the
    professional advancement of women in many fields, the women as leaders
    program gave 361 Russian women new leadership skills, resources, and
    training. The 2002 program targeted specific groups of women, including
    politicians; entrepreneurs; journalists; and activists addressing human
    trafficking and domestic violence. Many women were recommended by
    first-time Open World nominating organizations recruited to nominate
    for this new theme, such as the League of Women Voters, the Alliance of
    American and Russian Women, the Association of Women Journalists, and
    Russia's Ministry of Labor and Social Development.
        During their U.S. visits, participants job shadowed their American
    counterparts, attended leadership training seminars, met with prominent
    researchers and specialists in their given fields, and visited women's
    organizations and other NGOs to learn new strategies for fundraising,
    membership, volunteer recruitment, and advocacy. For example, Vital
    Voices Global Partnership, which works to expand women's roles in
    politics, civil society, and business, conducted an effective training
    program for a group of thirteen Russian women working against the
    serious problem of human trafficking as researchers, counselors,
    activists, and NGO and government leaders. While in the United States,
    the Russian women not only learned about practical strategies to fight
    trafficking, they also built new partnerships with their American
    counterparts involved in this issue, as well as among themselves. The
    importance of creating a support network with other anti-trafficking
    advocates in Russia was summed up by one participant from a small city
    in Russia's Far East, who said, ``I found out we are not alone. I'm
    from so far away, but there are so many of us.''

                Election 2002
        The fall 2002 election cycle enabled the Open World Program to show
    delegates American democracy in action as part of the program's
    federalism and women as leaders themes. Delegations visited polling
    stations; met with candidates, campaign officials, and journalists;
    received demonstrations on voting technology; and observed candidates
    campaigning. To prepare these delegations, a special presentation on
    American elections and the media was given at the D.C. orientation
    session.
        One such delegation included a department head from the Russian
    Federation Presidential Press Service and prominent women journalists.
    This delegation met with the White House Communications Director,
    attended a White House briefing, visited the Baltimore Sun, met with
    Maryland candidates and political campaign officials and attended
    election night receptions. The Alaska State Legislature hosted two
    delegations of regional legislators and elections officials from the
    Russian Far East for elections-related activities that included
    following candidates as they campaigned door-to-door and analyzing the
    election results with state legislators.
    Links to Open World Alumni
        Open World seeks to extend the value and significance of the brief
    U.S. visit for its 6,265 alumni with continuing links to American hosts
    and opportunities to meet and work collaboratively with other Open
    World alumni and alumni of other U.S. government-funded exchange
    programs. Open World made a commitment from its inception to track all
    program participants; ours is the single largest and most current
    database of such alumni in Russia. Because of the number of Open World
    alumni, their distribution throughout all regions, and our ability to
    locate them quickly through the database, U.S. government officials at
    the embassy, consulates, Regional Initiative offices, U.S. Foreign
    Commercial Service offices and other federal agencies meet and work
    regularly with them. Ambassador Vershbow recently met with our alumni
    in Perm and at American Corner openings in Arkhangelsk, Kaliningrad,
    Saratov, and Saint Petersburg.
        Open World's alumni bulletins and English-Russian website provide
    the means for communication and enhanced professional opportunities.
    Alumni are eager to provide Open World with topical articles and to
    report on their projects. Privately-funded efforts in 2003 will expand
    opportunities for training, professional development, and
    communication. Particular efforts will be made to link Open World
    alumni with Muskie and FLEX alumni in order to increase and multiply
    the strong U.S.-Russian political and cultural ties these programs each
    embody.
        Alumni are also contributing to local and regional newspapers,
    sharing their experiences and bringing a new perspective on America to
    local readers. In several cities alumni have organized thematic
    conferences upon their return to Russia. One such example was a
    conference on youth policy in America held in Barnaul on International
    Students' Day. Open World alumni explained how local government, the
    business community, and the nonprofit sector in the United States all
    work together to educate young people. Conference attendees received
    lists of American organizations eager to cooperate with them on youth
    issues. One of the youth leaders in Barnaul, Aleksey Ustiugov, said
    that ``on Open World I was able to study all aspects of the U.S.
    educational system and establish relations with youth organizations.
    The program not only fosters mutual understanding, but also strengthens
    trust and friendship between our nations.''
    Achievements and Goals
        Open World has engaged and connected American and Russian leaders
    and citizens at all levels of our political system in unprecedented
    numbers.
        Open World has engaged Americans in more than 900 communities in
    all 50 states in public diplomacy. The United States has no finer
    advocates than our own citizens and community leaders who are actively
    involved in the public, private, and voluntary sectors.
        Opportunities to host Open World participants have expanded each
    year in communities all over America. Interest in building mutual
    understanding has increased. Many communities have hosted every year
    since the program began and maintain strong ties to communities and
    colleagues in Russia.
        The effectiveness of the Open World Program has been recognized by
    the Congress, which has now authorized new nation pilots beyond Russia.
        Open World provides a new, cost-effective model for both
    encouraging democratic development abroad and encouraging citizen
    engagement in public diplomacy at home. This model can probably be
    expanded to many other nations.
        Open World's visitors and hosts express best the program's focus
    and results:

                U.S. Ambassador to Russia Alexander Vershbow
        I would just like to thank Open World for giving Russians the
    chance to take part in these exchanges, which in turn help them
    transform the social and economic life of their regions, and this vast
    country as a whole. Your program touches the lives of individuals, but
    their good works in turn will affect and inspire an entire generation
    of Russians.

                Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor

        Nothing holds more promise for achieving the long-term security and
    prosperity of the world community than the rule of law. Nations that
    adhere to the rule of law share certain common understandings that
    reach across cultural and political divides. The Open World Russian
    Leadership Program plays a vital role in this dynamic process.

                Judge Paul A. Magnuson, District of Minnesota
        Through this demanding program, Russian judges and legal personnel
    immerse themselves in the U.S. system of justice by partnering with a
    leading Federal or State judge and living as part of an American
    community. Besides the intensive study and knowledge gained relating to
    case management, scheduling, court administration, jury selection, plea
    agreements, pretrial detention procedures, the adversarial process,
    etc.--there are also profound lessons learned about American society,
    the esteemed position of Judges, and the principles of the rule of law.
    It is clear to me, that the judges and legal professionals
    participating in Open World are taking these lessons home with them and
    sharing them with their colleagues, multiplying many times the
    effectiveness of the Open World rule of law exchange program.

                Chairman of the Council of Judges of the Russian Federation
                        and Supreme Court Justice Yuriy I. Sidorenko

        During the course of the visits, the Russian judges were successful
    in forming solid, fundamental, long-lasting, and fully productive
    relationships between the Russian and American judiciaries. The
    programs allowed the Russian judges to get acquainted with the system
    of justice in the United States and, because of this, they were able to
    further progressive legal reform in Russia. Last year's program
    provided us with a special opportunity to familiarize ourselves with
    the jury trial system in the United States, which, as is well known, is
    once again being introduced in Russia.

                Open World ``Women as Leaders'' Participant Irina Zamula,
                        City of Ulan Ude, Buryat Republic, Aide to Russian
                        State Duma Deputy

        The U.S. Library of Congress Open World program is unique. The
    program makes it possible to strengthen relations between our two
    countries at the level of inter-personal relations, and through
    contacts between ordinary citizens, who are able to see, hear and
    understand one another. The many meetings--gave us a lot. But the most
    important thing--they provided us the opportunity to change our
    stereotypical views toward American society.

                                     ______

       Prepared Statement of Marybeth Peters, The Register of Copyrights
        Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: Thank you for the
    opportunity to present the Copyright Office fiscal year 2004 budget
    request. This budget provides the resources for the Copyright Office to
    continue to play a leadership role in addressing, with the Congress,
    the increasingly important and complex copyright issues arising from
    the expanding use of digital technology and computer networks, and to
    fulfill the statutory responsibilities given the Copyright Office in
    our Nation's copyright law.
        In my testimony last year, I urged action on a $7.5 million
    supplemental appropriation request to offset a potential loss of
    receipts due to the anthrax-related disruption of U.S. Postal Service
    mail delivery on Capitol Hill. I begin my testimony this year by
    thanking the committee for approving that request. This funding enabled
    us to maintain our basic operations and ensured that we continued to
    meet public service requirements. We are very grateful that the
    committee recognized the need for this funding and acted so promptly to
    meet it.
        The held mail began to arrive in late April and we made a concerted
    effort to process it, and the fees it contained, as quickly as
    possible. We met our goal of processing all of this held mail by
    September 30th. As a result, the Office only used $1,850,000 by the end
    of fiscal year 2002, and $5,650,000 of the supplemental funds remained
    available. The Office is now, as directed by Congress, using the
    remaining supplemental funds for basic operations in fiscal year 2003.
    Our fiscal year 2003 annual appropriation was reduced by the same
    amount. A principal part of the fiscal year 2004 request I put before
    you today is to restore this $5,650,000 in base funding.
        Our only program change request for fiscal year 2004 is for
    $2,100,000 in new net appropriations and spending authority to build
    integrated information technology systems to support our reengineered
    Copyright Office business processes. The Office is designing these IT
    systems to improve our services to the public and to meet the demand
    for these services online. Copyright Office online services can be a
    major source for the deposit of digital works to the Library of
    Congress. The new net appropriation will be part of the $4.61 million
    in fiscal year 2004 spending for IT systems analysis, design, and
    development. I will address our reengineering program in greater detail
    later in my testimony.

                          THE COPYRIGHT OFFICE MISSION

        The Office's fiscal year 2004 budget request supports the Copyright
    Office's mission to promote creativity by administering and sustaining
    an effective national copyright system. The Office carries out the
    following functions:
      --Administration of the United States Copyright Law.--It processes
            claims for copyright registration, documents for recordation,
            and works deposited under the mandatory deposit provisions of
            the law. It creates public records of these actions and
            provides copies of deposited works for the Library's
            collections. For more than 130 years, copyright deposits have
            been a primary source of works for the Library, especially
            works by American authors. The Office also administers the
            law's compulsory licensing provisions, and convenes arbitration
            panels to determine royalty rates, terms and conditions of
            licenses, and the disposition of royalties.
      --Policy Assistance, Regulatory Activities, and Litigation.--The
            Office assists congressional committees in drafting and
            analyzing legislation relating to intellectual property;
            carries out important regulatory activities under the Digital
            Millennium Copyright Act; represents the U.S. Government at
            international meetings and diplomatic copyright conferences;
            advises the U.S. Trade Representative, the State Department,
            and the Commerce Department on domestic and international
            copyright laws; and assists the Courts and the Department of
            Justice in litigation involving copyright issues.
      --Public Information and Education.--The Copyright Office provides
            information to the public about United States copyright and
            related laws and Copyright Office practices and procedures, and
            conducts searches, which may be certified, of the copyright
            records. The Office conducts outreach to inform the public
            discussion of copyright issues.

                    FISCAL YEAR 2004 BUDGET REQUEST SUMMARY

        For fiscal year 2004, Offsetting Collections Authority remains at
    the same level as fiscal year 2003--$23,321,000. This authority is
    based on projected annual fee receipts of $21,500,000, and the use of
    $1,821,000 from the Copyright Office no-year account.
        The Copyright Office no-year account balance totaled $3,850,000 as
    of September 30, 2002. In the current fiscal year the Office will use
    $1,821,000 from the no-year account to partially fund the ongoing
    reengineering program. In fiscal year 2004, the Office proposes to
    continue using no-year account funds for the reengineering program: (1)
    $1,441,000 to partially fund the IT improvements; and (2) $380,000 to
    implement other aspects of reengineering. The use of the no-year funds
    will essentially deplete this account.

          REVIEW OF COPYRIGHT OFFICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND FUTURE PLANS

        I would like to briefly highlight some of the Office's current and
    past work, and our plans for fiscal year 2004.
    Policy and Legal Responsibilities
        The policy and regulatory work of the Copyright Office is largely
    dictated by the Congress, through responsibilities it gives the Office
    directly in the Copyright Act and through its setting of the
    legislative agenda in this area. Digital technology brings both
    opportunities and problems to the use of copyrighted works. Much is at
    stake in policy deliberations in this area--both in economic terms and
    in advancing education and learning. As such, our policy and regulatory
    work in this area is both increasingly technical and often contentious.
    The proceeding we completed last year on setting rates and terms for
    ``webcasting'' and the anticircumvention rulemaking now underway are
    illustrative of this trend.
        On the legislative front, we are pleased that the Technology,
    Education and Copyright Harmonization (TEACH) Act was signed into law
    last year. The TEACH Act promotes digital distance education by
    implementing the recommendations made in my May 1999 report to Congress
    titled ``Report on Copyright and Digital Distance Education.'' At the
    request of the Senate Judiciary Committee, the Copyright Office played
    a key role in bringing about the compromise reflected in the
    legislation by facilitating negotiations between the affected parties.
        We also worked closely with the Judiciary Committees of both houses
    on the issues raised by two 1999 rulings in which the Supreme Court
    determined that the doctrine of sovereign immunity prevents states from
    being held liable for damages for violations of the federal
    intellectual property laws even though states enjoy the full protection
    of those laws. Under current law, copyright owners are unable to obtain
    monetary relief under the copyright law against a state, state entity,
    or state employee unless the state waives its immunity. I testified on
    February 27, 2002, in support of S. 1611. At the request of the
    Judiciary Committees, the Office moderated negotiations between
    intellectual property owners and public universities over the proposed
    legislation, convening a series of meetings over a period of several
    weeks. Through this process, the affected parties were able to reach
    tentative agreement on some issues.
        In a similar manner, over the past year we have advised Members and
    staff on important issues such as piracy in peer-to-peer networks and
    the protection of authentication measures affixed to or embedded in
    certain copyrighted works.
        Congress is also continuing to study options for reform of the
    copyright arbitration royalty panel (CARP) system which the Office
    administers. CARPs are temporary panels composed of hired arbitrators
    who set or adjust royalty rates and terms of statutory licenses, and
    determine royalty distributions. These panels have been operating under
    the auspices of the Copyright Office and the Library of Congress since
    Congress eliminated the Copyright Royalty Tribunal (CRT) in 1993.
        I testified at a June 13 hearing before the House Subcommittee on
    Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property to consider how
    effective the CARP process has been thus far and ways in which it can
    be improved. In that testimony, I reviewed the findings of a report on
    CARP reform that the Office had prepared in 1998 at the request of the
    Subcommittee, and I commented on the need to reform the CARP process.
    The Subcommittee held another hearing on this topic this month, and I
    provided testimony then as well. I would note that changes in the
    arbitration system could result in functions that are now funded from
    royalty pools being funded from appropriations. If reform legislation
    is enacted this session with new requirements, our fiscal year 2004
    request would need to be adjusted accordingly.
        As I mentioned, this past year we completed what was perhaps the
    most widely-noticed, and one of the most controversial, CARP
    proceedings the Office has ever undertaken. It involved setting rates
    and terms of payment for two statutory licenses that allow for the
    public performance of a sound recording by means of digital audio
    transmissions, ``webcasting'', and the making of ephemeral recordings
    in furtherance of these transmissions. Under CARP procedures, the panel
    proposes rates and terms and I make a recommendation to the Librarian
    on whether to accept these proposals, or to reject them if they are
    arbitrary or contrary to law. The Librarian, in a June 20 order,
    accepted my recommendation to halve the CARP-proposed rates applicable
    to Internet-only transmissions made by webcasters and commercial
    broadcasters, while accepting the CARP-proposed rates for Internet
    retransmissions of radio broadcasts made by these same services.
        Later in the year, Congress passed into law the Small Webcaster
    Settlement Act. This Act declares that all payments to be made by non-
    commercial webcasters during the period of October 28, 1998 until May
    31, 2003, which have not already been paid, shall not be due until June
    20, 2003. With respect to small webcasters, SoundExchange was
    authorized to negotiate agreements with small webcasters; such
    agreements would cover the period from October 28, 1998 through
    December 31, 2004. Once the terms of such agreements were published by
    the Copyright Office in the Federal Register, they would be effective.
    The law required that the royalty payments in these agreements be based
    on a percentage of revenue or expenses, or both, and include a minimum
    fee. These terms would apply in lieu of the decision by the Librarian.
    To encourage agreements, payments of small webcasters would be delayed
    up to December 15, 2002, the date for any agreements to be concluded.
    An agreement was concluded on December 13 and published by the Office
    in the Federal Register of December 24, 2002.
        The section 1201 anticircumvention rulemaking we are currently
    conducting is mandated by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which
    provides that the Librarian may exempt certain classes of works from
    the prohibition against circumvention of technological measures that
    control access to copyrighted works. The purpose of this proceeding is
    to determine whether there are particular classes of works as to which
    users are, or are likely to be, adversely affected in their ability to
    make noninfringing uses due to the prohibition on circumvention of
    access controls. The first anticircumvention rulemaking under the DMCA
    was completed in October 2000. The current rulemaking will conclude
    this October.
        The Copyright Office continues to provide ongoing assistance to
    executive branch agencies on international matters, particularly the
    United States Trade Representative (USTR), the Patent and Trademark
    Office (PTO), and the Departments of State and Commerce. There is a
    full agenda of international intellectual property issues in
    international fora, such as those presented in free trade agreements,
    and bilateral negotiations.
        Copyright Office staff were part of the U.S. delegation in the May
    13-17, 2002, and November 4-8, 2002 meetings of the World Intellectual
    Property Organization (WIPO) Standing Committee on Copyright and
    Related Rights, which is considering among other things, a possible
    treaty on the protection of broadcasting organizations. In cooperation
    with the PTO, staff prepared a proposed treaty text that became the
    U.S. proposal and which differed in its scope from the proposals of
    others because of its inclusion of certain activities of webcasters.
        Staff served as part of the U.S. delegation in the World Trade
    Organization (WTO) Council on TRIPS (trade-related aspects of
    intellectual property rights), which met in November 2001 and March,
    June, and September 2002. The TRIPS Council is responsible for
    monitoring the operation of the TRIPS Agreement, and, in particular,
    how members comply with their obligations under it. The Council reviews
    the intellectual property laws of member countries for compliance with
    TRIPS obligations.
        Copyright Office staff were members of the U.S. delegation to the
    November 2001 and September 2002 meetings of the Intellectual Property
    Negotiating Group of the Free Trade Area of the Americas and were
    instrumental in preparations, including the redrafting of U.S. treaty
    proposals. We also participated in the drafting and negotiation of the
    intellectual property provisions of bilateral Free Trade Agreements
    with Chile and Singapore, including the drafting of proposed text, and
    have also taken part in preliminary discussions concerning a possible
    bilateral agreement with Morocco and multilateral agreements with
    groups of nations in Central America and southern Africa.
        As part of its responsibility to provide information and assistance
    to federal departments and agencies and the Judiciary on copyright
    matters, the Copyright Office has assisted the Department of Justice in
    a number of cases, most notably in defending the challenge to the
    Copyright Term Extension Act (CTEA), resulting in the recent decision
    by the Supreme Court in Eldred v. Ashcroft upholding to CTEA.
    Registration, Recordation and Cataloging Operations
        The Copyright Office registered and cataloged more than one-half
    million claims for copyrighted works during fiscal year 2002, despite
    the effects of anthrax incidents on Capitol Hill mail and the
    subsequent postal disruption which hampered the flow of claims into the
    Office. The Office received 526,138 claims to copyright covering more
    than 800,000 works and registered 521,041 claims. The Cataloging
    Division received 520,752 registrations in fiscal year 2002 and created
    cataloging records for 578,658. The Division reduced the amount of
    registrations awaiting cataloging from 183,204 to 78,379, a decrease of
    57 percent.
        The Documents Recordation Section received 12,600 documents for
    recordation and cleared 10,506, covering nearly 218,000 titles of
    works.
        During the fiscal year, the Copyright Office transferred to the
    Library of Congress for its collections 896,504 copies of registered
    and unregistered works valued at $31,302,048.
    Licensing Activities
        During fiscal year 2002, the Copyright Office administered eight
    CARP proceedings that included five rate adjustment proceedings and
    three distribution proceedings. Of the five rate adjustment
    proceedings, four involved setting rates and terms for the section 114
    digital performance right in sound recordings, and the section 112
    statutory license for the making of ephemeral recordings to facilitate
    these transmissions. The fifth proceeding involved setting rates and
    terms for the section 118 statutory license for the use of certain
    copyrighted works in connection with noncommercial broadcasting.
        The Copyright Office administers the compulsory licenses and a
    statutory obligation under title 17. The Licensing Division collects
    royalty fees from cable operators for retransmitting television and
    radio broadcasts, from satellite carriers for retransmitting
    ``superstation'' and network signals, and from importers and
    manufacturers of digital audio recording products for later
    distribution to copyright owners. In fiscal year 2002, the Office
    distributed approximately $110 million to copyright owners. The
    Division deducts its full operating costs from the royalty fees and
    invests the balance in interest-bearing securities with the U.S.
    Treasury.
    Copyright Education
        Copyright education is a particularly important aspect of our work,
    as more and more people implicate copyright laws in their daily online
    activities. The Copyright Office responds to public requests for
    information in person, through its website, and via email, telephone,
    and correspondence. It also engages in outreach programs to educate the
    public about copyright issues.
        In fiscal year 2002, the Office as a whole responded to 358,604
    requests for direct reference services, including 57,263 email
    inquiries, of which some 10,000 were on the issue of webcasting. The
    Public Information Section assisted 25,005 members of the public in
    person, taking in 17,644 registration applications and 2,884 documents
    for recordation. The Section answered 123,106 telephone inquiries,
    10,783 letter requests, and 31,681 email requests for information from
    the public, representing an over 100 percent increase in the use of
    email communications. This increase in electronic mail requests is
    partly a result of the public using an alternative means of
    communication during the mail disruption and website modifications that
    made it easier to contact the Office by email.
        The Copyright Office website continued to play a key role in
    disseminating information to the copyright community and the general
    public, with 13 million hits on key pages during the year, an 8 percent
    increase over the prior year.
    Reengineering Program
        Over the past three years, we have been undergoing intensive
    planning and design to improve each of the public services I have just
    described. The Office's Reengineering Program will reshape the delivery
    of our public services. We are very grateful for the support this
    Committee has given this important effort.
        The program is progressing along four fronts: process,
    organization, facilities, and information technology. All of these
    areas are linked to each other and have to proceed together. We are
    making good progress and our request for fiscal year 2004 will allow us
    to maintain this momentum. Our goal is to complete implementation of
    our new processes and IT systems in fiscal year 2005.
        This budget requests $2,100,000 to support the development of
    integrated information technology systems for our reengineered public
    services. This request will augment the $2,500,000 to be obtained from
    the Office's base budget. The entire reengineering program depends on
    the development and implementation of new information technology
    systems. So many of the efficiencies we will gain will be from using
    new and better technology, and having all our systems integrated rather
    than working through numerous stand-alone systems as we do now.
        Our fiscal year 2004 request, and our information technology work
    as a whole, is based on careful planning that has been done over the
    past two years. We have completed an extensive study and planning
    effort to design business processes which improve the delivery of our
    public services and allow the public to secure these services online to
    the maximum extent possible. Once we developed processes that we
    believe will enable us to best serve the public, we completed an IT
    requirements analysis, which identified logical systems components and
    potential software packages. This year we plan to award a contract,
    through a government-wide agency contract (GWAC), to begin the work of
    building integrated information technology systems.
        The $2.1 million in new net appropriations will be part of an
    overall $4.61 million budget for this IT systems development work.

                                   CONCLUSION

        We expect this will be a busy Congressional session addressing
    copyright matters; we will continue our close collaboration with the
    committees and individual Members on these often complex and wide-
    reaching issues. As we continue to fulfill the responsibilities given
    us under the copyright law, including making over one-half million
    registrations each year, we are also intent on maintaining the progress
    of our Reengineering Program to improve these services. Our fiscal year
    2004 request permits us to meet these challenges.

                                     ______

      Prepared Statement of Daniel P. Mulhollan, Director, Congressional
                                Research Service

        Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: I appreciate the
    opportunity to appear before you today to present the fiscal 2004
    budget request for the Congressional Research Service (CRS). Our
    request focuses on two areas of critical importance to the mission and
    continued success of CRS: ensuring continuity of business operations
    and investing in a new generation of workers who choose public service.
    Before discussing the details of our request, however, I would like to
    thank the Subcommittee for its generous support of our fiscal 2003
    budget.

               ASSISTING THE CONGRESS IN A CHANGED WORLD SETTING

        I come before you today at a time of unprecedented circumstances
    for the Congress, for our Nation, and for the world. We are a Nation at
    war. Beyond increasing efforts to ensure the safety and security of our
    staff and systems here on Capitol Hill, CRS continues to work closely
    with Members and Committees in both Houses on a multitude of issues.
    The mission of CRS is to contribute to an informed national
    legislature--a mission of critical importance during a time of foreign
    turbulence and domestic uncertainties. Our country's past experience,
    from the Civil War to Vietnam, suggests that during wartime Congress
    faces enormous challenges in exercising its constitutional legislative
    and oversight responsibilities. During the Civil War the Congress
    created the Joint Committee on the Conduct of the War to investigate
    military operations. Although subject to criticism for its procedures
    and operations, some scholars have credited the Committee for
    contributing significantly to the war effort. The experience of World
    War II, which saw the creation of the so-called ``Truman Committee'' to
    oversee an unprecedented growth in military spending, led to a
    determination by Congress that it required independent, objective
    analytical support in order to design legislative solutions to the
    problems facing the country and to evaluate effectively the proposals,
    policies, and operations put forward by the Executive Branch.
    Consequently, the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 included the
    first statutory charter for CRS with a commitment that Congress would
    have access to research expertise at the same level of quality
    available to the President.
        Similar developments occurred during the Vietnam War, when Congress
    was again forced to make critical decisions on issues affecting U.S.
    foreign policy, military capability, economic policy, and domestic
    stability. Congress again concluded that it needed additional support
    in order to evaluate the implications of competing legislative
    proposals and to monitor the myriad programs administered by the
    Executive Branch. As a result, the Legislative Reorganization Act of
    1970 enhanced the mission and functions of the Legislative Branch by
    expanding the roles and mandates of the Congress' support agencies,
    including CRS, leading to a rapid increase in our staff and research
    capabilities.
        The United States is engaged in a period of international conflict
    that is likely to be more complex and threatening than any we have
    faced before. While traditional and conventional military action may be
    intense, as exemplified by Iraq and Afghanistan, the combination of
    world-wide terrorist networks and rogue states possessing lethal
    weaponry leaves us with the prospect of continuing risks and
    uncertainty, both at home and abroad--this war on terrorism is a war
    without boundaries and with no end in sight. In all of the times that
    the U.S. government has had to confront a war and organized terrorism,
    the challenges have never been as great, nor the consequences of
    failure more potentially catastrophic. The budgetary implications of
    this war on terrorism and the needs of homeland security are enormous
    and will continue to rise, as will numerous questions about how much is
    adequate, how priorities should be set, and how resources should be
    allocated. New policies and programs may be needed to defend against
    conventional, biological, chemical, and nuclear attack by improving our
    threat assessment and response capabilities, federal coordination, law
    enforcement capabilities, and public health services. Indeed, most of
    the issues on the Administration and Congressional agendas are being
    reexamined and reshaped. Congress must be prepared to address these
    challenges in both the short and long term, and CRS must be prepared to
    help you.
        Building on our already close working relationship, my goal is for
    CRS to be there with you at every step of the way as you examine a
    range of critical issues with vital consequences for all Americans. The
    activities supporting the war and homeland security may involve
    difficult tradeoffs between the need for greater security on the one
    hand, and important economic, social, and constitutional considerations
    on the other. Similarly, budgetary realities may well require tough
    choices among competing priorities, as new responsibilities for
    establishing stable and democratic regimes overseas are superimposed on
    multiple requirements for military preparedness, domestic and social
    programs, counter-terrorism and intelligence capabilities, and economic
    stimulus.
        Mr. Chairman, I am grateful for the opportunity CRS has had to
    serve you during this difficult time in our nation's history, and I am
    proud that so many Members and staff have called upon us to deliver the
    type of objective, nonpartisan assistance that only CRS can provide.
    Each Member who has called to request a briefing, and each staffer who
    has called to discuss the implications of a particular policy issue or
    problem, has given us an opportunity to contribute. We identify the
    policy problems the Congress is likely to face, seek out solutions to
    those problems and analyze the implications of those solutions for
    policy. We undertake this legislative research often in anticipation of
    the legislative agenda and in collaboration with you, your colleagues,
    and staff. Thus, we are ready to offer the full analytic/research
    capacity of the Service to you when you need it. Congress can continue
    to rely on CRS to advise and assist the Congress in the analysis,
    appraisal, and evaluation of legislative proposals, in order to assess
    the advisability of enactment, estimate the probable consequences of
    such enactment, both intended and unintended, and examine alternative
    options. This work must be done in a manner that is confidential,
    objective, and nonpartisan, and that offers a balanced treatment of the
    issues involved and a range of options for legislative action. Our
    statutory charter makes it clear that our sole mission is to serve the
    Congress. The financial investment that I seek in this year's budget
    request is an investment with multiple benefits: (1) to continue to
    serve the Congress whenever and wherever you need us--within a flexible
    and secure technical infrastructure; (2) to enhance our research by
    establishing capacity to procure, create, maintain and manipulate the
    large data sets upon which CRS analysts rely to conduct their public
    policy assessments of legislative proposals and specific program
    implementation; and (3) to provide CRS managers with flexible tools and
    incentives that can be used to encourage staff retention.

    CONTINUITY OF BUSINESS OPERATIONS TO SERVE THE NEEDS OF CONGRESS AT ALL
                                     TIMES

        Much of your attention today is focused on security matters--both
    here at home and abroad. The first set of initiatives that I present to
    you relates to safeguarding further the Service's infrastructure to
    ensure that CRS will be ready to support your work needs at any time,
    any place, and in any situation.
        The tragic events of September 11, 2001, and the anthrax incidents
    on Capitol Hill, mandate different and additional organizational
    procedures for every business entity, in both the public and private
    sectors, to confront and guard against the ongoing threat of terrorism.
    Through a shared effort with the House and Senate, CRS and the Library
    of Congress will implement an Alternative Computing Facility and
    Disaster Recovery site. With the additional funding that we are
    seeking, we will plan, design, and implement a backup facility that can
    support CRS and the Congress by mirroring the current technical
    environment. The alternative site will provide us with the
    functionality to resume service to Congress in the event that the
    Madison Building computer facilities are no longer available.
        Second, like most government information technology organizations,
    CRS has mission-critical technical applications that need to be
    available in a secure environment 24 hours a day and 7 days a week (24/
    7) under a variety of threat scenarios. Our Inquiry Status and
    Information System--ISIS--is the mission-critical application used to
    receive confidential requests from Congress, assign the work to CRS
    analysts, track the work status through completion, and provide
    managers with key performance statistics and indicators. The current
    architecture of the ISIS application cannot support secure 24/7 access
    from remote locations or when the Library's computer facilities are not
    available, a condition that we will have corrected by the end of fiscal
    2004 if funded.
        The last initiative is in response to a Congressional requirement
    stated in the fiscal 2003 Appropriations Act. The Congress directed CRS
    to take steps to ensure that the Service's materials are available to
    Congress whenever and wherever they may be required. Meeting this
    congressional mandate requires that CRS staff--the creators of the
    research and information materials--be as mobile as Congress and be
    able to work from a variety of places other than their own offices.
    This need can arise in a number of different circumstances--including
    normal work situations as well as emergencies.
        Under normal circumstances, for example, a CRS staffer working
    closely with a conference committee late at night in the Capitol may
    require secure access to statistical data that the committee needs to
    decide the final version of a distribution formula for a particular
    program. An example of an emergency situation is the anthrax incident
    that occurred in October 2001 and forced the evacuation of a number of
    congressional and Capitol Hill buildings, including the Madison
    Building. All CRS staff and many congressional staff had to work from
    alternative locations for varying amounts of time. During this period,
    CRS staff could not access information and research materials stored on
    their personal computers or on CRS servers and, had the emergency
    lasted much longer, they would not have been able to support Members
    and committees as required.
        In both normal and emergency work situations, CRS staff need secure
    access to the full range of information and research systems currently
    available through the Library's computer center and CRS' servers. From
    wherever they might be located, our staff need to be able to receive
    and track requests that Members and committees place by phone or via
    the CRS Web site. To respond to these requests and perform the required
    analyses, staff need access to the full text of their research and
    information sources as well as to their raw data and databases to which
    the Service subscribes or which it builds in-house. CRS staff need to
    be able to create reports and other products that respond to
    congressional requests and they need to get those reports and products
    to Congress by uploading them to a Web site or including them in a
    secure email message for delivery. I am requesting funds to develop and
    implement technical solutions that will provide staff with remote
    access, from a variety of alternative work sites, to electronic
    research and information resources so that analysis can be conducted
    wherever CRS staff may have to work.
        Our goal is continuity of basic business operations. Accordingly, I
    am requesting $3.3 million to establish the CRS alternative computing
    facility, to make ISIS portable, and to develop technical solutions to
    support the Congress at any time, at any location. Concurrent with the
    submission of this budget request, the Library submitted a fiscal 2003
    supplemental appropriation request, on behalf of CRS, for $1.863
    million. If that request is approved, CRS can begin immediately with
    implementation of our portion of the ACF and the ISIS reprogramming,
    leaving $1.460 million for our fiscal 2004 needs.

            ADDING CRS CAPACITY FOR DATA BASE MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES

        Congress looks to CRS for analysis and information that is derived
    from large data sets and surveys because much of the data needed is not
    collected by executive branch agencies or the states. CRS relies
    increasingly on quantitative analysis to support its work for
    committees and Members. Examples of some of the Service's most recent
    efforts include: analysis of caseload data in the TANF program,
    simulation of alternative policy options for child care tax credits,
    and a historical analysis of foreign aid. To meet this growing demand
    most efficiently, CRS must build permanent, skilled capacity to assign
    basic data collection, acquisition, maintenance, cataloging, data
    manipulation, and processing tasks.
        In fiscal 2002, the Congress provided CRS with funding to enhance
    its research capacity by building a more powerful technical
    infrastructure and adding staff who could perform high-level
    statistical analyses. Given the growing number, size and complexity of
    data sets, the maintenance of these data sets now requires a Service-
    wide investment that ensures sound data management practices and
    supports the integrity and authoritativeness of the data. The data
    management activities include data acquisition, data library functions
    and data preparation--a professional skill set with industry standards.
    CRS is at a point where we need to add capacity to handle these new,
    increasing, and on-going, critical business functions that support the
    research efforts being performed by top analytic staff. Our fiscal 2004
    proposal will enhance our overall research by establishing specific
    capacity to procure, create, maintain and manipulate large data sets
    upon which CRS analysts rely. The proposal includes contract staff for
    the technical data upkeep of these data sets and one new permanent
    librarian to ensure business continuity and integrity of the data
    content. The additional staff, with specialized data skills, will
    implement industry-standard practices for data management uniformly
    throughout the Service. This new capacity will assure: (1)
    authoritativeness and timeliness of the data through regularly
    scheduled, and often frequent, data refreshment activities; (2) rapid
    access to the data through use of industry-standard data base
    structure, cataloging, and maintenance activities; and (3) consistent
    use and interpretation of the content through standard cataloging and
    data manipulation activities. To establish a new capacity and a formal
    structure for data base management activities, I am requesting $0.759
    million.

       INVESTING IN THE FUTURE: INCENTIVES THAT ENCOURAGE STAFF RETENTION

        The last, albeit no less important, focus of our fiscal 2004 budget
    request addresses updating management tools that meet the work needs
    and expectations of a new generation. We are making substantial process
    in hiring new staff and meeting our FTE targets. With Congress' help
    over the past several years, CRS has made significant staffing
    investments through our multi-year succession initiative and new
    staffing approvals for experts in information technology, combating
    terrorism, and multiple policy aspects of or related to the aging of
    the American population. We have integrated the concepts of succession
    and transition staffing into our formal strategic and annual program
    planning efforts and I want to assure you that I continue to adjust
    existing staff and resources to align with the Congress' legislative
    needs. We are asking Congress' assistance to help us to enhance the
    productivity, efficiency, and attractiveness of CRS as both a first
    choice research service-provider to the Congress and as a first choice
    work-place to a new generation of workers who are electing public
    service as a career. To maximize fully our research capacity and
    talent, we must provide the requisite ``work tools'' that staff need to
    produce the highest analytic quality product for the Congress, and we
    must do our best to retain a highly skilled, well-trained, and
    motivated workforce.
        In terms of retaining the talent drawn to CRS, I am requesting
    funding to initiate a Loan Forgiveness Pilot Program. Retention is a
    top priority for CRS because the Service will need a large number of
    stable, experienced staff to replace those who will be retiring in the
    next few years. CRS has already invested considerable money and effort
    to acquire and develop its current work force to prepare for the
    upcoming retirements. Expanding this investment plan to retain a high
    quality staff makes good business sense and ensures our ability to
    maintain our capacity to serve the Congress as retirements of senior
    staff occur. This program will allow CRS to initiate a pilot program
    that provides for the repayment of student loans. Assisting staff in
    repaying student loans allows us to use this benefit selectively to
    ensure continuity of service over the next years. During the one-year
    pilot, CRS would determine eligibility, against a set of pre-determined
    criteria, for no more than 70 percent of analysts and computer
    specialists hired over the past three years, plus 20 incumbents in
    selected at-risk positions whose loss would seriously impair CRS'
    ability to achieve its strategic goals and objectives.
        We are also seeking a modest increase to our travel, training, and
    awards budget allocations--again as retention incentives. CRS currently
    has approximately half the training funds per employee when compared to
    Executive Branch agencies. An attendant benefit of this modest
    investment is to provide new staff with continuing training experiences
    that foster their ability to assume quickly the responsibilities of the
    veteran staff they are replacing. Members of this bright new generation
    seek out organizations that are willing to offer opportunities for
    continued training and to provide learning experiences that foster
    professional growth, development, and rapid integration into the
    business content and culture. Further, travel and training
    opportunities are vital to the veteran research staff to keep them
    abreast of often changing research approaches, information, and
    research results. These off-site experiences keep them networked into
    policy research communities and enrich their analysis through exposure
    to new ideas, techniques, and information research tools. To establish
    incentives to encourage staff retention, I am requesting $0.535
    million.

                STATUS OF FISCAL 2003 NEW CAPACITY INITIATIVE

        I want to thank you once again for providing CRS with the half-year
    funding in fiscal 2003 to acquire 12 additional research staff to
    address terrorism, homeland security, and an aging U.S. population. We
    expect to have 11 of these staff selected by the end of this fiscal
    year, with the last one to be hired by the end of the calendar year.
    They bring capacities such as biotechnology, epidemiology, physics,
    engineering, gerontology, and transportation safety. Given the current
    world situation, the addition of this new expertise will be invaluable
    to the Congress with the work CRS undertakes to support your
    deliberations.

                                   CONCLUSION

        In closing, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to appear
    before you and your colleagues today. CRS is the only source of public
    policy information and research analysis focused solely on the
    Legislative Branch. We take seriously our mission to contribute
    substantively to the overall knowledge base of the Congress by
    providing comprehensive and reliable analysis, research, and
    information services that are responsive, confidential, objective,
    authoritative, and timely. As a shared staff resource for the entire
    Congress, CRS is a cost-effective means of enhancing the Legislative
    Branch's capacity for meeting its constitutional responsibilities
    during this time of continued challenge.
        Once again, CRS continues to adjust existing resources to align
    with the Congress' needs. Our fiscal 2004 request reflects new measures
    and capacities that cannot be drawn from existing resources. I hope you
    find that we are meeting our mission, and that we are doing so in a way
    that warrants your continued trust and support.

                     RUSSIAN LEADERSHIP PROGRAM--OPEN WORLD

        Senator Stevens. Have you called attention to the letter
    you filed about the Open World Program?
        Dr. Billington. No, but I am happy to----
        Senator Stevens. I just want to call to the attention of
    the members that this is a program created by a bill I
    introduced that was Dr. Billington's idea, a very successful
    one. And I say that advisedly. Dr. Billington and I will go
    over and have a celebration in Russia concerning this program
    over the weekend. And I look forward to that. And maybe you
    will help me get out of here.
        Senator Campbell. I think it works the other way around,
    Senator. You have to help me get out of here.

                                 POLICE MERGER

        Let me proceed with a few questions myself. We talked at
    length about the Library Police merging with the Capitol
    Police. I am particularly interested in that, I guess maybe
    because I was a deputy sheriff years ago. I had an opportunity
    to talk to Speaker Hastert a couple days ago, because I
    understood that he was not supporting that merger.
        He said he did not see the need for merging them and having
    all the training go to the Library of Congress Police that
    would be simply checking books in and out. So I think there has
    been a disconnect on information somewhere. Would you explain
    to the committee which people are going to merge that work for
    the Library of Congress, which would actually need police
    training, which will not merge and do not need training?
    Because I want to pass that on to him.
        Dr. Billington. Yes. I think I will defer----
        Senator Campbell. General Scott.
        General Scott. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, our Library of
    Congress Police consists of 131 police officers. These police
    officers are empowered with the full force of the law on the
    premises of the Library of Congress. Their primary
    responsibilities are to man the entrance and exit points in the
    Library of Congress.
        In that context, they differ, their duties differ, from
    other police on Capitol Hill, in that not only are they
    concerned with what comes in the building, but they are very
    concerned about what goes out of the building. They conduct
    exit inspections, looking particularly for library properties,
    such as manuscripts, books, records, all that make up our
    collections.
        Of that number, 131 police, all of them have to have
    training as police officers in order to maintain their
    credibility and their status. Of that number, about 70 percent
    man the entrances and exits. Then there is another percentage
    that operates the police command center. But, that is basically
    what our police do that is different than what the other police
    officers do.
        Senator Campbell. I see. I understand that Speaker Hastert
    does not support that 3-year effective date that I understand
    is now pending in the supplemental conference. So we need to do
    some work with him apparently.

                        LIBRARY OF CONGRESS POLICE FORCE

        Let me go on with some more police questions that are of
    interest to me, too. The Library is requesting 51 additional
    officers in the fiscal year 2004 budgets. Are they needed now
    at this state, or is there any particular deadline by which you
    think it is going to be imperative that they are online?
        General Scott. Yes, sir. We are requesting 51 police
    officers in this particular fiscal year 2004 budget. These
    officers were identified as part of the Library's coordination
    with the Capitol Police back in 1999. At that time, we were all
    looking at our security requirements to ensure that, one, we
    had all of our positions currently identified and those that we
    expected to bring online in 2004.
        We submitted our request for 51 new officers because we
    have new posts that we have to man. We have not coordinated the
    hiring of these new officers with the Capitol Police. We are
    not resisting doing that. As a matter of fact, we look forward
    to doing that, because, where we can, we attempt to meet the
    hiring standards of the Capitol Police.

                             POLICE STAFFING STUDY

        Senator Campbell. Is that what you call a posting study?
        General Scott. Posting study?
        Senator Campbell. Yes. I am not sure what that term means.
    Do you recognize that term?
        General Scott. I do not recognize it, but I will ask my
    director of security, if you do not mind.
        Senator Campbell. Yes. Please identify yourself for the
    record.
        Mr. Lopez. Kenneth Lopez, Director of Security, Library of
    Congress. And the question was, sir?
        Senator Campbell. What is a posting study?
        Mr. Lopez. A posting study is essentially what we do--we
    call it a staffing study. It is where you look at your posts,
    and you determine what your minimum staffing level is for that
    particular post, depending on the function of the post and the
    time of the day.
        Senator Campbell. I see.
        Mr. Lopez. And that is essentially what we do, too. The
    term is different than what we use, but it is the same
    principle.
        Senator Campbell. I see. Well, any additional officers that
    you bring on, they will not negatively impact that impending
    time frame for the merger, will they?
        Mr. Lopez. I do not know what the time frame is that has
    been identified.
        Senator Campbell. Is it 3 years? A minimum of 3 years, yes.
        Mr. Lopez. It would not negatively impact us, if we were
    able to hire the people. Because we are asking for approval to
    hire these new police officers in fiscal year 2004, and were
    able to bring them onboard, then it would not leave any
    weaknesses in our perimeter.

                           DIGITAL FUTURE INITIATIVE

        Senator Campbell. Let me go back to you, Dr. Billington.
    This might not be in your mission but, the rebuilding of Iraq
    is on everybody's minds now. You told me that you will not be
    taking on any new functions. Is there anything that the Library
    of Congress does for new and emerging democracies? For example,
    Iraq does not obviously have libraries that experience a kind
    of total freedom of expression that we have in this country. Is
    there any connection at all with the Library of Congress and
    emerging or rebuilding or new democracies?
        Dr. Billington. Well, yes. There is quite an historic
    connection to that part of the world. We have six overseas
    offices. It is not quite formally our responsibility, but since
    these offices are in the region for instance, we have offices
    in Islamabad, Cairo, New Delhi, Jakarta, Nairobi, and Rio de
    Janeiro--there may be a role for us to play.
        After the first Gulf War, for instance, a good deal of the
    reconstruction of the National Library of Kuwait was from our
    duplicates in the Cairo office. And we would certainly want to
    be helpful with whatever we have in Cairo, Islamabad, and New
    Delhi.
        I mentioned the example of the Law Library replenishing the
    basic law codes of Afghanistan. This is very frequently the
    case. As far as the countries of the Middle East are concerned,
    our overseas offices--where we do the procuring, not only for
    the Library of Congress, but for other research libraries in
    America that cover the Middle East--may be useful in helping
    Iraqi Libraries. I note that we are in fact the largest Arabic
    language library in the world. We can, and we want to be,
    helpful in any way that we can.
        In addition, we are exploring with our online services ways
    to connect to the Middle East. We are going international with
    a project called Global Gateways; one of our leading Arabic
    curators is in Cairo at the moment, exploring a joint project
    with the National Library of Egypt, which is encouraging.

                              EMERGING DEMOCRACIES

        Finally, in the former Communist countries, at the
    direction of the Congress, we sent over teams, largely from the
    Congressional Research Service, to explore the possibility of,
    where they were establishing new parliaments, to advise them
    how they can establish a nonpartisan research base.
        Senator Campbell. Is that under the provision that Senator
    Stevens had talked about?
        Dr. Billington. No. That is an earlier program than the one
    that Senator Stevens mentioned, Open World, which is a new and
    even larger initiative which the Library launched in 1999 with
    Russia. The former effort was aimed at building a kind of
    miniature Congressional Research Service for Eastern European
    nations. One of the things people do not remember is when
    people have not had freedom, and they set up a legislature, if
    they do not have any information, they do not have any
    knowledge. Democracy has to be knowledge based. I mean, it is
    one of the great lessons of the American experience.
        And so--and after the war, for instance, in Japan and
    Korea, they set up diet libraries. They had not had them
    before, but it was an imitation of the Congress' initiative in
    Japan and South Korea. So this has also been done for all of
    the countries of the former Soviet empire.
        Now more recently, the very visionary legislation which
    Senator Stevens championed, resulted in the emergence of what
    is now called Open World. Congress recently changed the name
    from the Russian Leadership Program. Open World has been
    expanded this year. Both Houses have approved the idea of
    exploring two or three new countries for pilot programs. And we
    are now analyzing where they are most needed. Talking with the
    State Department and with others, we have narrowed the list
    down to five.
        And two of the five being considered, for instance, are the
    former Islamic republics of Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan, both of
    which have American bases in them and have been very supportive
    to the United States, both of the war on terrorism and more
    recently with Enduring Freedom in Iraq. So--as well as looking
    into the Ukraine, Lithuania, and other----
        Senator Campbell. Is Belarus a candidate for that?
        Dr. Billington. Yes, Belarus is one of the five being
    considered--Belarus, Lithuania, Ukraine, Uzbekistan and
    Kyrgyzstan. And since Congress has changed the name to Open
    World, we now have a mandate to expand beyond Russia. I know
    CRS has had people from Mexico saying they would like to
    explore the possibility at various times of looking into this.
        When Nigeria moved in a democratic direction, we had a
    delegation from Nigeria that came into my office and was very
    interested in how CRS functions. But, of course, they are
    thinking in more modest terms.
        I think there is a great deal the Library can do and has
    done, both in terms of restocking and helping their libraries
    develop and also in terms of the Internet, where we have this
    big international presence, but also in terms of possibly
    helping them support their legislatures.
        In many of these emerging democracies, the executive branch
    has engulfed all the other branches of Government. I might just
    say that the experience in the last year with the Russian
    Leadership, the Open World Program, has been particularly good
    because we have invited judges over, to help develop an
    independent judiciary. We have had 300 or so judges over, and
    many of them have established sister court relationships with
    American courts. And it has been a very stimulating thing.
        That program, the Russian Leadership Program, which is now
    being modeled out for possible other areas, has the great
    virtue of bringing people to see how the American system works.
    It is not travel. They stay in one community. And they have
    come from all 89 regions of Russia and stayed in all 50 States.
    Our participants reflect more than 50 different ethnic groups
    participating from Russia. We forget that Russia is a big,
    multi-ethnic society, as are we.
        So it has been very successful--more than 40 percent of
    these have been women, which is totally new. And, of course, as
    you look around the world, that is another area ripe for more
    full democratic development in many emerging democracies. So I
    think exposure to the American system, through Open World which
    is modeled on the 1.5 percent of the Marshall Plan that was
    designated for training young Germans after the war, is
    successful because it brings young Russian leaders over here to
    see for themselves how America works. They see things that we
    take for granted.
        And so I think there are a number of ways in which the
    Library, for one reason or another, has gotten into this kind
    of activity and we would want to be helpful at the Congress'
    instruction in terms of where the legislative branch sees its
    priorities. All I would stress is that for a new democracy, a
    functioning legislature is essential. One of the progressive
    things that has happened in Russia is they moved from ruling by
    presidential decree, which is basically what President
    Yeltsin--for all his other good qualities--was doing in the
    last years--to getting through laws that are stamped by a
    legislature which broadly represents the whole country. Even if
    the legislature is weak and even if maybe there are other
    things wrong with it, it is still a great step forward and one
    of the more decisive steps in making sure you do not revert to
    kind of absolute autocratic rule.
        Senator Campbell. Oh, I think the effort we have put
    forward as a nation to help any of the emerging democracies is
    really important. The last few years, I have been the Chairman
    of the Helsinki Commission.
        And speaking of Belarus, I have met five times with a young
    legislator of Belarus, three times in international meetings
    and twice he came here. Interesting enough, every time after I
    met with him, he got put in jail, which does not speak very
    well to my prestige in Belarus, I guess. But he told me that
    two of his colleagues, who were taken out of the parliament,
    were never heard of again. Two more that he served with are
    still in prison. So they have a real adversarial relationship
    with the president of Belarus.
        But any kind of information we can get in to their hands
    that would help promote democracy are probably really well
    received by the people.
        Dr. Billington. We have a classic problem in choosing--take
    Belarus and Lithuania. One is quite a repressive society, as
    you know, Belarus. The other is a very open, democratic
    society, even going into NATO and so forth. And you want to
    reward the good guys, but you also want to help the people who
    are having difficulty.
        Exactly the same juxtaposition between Uzbekistan and
    Kyrgyzstan. Kyrgyzstan is an amazingly progressive, functioning
    democracy in very difficult circumstances. Uzbekistan is much
    more authoritarian. So how do you judge which one to invest
    your small pilot efforts in? There is an argument can be made
    for both, but it is not easy to decide.

                        SECURITY--CAPITOL VISITOR CENTER

        Senator Campbell. Let me do this in rounds, so that Senator
    Bennett can participate in this, too.
        Senator, if you would like to ask a few questions?
        Senator Bennett. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do not
    have any specific questions.
        I am glad you are pursuing the Russian project, because
    that is one that is near and dear to Senator Stevens' heart.
    And during my stewardship, we kept a warm blanket around to
    keep it going. And I am glad to see that it still receives the
    support that I think it deserves.
        The only question I would have, going back to the issue of
    the police merger, I am assuming, Dr. Billington, General
    Scott, that as the visitors center progresses, you are paying
    attention to the integration between the Library and the
    Capitol that will occur as a result of the visitors center and
    the tunnel. I do not know if you have any feel for how many
    visitors to the Library will come through the tunnel or if you
    are planning to steer all of your visitors through the visitors
    center, as a security measure.
        Because from a terrorist point of view, the Capitol campus
    is the number one target in the world. And while the Capitol is
    the symbol that the terrorists want to take down on television,
    the Library of Congress, particularly the Jefferson Building,
    is close enough that they would take that, if they could not
    get into the Capitol. So--well, you understand all this. We
    have had this conversation.
        But have you looked into the visitors center, or are you
    making plans for the impact on the visitors center? And I would
    be interested in knowing if you are planning to redirect
    traffic yourself to the Library through the visitors center or
    if you are going to keep separate entrances open.
        Dr. Billington. I would just say I think this is going to
    greatly increase the security and the efficiency and also the
    convenience to people who want to see the exhibits and see the
    beauty of the great hall and so forth, because very often they
    have to wait out in the snow or in the cold in rather long
    lines. The efficiency of having one major entry point for
    visitors is very good.
        We also hope that the Capitol Visitor Center will be able
    to dramatize not so much something about the Library of
    Congress, but something about the Congress that is
    insufficiently appreciated and understood, namely that this
    legislature has preserved the mint record of private creativity
    in the United States through the copyright deposit system.
        This is a unique thing. No legislature has ever done this
    in any other part of the world. We have the largest performing
    arts library in the world, music and movies and all of this. To
    demonstrate this, not as a Library of Congress collection, but
    as a work of preservation of the legislative branch of
    Government, will be a great thing.
        So we anticipate a great increase in visitors, but at the
    same time a commensurate increase in security protection by
    having this main entry point to the whole complex and relating
    it. I do not know if General Scott has further comments.
        General Scott. Well, I would just add, Senator, that we
    certainly will comply and cooperate, fully cooperate, with
    whatever standards there needs to be in order to make sure that
    we do not have a weak link at any point in the entry or exit of
    this Capitol complex. I am not aware that we have come to any
    final conclusion as to where visitors are going to be routed
    yet. I think that is yet to be planned and coordinated.
        But I just want to share with the committee that Dr.
    Billington has always stressed that we will cooperate fully
    with securing the Capitol complex.
        Mr. Lopez. I would like to say, sir, that we are meeting on
    an ongoing basis with the Capitol Police and the Architect of
    the Capitol to facilitate passage between the two entities,
    even if there were separate entrances, to use the connecting
    tunnel for our exit inspection and also utilizing the Capitol's
    entrance into the visitors center as essentially our entrance
    into the Library, if they came through the visitor center
    tunnel. But we have not reached the point about talking about
    that as the only entrance until a decision is made.
        Senator Bennett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

                            AUTOMATED HIRING SYSTEM

        Senator Campbell. In 2001, the Library installed a new
    automated hiring system that was required by a court order.
    What is the status of that system? And will you be able to hire
    up to the level that Congress authorized for fiscal year 2003?
        Dr. Billington. Well, we have increased both the quantity
    and the speed of our hiring very dramatically after some
    initial problems with adjustment to it. But General Scott can
    speak to the details, because he has been watching this very
    closely.
        General Scott. Thank you, Dr. Billington.
        Senator Campbell. Yes, please.
        General Scott. Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman. Yes, we have made
    substantial progress in using the automated hiring system to
    fill our hiring needs. This past fiscal year, we hired 300 good
    quality applicants using the system. Now that compares
    favorably, very favorably, with only 190 hires in the
    administrative and professional categories of a year ago.
        We continue to look at that system and develop a fully
    functioning merit selection system, so that we have a pool of
    applicants that are not only highly qualified, but a pool that
    gives us diversity and everything else that you would want to
    have in a modern system.
        So yes, in summary, we are not satisfied with where we are,
    but the system has demonstrated that it is meeting our hiring
    needs.
        Senator Campbell. Thank you.
        Dr. Billington. We used to have an average of 18 applicants
    for a position. We now have an average of 94. So getting it out
    electronically gives a much richer pool. And that is a real
    plus. That gives you added possibilities for diversity in every
    sense of the word and for surveying a very wide panel. So I
    think it does reach out much more effectively, as well.

     NATIONAL DIGITAL INFORMATION INFRASTRUCTURE AND PRESERVATION PROGRAM
                                    [NDIIPP]

        Senator Campbell. Let me ask you something about the
    National Digital Information Infrastructure and Preservation
    Program. You recently received the committee's approval to
    proceed with spending $25 million of the $100 million that was
    appropriated for that program. What is the status of that
    effort now?
        Dr. Billington. Well, the National Digital Information
    Infrastructure and Preservation Program is a three-stage
    process. The appropriation has already been made, just a few
    pennies under $100 million, $5 million of which was released to
    start this process. We have had a couple hundred experts
    involved. We had a whole series of strategy meetings with
    convened groups. We had a small group of Government agencies
    that we had to specially consult with under the legislation.
    And we have devised this--we submitted this plan, which was
    approved by five different Congressional committees. There is a
    thicker appendix backup to the plan as well.
        And now we are going on to the next stage, which was
    designed to be a release of another $20 million; and we asked
    to have included in that release the first $15 million of the
    $75 million which needs to be matched. So we are not starting
    on the match right away, but we will hope to be planning for
    that this summer and begin to see if we can get either in-kind
    or cash matching.
        Now what has happened is that we have defined specific
    things that have to be accomplished in the next phase. We have
    developed a kind of base technical architecture for this
    network. And we have worked with a whole series of partners
    very effectively, in the information technology industry,
    libraries and archives, the producers of intellectual property,
    the consumers of the material, all the different interest
    groups.
        So we have sort of a basic agreement that we will now
    further develop and refine the architecture. We will begin to
    form partnerships for a series of pilot projects. The aim of
    this, of course, is to acquire, find ways of acquiring and
    preserving and getting rights-protected access to the amazing
    amount of materials that is being produced on the Internet that
    does not survive, and which very often is born digital, and
    only available in digital forms. The average life of a website
    is only about 44 days.
        In addition to beginning the partnerships and perfecting
    the technical architecture, the National Science Foundation and
    other collaborating Government agencies also are going to be
    doing research. This is a tremendous conceptual problem as
    well.
        We will come back to the committees once again with the
    results of this and hope to have the release of the remaining
    $60 million. This is all money that is already appropriated.
    But we are moving ahead on the schedule that was established
    with what is a very complex problem and with the end result of
    which is going to be a distributed network of people who will
    work together to preserve what is of lasting importance on the
    Internet for future generations. The technical architecture
    will be based on an agreed set of protocols, support metadata,
    so that the content is preserved and secure. We will probably
    be having a lot of conversation with the Congress about
    possible legislation.
        But this has been, I think, a very creative thing. It is
    moving ahead very well. We have had wonderful cooperation. I
    must say, the private sector has given a lot of help. There is
    the implication that everyone will participate and pitch in
    with something quite new, which is distributed responsibility
    for our public national trust.
        The other thing that is important, is that the Library has
    unique experience. It is one of the reasons that I think they
    all agree that the Library of Congress should play a central
    role in this. We did not put them up to that, but they feel it
    is extremely important. We did set the standards for cataloging
    in the print world, so that all libraries could use it.
    Cataloging is a continuing benefit to the whole library system
    of America with the books and what we call analog artifactual
    containers of knowledge and creativity.
        Now in the new digital world, it is going to be much
    tougher. But we still have the basic responsibility of working
    with the National Institute of Standards and Technology and
    Commerce and other Government agencies, and with the private
    sector, to set standards that will be uniform, even though the
    responsibility for executing it will be a distributive one.

                            VETERANS HISTORY PROJECT

        Senator Campbell. Thank you. You are also requesting
    approximately $1 million for the Veterans History Project,
    which is something I think is really overdue and important.
    That was created to collect taped and written accounts of war
    veterans. I assume that means dead or alive going back
    throughout history. The budget you have requested is about
    double the current year's budget. Have you had any problems in
    trying to implement that program?
        Dr. Billington. I think there are no problems that a little
    more help at the center of it would not mitigate, which is why
    we have made this request. It has been an extraordinary
    response.
        Senator Campbell. How do you start cataloging them? Do you
    go through the National Archives or the Department of Veterans
    Affairs or something to find people to interview?
        Dr. Billington. We have working arrangements with several
    hundred national organizations and local organizations--all
    kinds of partners that we work with. We are archiving the whole
    business. They send in their accounts. We have sent out 100,000
    instruction kits of how to prepare accounts and how to conduct
    the interviews. We work through any local organization that
    wants to partner with us. Forty-two of the 100 Senators have
    set up projects in their own States and have specified people
    that we can work with in their States or in their communities.
    About one-third of the House of Representatives has done that
    in their districts.
        We have got a system whereby it is collected through the
    Archive of American Folk Life, which now has permanent status
    within the Library of Congress. They have some experience with
    the overall history and the recording of accounts, because they
    have recorded, as you probably know, some 10,000 wax disks
    dating back to the 1890s with the Native Americans and 3,000
    long-playing records on which so much of that oral history is
    recorded.
        Staff located in the Folklife Center are the people who are
    archiving these histories. They deal with multiple formats. We
    also accept diaries. Some people have moving testaments of
    letters written during the war.
        Senator Campbell. Do you work with tribes, too?
        Dr. Billington. Yes, sir. We have some groups that we have
    worked with, both in Seattle and in Nebraska, if I remember
    correctly. Of course the famous Navajo Code Talkers have been
    the absolute heroes of our last two national books festivals.
    We are working with a wide variety of groups. We also work
    with--let me make sure I get the name right here.
        General Scott. I can fill you in on that.
        Dr. Billington. General Scott, needless to say has been
    intimately involved in overseeing this project.
        General Scott. Yes, sir.
        Dr. Billington. By the way, it is all wars, not just the
    20th Century, that we are commemorating.
        General Scott. Right. We do have one staff person who is
    dedicated for outreach with various minorities in our country.
    We do have several projects, and including one with a Native
    American tribe that is located in or is associated with the
    Oglala Lakota College on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation.
        We are also working with the Soaring Eagle Foundation in
    Seattle which also is involved with the Veterans History
    Project. We also are working closely with the National Congress
    of American Indians.
        Our aim here is to not try to do all of the collecting of
    the various stories ourselves, but to have as many partnerships
    all across America as we possibly can. What we found is that in
    certain regions of the country you have very strong veteran
    service organizations. But we have also found that for many of
    those veterans organizations minorities do not usually flock to
    those organizations. That is why we have dedicated one of our
    service members as minority outreach.
        Senator Campbell. I might point out that they do not flock
    to the larger, maybe the larger things, for instance, like the
    VFW. Some of the minority groups might not join the downtown
    VFW. But those VFW groups that are focused just on one ethnic
    background or something like that----
        General Scott. Yes, sir.
        Senator Campbell [continuing]. They do join.
        General Scott. Right.
        Senator Campbell. The largest VFW, for instance, in
    Montana, the largest VFW chapter is the Cheyenne Indian VFW. It
    is larger than any of them, in Billings or any other cities. So
    I guess it depends on how they feel, whether they identify with
    other people that are already in it or something.
        I might mention to you, too, that there is a man, Dr.
    Herman Viola, and he used to be at the National Archives.
        Dr. Billington. Oh, I know him very well.
        Senator Campbell. He has written dozens of books. And he is
    doing one now that I think ought to be really interesting that
    you might tell your staff person about, that deals with Indian
    veterans. You might want to contact Herman, because he is doing
    one now on American Indian veterans going clear back to the
    late 1800s. It is not out yet, but he has a lot of
    documentation that might be interesting.
        General Scott. Yes, sir, we will. We will follow up on
    that.
        Dr. Billington. That is very good. Actually, in the
    percentage of veterans in wars, the minority percentage is
    higher than the general population percentage. So this is a
    very important frontier. It is another reason, frankly, that we
    need a little more help at the center. We are not doing this
    all. We are just getting the instructions out.
        One of the best things about it is the intergenerational
    quality. What is best is the various ways these interviews are
    conducted that involve young people interacting with seniors.
    The most moving is young people who discover things about their
    great uncle they never knew he had experienced. It really is a
    wonderful thing. It was unanimously endorsed by the Congress.
    We got $3 million from the AARP when it started, although we
    got very little initially.
        We do feel now it has reached a stage where more support is
    needed. We have about 75,000 of these accounts. But there are
    19 million veterans; 1,500 die every day--we are racing against
    time. We want to get these stories--many of the veterans have
    never talked about their experiences. I can say, as a
    historian, just looking at some of this stuff--and I have
    conducted a few interviews myself--it is going to change the
    writing of history, because we will now see wars from the
    bottom up, rather than from just the top down.
        Senator Campbell. I think it is a really important program.
        Let me yield to Senator Durbin.

                            USE OF LIBRARY RESOURCES

        Senator Durbin. Thank you, Senator. I apologize for being
    late. We had an emergency meeting of the Illinois and Iowa
    delegations over the future of an arsenal, and I wanted to be
    certain that I made an appearance there.
        But I am glad I could join you here today. Thank you and
    thanks to Dr. Billington and General Scott for what you are
    doing at the Library of Congress.
        I would like to address an issue which is near and dear to
    me that I have discussed with both of these gentlemen as
    recently as yesterday. If you read the latest issue of Atlantic
    Magazine, you may be surprised to learn, that Adolf Hitler was
    not only a megalomaniac, but he was also a bibliophile and
    collected a vast amount of books. When the Allied troops
    liberated Germany, they took that collection and turned it over
    to our friends at the Library of Congress. And across the
    street now is Adolf Hitler's book collection with his
    nameplates in the books.
        Now the reason that that caught my attention was that I
    never dreamed that he was a book collector.
        Dr. Billington. He burned a lot of them.
        Senator Durbin. Yes, he burned a lot. Nor did I know that--
    --
        Senator Campbell. He was an art collector, too, of sorts.
        Senator Durbin [continuing]. His collection was across the
    street at the Library of Congress, amid probably other
    collections, but I think it is one of the major ones. We had a
    conversation yesterday. We talked about all of the treasures
    and assets of the Library of Congress that are virtually
    unknown to the rest of the world. I think it is time that we
    stopped hiding this light under a bushel. I think in order to
    let the American people and the world know what we have, we
    have to do a little better job of telling the story.
        I think you do that. And I think websites are going to open
    up a lot of access that just did not exist several years ago.
    But there is another area that strikes me where we have great
    potential. If you visit the National Gallery or any of the
    Smithsonians or any of the museums, major museums, in any city
    in this country, you will find great collections of wonderful
    things and a great gift store that allows you, in leaving with
    that positive feeling about this institution, to take home
    something that caught your eye, a reproduction of a work of art
    or something that you want to treasure yourself and share with
    your family.
        I think we can do more with the Library of Congress in this
    regard. I think there is an opportunity to take some of the
    more outstanding things in the collection of the Library of
    Congress and safely reproduce them in a form that will generate
    revenue for the Library, to be reinvested in its activities and
    also give the American people a better opportunity to
    understand what a great treasure we have in the Library of
    Congress.
        And I might add, Mr. Chairman, this committee is really on
    the front line of this. In the not-too-distant future, maybe 2
    years, we will have a Capitol Visitor Center. Within that
    Capitol Visitor Center, we will find millions of people
    accessing the United States Capitol again under the best
    circumstances, in a secure way, so that there is no doubt about
    their security or the security of the building.

                            RETAIL SALES ACTIVITIES

        Attached to that Capitol Visitor Center will be tunnel
    access to the Library of Congress. So these same hundreds of
    thousands of visitors will have a chance to make a turn in
    their visit to Washington and come over to see the Library of
    Congress, many for the first time. I think that, too, is going
    to be another opportunity for access to the Library and access
    to perhaps some retail operation where they can leave the
    Library with something that means a lot to them.
        I have not even touched on E-commerce, which I think I
    would like to ask you about, if I could. I have talked to some
    people. And they said, for example, if you took some of the
    extraordinarily rare maps in the Library of Congress and
    produce them in limited edition for sale, with the revenue
    coming back to the Library, there would be a lot of people
    interested in it.
        Tell me what you have done so far--we have talked about
    this for a year or two--and what you envision the next step to
    be in this process.
        Dr. Billington. Well, I will just say one word, because
    General Scott has been overseeing this. We have moved, and
    largely in response to your very effective and helpful
    suggestions, and done a test of online marketing. After 9/11,
    we had to close our Madison shop. We now have one in the
    Jefferson. It is small. We will certainly want to look into the
    idea of expanding it, as you suggest.
        But on the question of E-commerce, since we are a huge web
    presence as it is, this is very clearly promising. And the
    experiments that General Scott supervised this past year have
    shown real promise with that. But I will let him tell the
    story, because he has been doing a good job for it, moving us
    into a more aggressive business posture, as you have suggested.
        General Scott. Yes, sir. The first thing we have done is we
    have made some real progress towards making some profits on
    some of the items that we have marketed, particularly on the
    website. During last year, we marketed some of the gift shop
    items through Yahoo. And for a very modest investment, because
    we did not have additional money to really go out and hire
    somebody, we were able to make $73,000, which really came out
    to be about a 24 percent return on the investment.
        With that, we have also come out with a business strategy
    and an implementation plan that we feel confident that if we
    could have some seed money--that is what we have asked for in
    this budget--we could make this a much more profitable
    operation.
        We did talk about a map, putting one of the rare maps up. I
    am pleased to say that Beacher Wiggins, who is our Acting
    Director for Library Services now, has started already to
    research that project. We are going to see where that is going
    to take us. I do think we have put together a plan that
    identifies what we need to do between now and the next couple
    of years. If we can get this seed money, I think we will be
    able to come back and tell you our progress next year.
        Senator Campbell. Is this the plan that the Congress
    directed in the fiscal year 2003 to----
        General Scott. Yes, sir.
        Senator Campbell. And in your request this year, as I
    understand it, you are requesting $715,000, 5 FTEs, and that it
    will be the seed money to----
        General Scott. Yes, sir.
        Senator Campbell [continuing]. Do the infrastructure and
    the marketing and so on?
        General Scott. That is correct, sir. It is just a 1-year
    request that we are asking for.
        Senator Campbell. And you had a 23 percent----
        General Scott. We had a 24 percent return on investment.
        Senator Durbin. I want to just say, Mr. Chairman, I will
    not dwell on it any longer since I came in late, but I think we
    want to take care that we maintain our first responsibilities.
    You have a fiduciary responsibility to the contents of the
    Library of Congress. We all do as part of this effort, and that
    has to be protected.
        We certainly do not want to see commercial exploitation of
    things that are very sensitive and important. We want to take
    care that we pick those items that can be merchandised in a
    tasteful and thoughtful and responsible way. And I trust that
    is exactly what you are going to do.
        There have been some controversies in some agencies of
    government about commercialization. We are not going to get
    close to those. I think there are things that we can share with
    the American people and, with the revenue from that, enhance
    your great institution.
        Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Campbell. Let me add, too, though, I mean, some
    things you will market. But I have visited the Library a number
    of times. And I have traveled a lot, like Senator Durbin has. I
    have been to the Roman baths in Rome, for instance, and some of
    the great cathedrals in St. Petersburg. And I have to tell you
    that the mosaics on the floor of the Roman baths and the
    mosaics in the cathedrals of St. Petersburg I do not think are
    any nicer than the ones you have in this building.
        And it would seem to me that part of the marketing ought to
    be to get people to come and see the things that you are not
    going to be able to send them as a souvenir. And, I would
    commend that. In fact, I do all the time. People come into our
    office and ask us, ``We only have half a day. What do you think
    we ought to see around here besides the Capitol?'' I always
    recommend the Library of Congress, specifically because of
    those outstanding mosaics that are on the wall.
        So, from that standpoint, I do not really see that as
    commercialization. That is something they own, as American
    citizens and taxpayers. And it is certainly an educational
    experience for youngsters. And I think a lot could be done with
    that, if you want to increase the tourism over there.

                         ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

        Well, I have two or three other questions. What I am going
    to do, since I do have another meeting, however, is submit
    those to you and ask you if you would get back to us to put on
    the record in writing.
        General Scott. Yes, sir.
        Dr. Billington. Yes, sir.
        [The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
    were submitted to the Library for response subsequent to the
    hearing:]
             Questions Submitted by Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell

                                 POLICE REQUEST

        Question. The Library has approximately 130 police officers, which
    are to be merged with the U.S. Capitol Police over the next few years.
    The Library is requesting an additional 51 officers in its fiscal year
    2004 budget. Why are these officers needed now? Have you asked the
    Capitol Police to undertake a postings study for these additional
    officers? How will you ensure bringing in these officers at this time
    will not negatively impact the impending merger?
        Answer. The Library plans to open or expand ten new police posts in
    fiscal year 2004 in connection with the completion of 1999 supplemental
    appropriations perimeter security construction. Additionally, some of
    the requested FTEs would be used to bring current police posts to the
    minimum staffing level to ensure officer and staff safety. The Capitol
    Police have not been asked to conduct a postings study for the
    additional Library police officers. However, the Library has completed
    a comprehensive post staffing analysis supporting this request. The
    Library does not believe that bringing on the requested new officers
    would negatively impact an impending police merger. These additional
    FTEs would be needed under the current or a merged structure, as the
    requirements remain the same.

                                HIRING PROBLEMS

        Question. In 2001 the Library installed a new automated hiring
    system that was required by Court order. You reported in last year's
    hearing that it was resulting in some significant delays in hiring
    personnel with unqualified people getting through the initial screening
    process. What is the status of this system and will the Library be able
    to hire up to the level the Congress authorized for fiscal year 2003?
    What is the average amount of time required to hire a new person, and
    what accounts for the improvement over last year?
        Answer. After various systems and process improvements, the Library
    is hiring quicker and in higher numbers than ever before. On average,
    fiscal year 2002 selections occurred 110 calendar days after postings
    opened, as compared to 178 calendar days under the previous hiring
    process. The Library achieved this savings largely by reducing
    processing time within Human Resources Services. The Library also made
    300 selections in fiscal year 2002, a notable improvement over the
    previous 190-selection average. The Library is working hard to meet the
    fiscal year 2003 hiring requirements, despite working under eight
    continuing resolutions for almost 6 months of the fiscal year, which
    always impacts hiring.

                              CRS--HIRING PROBLEMS

        Question. Last year Congressional Research Service (CRS) identified
    some areas where it needed to increase its staffing--homeland security
    and terrorism, and aging-related issues. Have you been able to hire-up
    or otherwise fill the need you identified in these areas?
        Answer. Of the twelve new positions approved for fiscal year 2003,
    five positions were posted by March 31, 2003: (1) Public Health &
    Epidemiology--Combating Terrorism; (2) Infrastructure Systems
    Analysis--Combating Terrorism; (3) Science & Technology, Biochemistry--
    Combating Terrorism; (4) Economics of Aging--Aging; and (5) Economics
    of Health Care--Aging.
        Another six positions will be posted by early June 2003: (1)
    Islamic and Arabic Affairs--Terrorism; (2) Actuary--Aging; (3) Senior
    Demographer--Aging; (4) Bio-ethical Policy--Aging; (5) Genetics--Aging;
    and (6) Gerontology--Aging.
        The projected on-board dates for the four positions supporting
    Combating Terrorism, that have already been posted, vary from July
    through September. The last Combating Terrorism position, a Librarian,
    will be posted in fiscal year 2004. The projected on-board dates for
    the seven Aging positions begin in August 2003, with the final two
    reporting in October 2003.

                              DIGITAL INITIATIVES

        Question. The Library has a National Digital Library program with
    funding of about $20 million. Through this program the Library has
    digitized many parts of its collection and made them available through
    the Library's web site. In addition, the Library is shepherding a
    multi-agency, government/industry effort called the National Digital
    Information Infrastructure Preservation Program (NDIIPP). How do these
    two programs relate to one another? The Library recently received this
    Committee's approval to proceed with spending $25 million of the $100
    million appropriated for NDIIPP. What is the status of this effort? The
    next step will be securing matching funds from other organizations,
    totaling $75 million. Have you begun this process? Do you envision the
    need for significant additional appropriations in the next few years
    for digital initiatives or to implement the NDIIPP?
        Answer. Through the Library's efforts to build a digital library,
    The National Digital Library (NDL) program, the Library learned how to
    convert analog materials and deliver content electronically. Building
    upon the know-how gained in developing a digital library and handling
    digital materials, the NDIIPP's goal is to develop a national strategy
    for collecting and preserving digital content. The NDIIPP program is a
    special program to develop a national strategy to collect and preserve
    current digital content that only exist in ``born digital'' form.
    NDIIPP is funded by a special appropriation, whereas, the NDL is an
    ongoing part of the Library's budget base.
        The NDIIPP plan was accepted by Congress on December 3, 2002. The
    next phase of the NDIIPP plan has two major components: a network of
    cooperating institutions and partners, and the technical framework,
    communication networks, services, and applications that support the
    cooperating network of partners.
        The plan envisages a three-tiered research and investment program
    which suggests targeted core capacity investments that will be subject
    to matching funds in pilot projects and experiments that will run for 1
    to 5 years, beginning in fiscal year 2003. ``Core capacities'' refer to
    the shared knowledge, expertise skills, and consensus deemed essential
    to support collaborations among partners that comprise the digital
    preservation network.
        The Library does not envision the need for appropriations support
    in the next few years for the NDIIPP beyond the $100 million Congress
    has already appropriated for NDIIPP.
        The Library is in the process of updating its internal digital
    initiative strategy. This includes identifying the need for any
    additional NDL appropriated base funding support for fiscal year 2005
    and beyond.

                                CRS CONTRACTING

        Question. CRS' budget includes a $3 million increase for
    contracts--roughly 40 percent over the current year. Yet according to
    the Inspector General, in many instances CRS' consulting contracts are
    not cost effective and do not comply with regulations. The IG found at
    CRS consistent trends of limited or no competition, insufficient cost
    analysis and inadequate sole source justifications. Why should we
    provide this increase in view of these problems, and have these
    deficiencies been fixed?
        Answer. Per the Library's Inspector General (IG), the information
    driving the question about the CRS contracting may have been taken out
    of context. The majority of the audit conditions and recommendations
    were focused on the Library's Contract Services, not the CRS. Two of
    the three contracting issues addressed in the Senate question,
    competition and inadequate sole source justifications apply exclusively
    to the Library's Contract Services functions. The remaining issue,
    which relates to insufficient cost analysis, pertains to and has been
    partially corrected by CRS through training of the CRS contract
    specialist.
        The IG recognizes the absence of viable alternatives or competitors
    with regard to the highly specialized, interim research or analytic
    capacity for which CRS typically contracts under its statutory, non-
    competitive authority. The CRS non-competitive research capacity
    contracts are generally short-term and low dollar value contracts;
    therefore, performing extensive cost analysis on every individual
    contract would create an administrative burden and cost that could
    potentially exceed any savings. However, in following the spirit of the
    recommendation, CRS has consulted with the IG regarding the pricing of
    two unusual contracts--one contract was with a medical research
    corporation that included a sizable overhead fee, and the other
    contract was with an individual who cited a previously approved rate
    determination by an IG from another federal agency. The IG supported
    the CRS pricing concerns and we were able to achieve some savings on
    both contracts as a result.
        CRS has agreed to include cost reviews--where appropriate--in their
    updated contract policy guidelines, which will satisfy the audit
    recommendation.
        The CRS budget request included a $2.7 million increase in
    contracts; however, $1 million of that request was subsequently
    approved under the fiscal year 2003 supplemental. Of the $1.7 million
    remaining, nearly all of it is for contract staff who will support the
    CRS technology infrastructure for research and the creation and
    dissemination of CRS products. CRS will acquire these services through
    one of the existing General Service Administration (GSA) pre-competed
    contract vehicles--most likely Federal Systems Integration and
    Management Center (FEDSIM). The remaining $18,000 is for training
    contracts, which will be acquired competitively.

                         REMOTE ACCESS TO CRS MATERIAL

        Question. What is CRS doing to enable members of Congress and staff
    to access CRS from remote locations (e.g. traveling abroad)? What are
    the costs involved with making this possible?
        Answer. The Senate Sergeant-At-Arms provides members and staff with
    the means for connecting remotely to the Senate network. Once connected
    to that network, members and staff have secure access to the entire CRS
    Web site and to CRS staff through the Senate email system. Over the
    last several years, CRS has put significant effort into ensuring that
    its Web site offers the full range of CRS services, including access to
    all CRS products arranged by issue area or by user search-term, and the
    names, phone numbers, and email addresses of CRS experts in specific
    issue areas. From the CRS Web site, members and staff can also place
    requests, register for CRS seminars, and access CRS reference services.

                 BOOKS FOR THE BLIND AND PHYSICALLY HANDICAPPED

        Question. Last year the National Library Service for the Blind and
    Physically Handicapped was planning to convert to digital format in
    lieu of cassette tape, the books and materials it provides to the blind
    community. With an inventory of more than 700,000 cassette tape
    machines, this will be very expensive. How much will you need and when
    will you request additional funds?
        Answer. The National Library Service for the Blind and Physically
    Handicapped projects that a total of approximately $75 million will be
    required to fund the transition from analog cassette to a digital
    format over a period of at least 5 years. An initial request will be
    submitted in fiscal year 2005.

                              SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS

        Senator Campbell. With that, thank you so much for this
    material you brought me. I certainly do appreciate it. And I
    will read that 100-year anniversary of Harley-Davidson with
    great interest.
        This subcommittee is recessed.
        [Whereupon, at 2:23 p.m., Thursday, April 10, the
    subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of
    the Chair.]

             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.]

             LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004

                                  ----------

                             THURSDAY, MAY 8, 2003

                                           U.S. Senate,
               Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The subcommittee met at 1:23 p.m., in room SD-124, Dirksen
    Senate Office Building, Hon. Ben Nighthorse Campbell (chairman)
    presiding.
        Present: Senator Campbell.

                                  U.S. SENATE

                            Office of the Secretary

    STATEMENT OF EMILY J. REYNOLDS, SECRETARY OF THE SENATE
    ACCOMPANIED BY:
            MARY JONES, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE SENATE
            DIANE SKVARLA, SENATE CURATOR
            TIMOTHY S. WINEMAN, FINANCIAL CLERK OF THE SENATE

              OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL

        Senator Campbell. The subcommittee will be in session.
        We have had a vote rescheduled two or three times. It was
    supposed to be at 1:15. I understand it is postponed again now,
    and I am not quite sure when we are going to have to go. But we
    are going to get started a little bit early and hopefully
    finish as much as we can. Senator Durbin was not sure if he was
    going to get here or not. So we will go as far as we can.
        We will first hear from Ms. Reynolds who is requesting
    roughly $20 million for her operations. Then we will also hear
    from the Architect of the Capitol a little bit later.
        Ms. Reynolds' request for the Secretary of the Senate is a
    decrease from the current year, something we obviously rarely
    see, due to the one-time appropriation last year for the
    Senate's financial management information system.
        Ms. Reynolds, your operation has responsibility for
    everything from Senate security to the Parliamentarian. We
    welcome you. This is your first hearing before this
    subcommittee. You certainly have a large deal on your plate not
    the least of which is helping to oversee the Capitol Visitor
    Center. We wish you well in your new task.
        Following you, we will take testimony from Mr. Alan Hantman
    on the Architect's fiscal year 2004 budget. The budget request
    totals $513.9 million, with three major projects leading to the
    increase: the purchase of the alternate computing facility; a
    project to replace high-voltage switchgear in a number of
    buildings; and the Capitol Building master plan design. Funding
    is also requested to complete the West Refrigeration Plant
    expansion.
        There are a number of items in this budget we will have
    some questions about, but I think what I am going to do is just
    put the rest of my opening statement in for the record so we
    can at least get started before we are called over there to
    vote.
        So, Emily, if you would like to go ahead. I appreciate your
    being here.
        [The statement follows:]

             Prepared Statement of Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell

        The Subcommittee will come to order. We meet this afternoon
    to take testimony from the Secretary of the Senate, Emily
    Reynolds, and the Architect of the Capitol, on the fiscal year
    2004 budget requests. We welcome everyone here today.
        We will hear first from Ms. Reynolds, who is requesting
    roughly $20 million for her operations. This is actually a
    decrease below the current year--something we rarely see around
    here due to a one-time appropriation last year for the Senate's
    Financial Management Information System.
        Ms. Reynolds, your operation has responsibility for
    everything from Senate Security to the Parliamentarian. We
    welcome you to your first hearing before this Subcommittee. You
    have a great deal on your plate--not the least of which is
    helping to oversee the Capitol Visitor Center project for the
    Majority Leader and the Capitol Preservation Commission, and we
    wish you the best in your new role.
        Following Ms. Reynolds, we will take testimony from Alan
    Hantman on the Architect's fiscal year 2004 budget. The budget
    request totals $513.9 million with 3 major projects leading to
    the increase--the purchase of the alternate computing facility,
    a project to replace high-voltage switchgear in a number of
    buildings, and the Capitol Building Master Plan design. Funding
    is also requested to complete the West Refrigeration Plant
    expansion.
        There are a number of items in your budget we have
    questions with--such as whether we need to proceed with a
    Capitol Building Master Plan at this time, whether there has
    been sufficient plans for purchasing the alternate computing
    facility, and whether there are projects we can put off pending
    completion of the Capitol Visitor Center project and other
    major ongoing projects around this campus.
        Clearly we are interested in the status of the CVC, and
    your efforts to improve the management of your agency and
    follow-up on recommendations made by the General Accounting
    Office in the last year.
        I will turn to my ranking member, Senator Durbin, and then
    Ms. Reynolds will proceed with her opening statement.

        Ms. Reynolds. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is a pleasure to
    be with you this afternoon.
        As you know, we have a lengthy full statement prepared for
    the record as well.
        Senator Campbell. That will be included in the record.
        Ms. Reynolds. Thank you.
        But I would like to just give a brief overview this
    afternoon. With me is Mary Jones, our very able Assistant
    Secretary; Tim Wineman, who of course is a longtime fixture
    here in the Senate, our Financial Clerk; and a number of our
    very able department heads.
        I would be remiss also, Mr. Chairman, if I did not thank my
    predecessors in this job. As you know, I have been on the job
    about 4 months now as the 31st Secretary of the Senate, and it
    is a huge honor for me to serve in this capacity. Several of my
    predecessors have been a huge help to me in navigating these
    waters for the last few months, and I am very grateful for
    their counsel.

                                BUDGET OVERVIEW

        As you pointed out, our budget request this year is roughly
    $20 million, and thanks to the very generous appropriation last
    year on FMIS, that does take us to about a $4 million-plus
    decrease in this year's budget.
        The committee last year also appropriated $500,000 to us in
    some nonrecurring costs that will enable us to make this year
    some very badly needed, much needed technology upgrades. So
    overall, out of that roughly $20 million, $18 million is our
    salary cost. That will enable us to continue to attract and
    retain the very best individuals possible for our myriad of
    functions from the legislative to financial and our many
    administrative services.
        In addition, our operating budget will be about $1.7
    million. That will not only enable us to meet the bottom line
    needs of the Senate, the job that we perform every day, but
    also will help us to provide for some new initiatives,
    primarily for the curator and to continue to enhance our Senate
    Web site, both for our Senate community and the general public.

                                MANDATED SYSTEMS

        The two mandated systems that we have--and again, we have
    mentioned FMIS, the $5 million that you all provided us last
    year. On the financial management information side, our goal
    ultimately is to move to a paperless voucher system and also
    provide the Senate with the ability to prepare an auditable
    consolidated financial statement. At all times, one of the
    primary things we keep in mind for all of our offices here in
    the Senate is to increase efficiency and accountability and
    ease of use. So with those goals in mind, this year, with the
    $5 million in multi-year funds, we will roll out approximately
    seven either new releases or pilot projects within the FMIS
    activity. So we are making substantial progress.
        On the legislative information side, our second mandated
    system that this committee, once again, has been very generous
    in funding--and that was a $7 million no-year fund
    appropriation some 2 years ago--the LIS augmentation project
    will give us the ability, our entire Senate community over
    time, to implement Extensible Markup Language, or XML, as the
    data standard with which we will author and exchange all
    documents among the Senate, House, the Government Printing
    Office, and other legislative agencies. To date we are working
    with what we call the pioneer group, a group within the Senate
    Legislative Counsel's Office and our own enrolling clerks, in
    implementing this transition to the LIS project. Ultimately we
    will have documents that can be more easily shared, reused, and
    repurposed. So this is a huge plus for our Senate community
    overall over time.
        We will begin to work, hopefully, even this summer with the
    Appropriations Committee. We are coming to you all first to
    work with you all on the LIS augmentation project in
    determining what your requirements are going forward. As I
    said, there will be more conversation about that here in the
    coming weeks.

                       HIGHLIGHTS OF OFFICE OF SECRETARY

        I certainly this afternoon, given our brief time together,
    will not run through all 25 departments within the Office of
    the Secretary, and there are many accomplishments over the
    course of the last year. But I did want to just point out a few
    highlights, and the other details are obviously in our
    department reports.

                                CURATOR PROJECTS

        The curator. For example, we have work underway on the
    portraits of Senators Dole and Mitchell for our leadership
    collection. In addition, we have underway and hope to install
    and unveil next year the portraits of Senator Vandenberg and
    Senator Robert Wagner in our Senate Reception Room.
        One item that is coming this summer that we are
    particularly excited about is a catalog of our U.S. Senate fine
    arts collection, featuring the 160 items in our fine art
    collection in the Senate. This will be a new resource for all
    of us and something that is eagerly anticipated over the
    summer.
        The restoration of the Senate desks. That project continues
    with 61 restored to date.

                               HISTORIAN'S OFFICE

        In addition, from our historian's office, they have been
    involved in a tremendous project that was released this week by
    the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. Our Historical
    Office had the opportunity to help edit and annotate the 3,800
    pages of the McCarthy executive hearings from 1953-54. So we
    are particularly proud of that accomplishment. And in addition,
    they will be working with our colleagues on the House side,
    hopefully next year, for the first time since 1989, to reprint
    and update the biographical directory of the U.S. Congress.

                                 SENATE LIBRARY

        Our Senate library, another outstanding resource for us
    here in the Senate community. It is interesting to note, since
    the library was moved to the Russell Building, unlike other
    information centers across the country that are actually seeing
    a downward trend in usage, our Senate library is seeing an
    upward tick in usage. That includes about 10,000 walk-in visits
    last year alone and a total of about 40,000 users over the
    course of the last year. So it is a wonderful resource.

                               EDUCATION OF PAGES

        I also just want to briefly mention, because this is one of
    the joys of the Secretary's operation, and that is the
    opportunity to educate our Senate pages. I had the chance
    yesterday to go over yesterday morning, as the pages were
    packing these wonderful care packages they have been putting
    together for our troops. This is the third class that has taken
    on this project, and watching them work for an hour yesterday
    morning, putting everything from licorice to eye drops in these
    great boxes to go overseas, and to see their enthusiasm for the
    project that really our entire Senate community has responded
    to was great fun.

                         CONTINUITY OF OPERATIONS PLANS

        On a more serious note, one of the high priorities of our
    office, of course, involves the continuity of operations
    planning. Here is where we have a very dynamic relationship
    with the Senate Sergeant at Arms. Our predecessors, Al Lenhardt
    and Jeri Thomson, certainly set the standard for Bill Pickle
    and me in terms of that cooperation, the collaboration between
    our two offices with the COOP planning. And it is my hope,
    obviously, that we will continue to meet that standard.
        When it comes to continuity of operations, our staff meets
    at least weekly, and in addition, there are numerous informal
    conversations and meetings over the course of the weeks as
    well. Each of our departments within the Secretary's office has
    their own individual COOP plan, and in addition to that, we
    will continue to work with the Sergeant at Arms, just like last
    year, on a series of tabletop exercises that will culminate
    hopefully later in the year in an overall mock session for the
    Senate, just as one was staged last year.
        We recognize obviously in the Secretary's Office that the
    most important role we can play in COOP planning is to ensure
    that the Senate can continue to carry out its legislative
    responsibilities, its constitutional responsibilities. So that
    is our primary goal in our COOP planning, and certainly
    continuing the financial operations of the Senate is first and
    foremost in our minds as well.
        I would like to close just by saying that in the 4 months
    that I have been in this job one of the great joys has been
    working with a tremendous team of people, 232 employees in the
    Secretary's Office, who are devoted to this institution, and
    combined, they have a very impressive 2,221 years of service to
    the United States Senate. I know they share our ultimate goal
    and that is simply to continue to provide the best possible
    legislative, financial, and administrative services to the
    Senate.
        With that, Mr. Chairman, I thank you for your time and I
    welcome your questions.
        [The statements follow:]
                    Prepared Statement of Emily J. Reynolds
        Mr. Chairman, Senator Durbin and Members of the Subcommittee, thank
    you for your invitation to present testimony in support of the budget
    request of the Office of the Secretary of the Senate for fiscal year
    2004.
        Detailed information about the work of the 25 departments of the
    Office of the Secretary is provided in the annual reports which follow.
    I am pleased to provide this statement to highlight the achievements of
    the Office and the outstanding work of our dedicated employees.
        My statement includes: Presenting the Fiscal Year 2004 Budget
    Request, Implementing Mandated Systems: Financial Management
    Information System (FMIS) and Legislative Information System (LIS),
    Capitol Visitor Center, Continuity of Operations Planning, and
    Maintaining and Improving Current and Historic Legislative, Financial
    and Administrative Services.

                 PRESENTING THE FISCAL YEAR 2004 BUDGET REQUEST

        I am requesting a total fiscal year 2004 budget of $19,999,000
    which is a $4,157,000 decrease from the fiscal year 2003 total budget
    for the Office of the Secretary. Last year's budget included a five
    million dollar multi-year appropriation for the Senate's Financial
    Management Information System.
        The fiscal year 2004 budget request in the amount of $19,999,000 is
    comprised of $18,299,000 for salary costs and $1,700,000 for the
    operating budget of the Office of the Secretary. The salary budget
    represents an increase over the fiscal year 2003 budget request as a
    result of (1) the costs associated with the annual Cost of Living
    Adjustment in the amount of $687,000; and (2) an additional $533,000
    for merit increases and other staffing. The operating budget represents
    a decrease of the fiscal year 2003 budget request in the amount of
    $377,000.
        The net effect of my total budget request for fiscal year 2004 is
    an increase of $156,000 plus funding for the annual Cost of Living
    Adjustment.
        Our request in the operating budget is a sound one, enabling us to
    both meet our operating needs, and provide us with the opportunity for
    new projects and initiatives. In that regard, we will use a portion of
    our operating budget, for example, to professionally photograph all 100
    restored Senate Chamber desks, both for historical documentation and
    emergency preparedness plans. Estimated cost is approximately $35,000.
    In addition, we hope to perform a finishes survey on the architectural
    features within the Senate wing of the Capitol for better documentation
    and historic interpretation. The first phase of this project, which
    would include the public spaces in the Senate wing, is estimated at
    $60,000.
        In addition, there are several special exhibits and presentations
    we would like to add to www.senate.gov in our continuing effort to
    improve and enhance the Senate's website. These include an online
    exhibit of the Senate's Issac Bassett collection, an online exhibit on
    the Senate desks, the expansion of the Virtual Tour of the U.S.
    Capitol, and converting exhibits prepared by the Curator (the political
    cartoons of Puck, a 19th century satirical magazine and the drawings of
    Lily Spandorf illustrating the filming of the motion picture ``Advise
    and Consent'') to a format for posting. Approximate costs of these
    projects for website enhancement is $76,000.
        In reference to the salary budget, first and foremost, this request
    will enable us to continue to attract and retain talented and dedicated
    individuals to serve the needs of the U.S. Senate through our
    legislative, financial and administrative offices. We are in the
    process of completing a substantial internal compensation study for the
    Office of the Secretary which will further document our ongoing
    staffing requirements, appropriate levels of compensation, and
    additional staffing needs.

                                     OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY APPORTIONMENT SCHEDULE
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         AMOUNT              BUDGET ESTIMATE
                                                                        AVAILABLE   --------------------------------
                                  ITEM                                 FISCAL YEAR
                                                                      2003, PUBLIC     FISCAL YEAR      DIFFERENCE
                                                                        LAW 108-7         2004
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    DEPARTMENTAL OPERATING BUDGET:
        EXECUTIVE OFFICE...........................................        $397,800        $525,000       +$127,200
        ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES....................................       1,422,900       1,100,000        (322,900)
        LEGISLATIVE SERVICES.......................................         256,300          75,000        (181,300)
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------
          TOTAL OPERATING BUDGET...................................       2,077,000       1,700,000        (377,000)
                                                                    ================================================
    SENATE MANDATED PROJECTS: FINANCIAL MGMT. INFO. SYSTEMS MULTI-        5,000,000  ..............      (5,000,000)
     YEAR..........................................................
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------
          TOTALS...................................................       7,077,000       1,700,000      (5,377,000)
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                         IMPLEMENTING MANDATED SYSTEMS

        Two systems critical to our operation are mandated by law, and I
    would like to spend a few moments on each to highlight recent progress,
    and to thank the committee for your ongoing support of both.
    Financial Management Information System (FMIS)
        The Financial Management Information System, or FMIS, is used by
    approximately 100 Senate offices, 20 Committees and 20 Leadership and
    support offices. As a result of a five year strategic plan devised by
    the Disbursing Office, my predecessor recommended, and the
    Appropriations Committee subsequently approved, a $5 million
    appropriation for a multi-year program to upgrade and expand FMIS for
    the Senate.
        With these funds, the Disbursing Office is modernizing processes
    and applications to meet the continued demand by our Senate offices for
    efficiency, accountability and ease of use. Our goal is to move to a
    paperless voucher system, improve the FMIS-Web system, and make payroll
    and accounting system improvements. In addition, we are working
    cooperatively with the Sergeant at Arms to meet the mandate to prepare
    auditable financial statements for the Senate.
        In fiscal year 2002, specific progress made on the FMIS project
    included:
      --Three Web FMIS releases, one of which changed the accounting for
            travel and petty cash advances to be obligations of Senate
            offices.
      --Senate-wide implementation of the Senate Automated Vendor Inquiry
            System, or SAVI, which enables Senate staff to check the status
            of their reimbursements. In July 2002, Senate employees were
            given the opportunity to receive all expense reimbursement
            through direct deposit, and were informed of this change in a
            Senate-wide mailing.
      --For vouchers of $35 or less, a new document approval process was
            instituted. The time required to pay such vouchers has been cut
            considerably as the vouchers are routed directly to certifying
            accounts payable specialists in Disbursing for review and
            posting.
      --The ability to produce auditable consolidated financial statements
            is a primary objective of the Senate's Strategic Plan for
            Financial Management. The Disbursing Office took a significant
            step toward that objective by initiating a contract to develop
            a draft or pro-forma Senate wide financial statement which
            includes all supporting schedules and reports for fiscal year
            2002. The required deliverables of this initiative were
            completed in April 2002, and a number of corrective actions
            necessary to meet our objectives were identified. As some of
            these corrective actions impact the Sergeant at Arms Finance
            Office, the Disbursing Office is working with them to develop
            an implementation plan. For example, a Senate-wide
            capitalization policy has been drafted and is currently under
            review by both offices.
        During fiscal year 2003, the following FMIS activities are planned:
      --Implement a new Web FMIS release in April 2003 (completed) that
            includes the functionality for:
        --A pilot of online sanctioning of vouchers by the Rules Committee
                staff. During this pilot, vouchers from all standing,
                select, special and joint committees will be sanctioned
                online;
        --Senate-wide implementation of online Travel Expense Summary
                Reports (ESR) for all Senate staff. Staff who travel are
                now able to complete the required documentation for travel
                expense reimbursement via a Web Site; and
        --Senate-wide implementation of the Travel ESR-import feature in
                Web FMIS. This function enables Office Managers and Chief
                Clerks to create a travel voucher by ``importing'' data
                from an online Travel ESR, thus eliminating duplicate data
                entry.
      --As requested by the Rules Committee, implement online sanctioning
            of vouchers for all offices that prepare vouchers via Web FMIS
            (e.g., Senators, Leadership offices).
      --Generate a random sample of vouchers $35 or less for the Rules
            Committee post payment audit.
      --Implement a new release of online Travel ESR that will incorporate
            suggestions made by pilot users.
      --Implement a new release of the Senate Automated Vendor Inquiry
            (SAVI) system that incorporates suggestions made by users.
      --Conduct a pilot of direct deposit payments to vendors, without
            online notification. This means that these vendors would be
            paid by direct deposit but would not be able to look at deposit
            information via the Senate Automated Vendor Inquiry (SAVI)
            system, which would remain inside the Senate's firewall.
      --Revise requirements for imaging of supporting documentation and
            electronic signatures.
        During fiscal year 2004 the following FMIS activities are planned:
      --Implement new technology for Web FMIS, ``Thin Client,'' which will
            provide a substantially streamlined architecture, upgrade the
            technology used, provide simpler disaster recovery, and provide
            the platform for imaging of supporting documentation and
            electronic signatures. In general, we will re-write the Web
            FMIS functions implemented in the early releases to eliminate
            the use of Cold Fusion and Client/Server technology. When
            completed, all components of Web FMIS will use Intranet
            technology on a single platform, Web Sphere. This is a
            substantial effort, and is planned in two phases:
        --Phase I--(Winter 2004).--In this release we will implement a
                roles-based security scheme enabling users to access
                specific functions based on the activities they perform,
                re-write the local list maintenance functions (used by
                offices) and system administrative functions (used by DO)
                to eliminate Cold Fusion, update the underlying technology
                for Web FMIS reports, and archive data for lapsed fiscal
                years so that users can still generate reports after the
                data is archived from the general ledger.
        --Phase II--(Summer 2004).--In this release we will re-write the
                budget entry and document entry functions of Web FMIS to
                eliminate the Client/Server technology. These are the
                functions used most by Office Managers and Chief Clerks, so
                this will be most visible to them.
      --Begin using laser checks. This significantly simplifies our
            disaster recovery activities.
      --Implement a new release of the Senate Automated Vendor Inquiry
            (SAVI) system that enables e-mail notification of payments to
            staff and vendors.
        A more detailed report on FMIS is included in the departmental
    report of the Disbursing Office which follows.
    Legislative Information System (LIS)
        Our second mandated system, which this Committee has generously
    supported, is the Legislative Information System, or LIS, which
    provides Senators and staff with text of Senate and House legislative
    documents from their desktop computers. In addition, LIS provides real-
    time access to legislative amendments and the current status of new
    legislation within 24 hours. LIS originates from the 1997 Legislative
    Branch Appropriations Act, which also established a requirement for the
    broadest possible exchange of information among legislative branch
    agencies. This exchange process is now the focus of the LIS
    Augmentation Project, or LISAP.
        The overall objective of the LISAP is to implement the extensible
    markup language, or XML, as the data standard to author and exchange
    legislative documents among the Senate, House of Representatives, the
    Government Printing Office and other legislative agencies. Two years
    ago, the Appropriations Committee appropriated $7 million to the
    Secretary for the LISAP, designed to carry out the Senate portion of
    the December, 2000, directive given to both the Secretary and the Clerk
    of the House by the Senate Rules Committee and the House Administration
    Committee respectively. Thus far, we have spent approximately $3
    million of our appropriation, and I am pleased to report that
    considerable progress has been made and the project is on budget and
    running smoothly.
        The project is currently focused on Senate-wide implementation and
    transition to a standard system for the authoring and exchange of
    legislative documents, including an XML authoring system for the Office
    of Senate Legislative Counsel (SLC) and the Enrolling Clerk for bills,
    resolutions and amendments. A database of documents in XML format and
    an improved exchange program will mean quicker and better access to
    legislative information and will provide documents that are more easily
    shared, reused and repurposed.
        The LISAP project team has demonstrated the Senate's legislative
    editing XML application (LEXA) for the Office of Legislative Counsel
    where it was greeted with enthusiasm. Over the next several months, the
    LISAP project team will continue to refine and enhance this editing
    application, release a document management system for the Senate
    Legislative Counsel, and complete the data conversion projects. The
    team will also develop and deliver a training program for the SLC, and
    begin to address the needs of other Senate offices and Committees,
    starting with the Appropriations Committee.
        A more detailed report on LIS follows the departmental reports.

                             CAPITOL VISITOR CENTER

        While the Architect of the Capitol directly oversees this massive
    and impressive project, I would like to briefly mention the ongoing
    involvement of the Secretary's office in this endeavor. My colleague,
    the Clerk of the House, and I continue to facilitate weekly meetings
    with senior staff of the joint leadership of Congress to address and
    hopefully quickly resolve issues that might impact the status of the
    project or the operations of Congress in general.
        In addition, I also facilitate weekly meetings with the Architect's
    office for the senior staff of the Senate Sergeant at Arms, Capitol
    Police, Rules Committee and Appropriations Committee, to address the
    expansion space plans for the Senate and any issues with regard to the
    CVC's construction that may directly impact Senate operations.
        Although the construction creates numerous temporary inconveniences
    to Senators, staff and visitors, completion of the Capitol Visitor
    Center will bring substantial improvements in enhanced security and
    visitor amenities, and its education benefits will be tremendous.

                       CONTINUITY OF OPERATIONS PLANNING

        The Office of the Secretary maintains a Continuity of Operations
    (COOP) program to ensure that the Senate can fulfill its Constitutional
    obligations under any circumstances. Plans are in place to support
    Senate floor operations both on and off Capitol Hill, and to permit
    each of the 25 departments within the Office of the Secretary to
    perform its essential functions during and following an emergency.
        COOP planning in the Office of the Secretary has been an ongoing
    process since late 2000. Working in close cooperation with the Sergeant
    at Arms and the General Services Administration, employees in each
    department were trained to evaluate COOP requirements and subsequently
    write COOP plans specific to their departments. By the summer of 2001,
    each department had completed the first draft of a COOP plan, which
    included the identification of records, databases, equipment and
    supplies necessary to conduct essential functions, and plans to
    duplicate and store essential items offsite or to provide for their
    timely replacement. Information from all final departmental plans has
    been integrated into an overall plan for the Office of the Secretary.
        Several departments had completed their plans prior to the
    terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and the anthrax contamination
    in the Hart Senate Office Building in October 2001. As a result, both
    the Disbursing Office and the Office of Public Records, as well as
    other departments located in Hart, were able to continue operations
    throughout the 96 days that Hart was closed. Every payroll was met, all
    bills were paid, and every filing deadline was met.
        The implementation of COOP plans that fall provided valuable
    experience in emergency management. Both the Secretary and the Sergeant
    at Arms' operations continued to formulate plans to deal with the
    possibility of subsequent emergencies. In the spring and summer of
    2002, our offices participated in a series of tabletop drills and live
    exercises to test and refine existing emergency preparedness plans.
    Alert and notification procedures using emergency communications
    systems were tested; Emergency Operations Centers and a Briefing Center
    were activated in a trial run; and a mock Senate session was conducted
    in an alternate Senate Chamber.
        As a vital part of COOP planning, we have identified equipment,
    supplies and other items critical to the conduct of essential
    functions, and have assembled ``fly-away kits'' for the Senate Chamber,
    and for each department of the Office of the Secretary. Multiple copies
    of each fly-away kit have been produced with storage in both our
    offices and at appropriate off-site locations. This will enable the
    Office of the Secretary to resume essential operations within twelve
    hours or less.
        In the event of an emergency, the Office of the Secretary is
    prepared to do the following: activate an Emergency Operations Center
    within one hour, support Briefing Center operations within one hour,
    support Senate Floor operations in an alternate Senate Chamber (within
    twelve hours onsite and within 24 to 72 hours offsite, depending upon
    location).
        Working with Leadership offices, the Sergeant at Arms, and the
    Capitol Police, we continue to refine COOP and emergency management
    plans. All COOP plans are reviewed and updated at least annually to
    ensure their continued viability. A second series of tabletop drills is
    planned for this year to culminate in another mock exercise of the
    activation of an alternate Senate Chamber.
        The central mission of the Office of the Secretary is to provide
    the legislative, financial and administrative support required for the
    conduct of Senate business. Our COOP and emergency preparedness
    programs are necessary to ensure that the Senate can carry out its
    Constitutional duties under any set of circumstances.

     MAINTAINING AND IMPROVING CURRENT AND HISTORIC LEGISLATIVE, FINANCIAL
                          AND ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
                              LEGISLATIVE OFFICES

       The Legislative Department of the Office of the Secretary of the
    Senate provides the support essential to Senators in carrying out their
    daily chamber activities and, most importantly, to carry out the
    Constitutional responsibilities of the Senate. The department consists
    of eight offices: Bill Clerk, Captioning Services, Daily Digest,
    Enrolling Clerk, Executive Clerk, Journal Clerk, Legislative Clerk, and
    the Official Reporters of Debates. The Legislative Clerk is the overall
    supervisor, providing a single line of communication to the Assistant
    Secretary and Secretary, and is responsible for coordination,
    supervision, scheduling and cross-training between the eight offices.
    In addition, the Parliamentarian's operation also works in close
    coordination with the Legislative Department.
        Each of the eight offices within the Legislative Department is
    supervised by experienced veterans of the Secretary's office. The
    average length of service of legislative supervisors in the Office of
    the Secretary of the Senate is nineteen years. The experience of these
    senior professional staff is a great asset for the Senate. In order to
    ensure continued well-rounded expertise, the legislative team has
    cross-trained extensively among their specialities.

                                 1. BILL CLERK

        The Office of the Bill Clerk collects and records data on the
    legislative activity of the Senate, which becomes the historical record
    of official Senate business. The Bill Clerk's Office keeps this
    information in its handwritten files and ledgers and also enters it
    into the Senate's automated retrieval system so that it is available to
    all House and Senate offices via the Legislative Information System
    (LIS). The Bill Clerk records actions of the Senate with regard to
    bills, reports, amendments, co-sponsors, public law numbers, and
    recorded votes. The Bill Clerk is responsible for preparing for print
    all measures introduced, received, submitted, and reported in the
    Senate. The Bill Clerk also assigns numbers to all Senate bills and
    resolutions. All the information received in this office comes directly
    from the Senate floor in written form within moments of the action
    involved, so the Bill Clerk's Office is a timely and accurate source of
    legislative information.
        The Bill Clerk's Office continues to provide to Senate offices and
    the public information on Senate legislative status with a high degree
    of accuracy and speed, both through the Senate LIS system and over the
    telephone. The information provided is the most quickly available and
    the most accurate information on Senate legislative activity available
    to staff.
        Here is a final cumulative summary of the 107th and the 106th
    Congresses:

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       107th        106th
                                                      Congress     Congress
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Senate Bills..................................        3,181        3,287
    Senate Joint Resolutions......................           53           56
    Senate Concurrent Resolutions.................          160          162
    Senate Resolutions............................          368          393
    Amendments Submitted..........................        4,984        4,367
    House Bills...................................          562          697
    House Joint Resolutions.......................           29           46
    House Concurrent Resolutions..................          175          151
    Measures Reported.............................          653          765
    Written Reports...............................          351          513
                                                   -------------------------
          Total Legislation.......................       10,516       10,437
                                                   =========================
    Roll Call Votes...............................          633          672
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Current Projects
        Amendment Tracking System.--In the fall of 2001, Rules Committee
    staff approached our office with the task of scanning submitted
    amendments onto the Amendment Tracking System on LIS. The Rules
    Committee has identified a need for Senate staff to have all amendments
    submitted in the Senate made available to them online shortly after
    being submitted, especially during cloture. The Rules Committee also
    requested that the Secretary, through the Bill Clerk, assess the
    feasibility of lifting the page limitation for scanning amendments onto
    the ATS Indexer. In response, the Bill Clerk contacted the Technology
    Development division of the Sergeant-at-Arms office to outline the
    technical requirements needed to implement such a request; a draft has
    been completed. Once the final version is delivered, the Secretary,
    through the Bill Clerk, and in consultation with the Legislative Clerk,
    will ascertain the legislative requirements needed in order for the
    staff to implement this request. The system must be designed and
    implemented without sacrificing critical services to the functioning of
    the Senate Chamber, specifically the amendment process.
        Electrical Ledger System.--Shortly after the September 2001 attacks
    and the subsequent anthrax attacks in the Capitol complex, the Bill
    Clerks identified the need to have a electronic version of the official
    Senate ledgers in order to ensure the integrity of the information
    recorded in the ledgers. The electronic version will be portable for
    use during possible emergency scenarios. The Technology Development
    division of the Sergeant at Arms is working to develop two separate
    functions of this electronic ledger system. One is an electronic data
    entry system which will mimic the layout of the current Senate ledgers
    printed by the Government Printing Office; the other is a search
    function. Both of these programs will be housed on a separate server to
    maintain the integrity of the ledger data. The electronic ledger system
    is currently under development.

                             2. CAPTIONING SERVICES

        Since 1991, the Office of Captioning Services has provided real-
    time captioning of Senate Floor proceedings for the deaf and hard-of-
    hearing along with unofficial electronic transcripts of those
    proceedings to Senate offices via the Senate Intranet. The primary
    focus of the Office of Captioning Services is caption accuracy.
    Selected on-air turns are printed and reviewed to constantly monitor
    quality and consistency.

    Technology Update
        The Senate Recording Studio continues to refine a system that
    captures our caption data stream, time stamps the captions and stores
    them in a searchable database. This database contains links to the
    corresponding audio files which can be listened to over the Senate
    Intranet in Senate offices.
        During 2002, all available real-time captioning technologies were
    evaluated for the purpose of replacing our existing outdated
    technology. As a result, all captioning hardware and software will be
    replaced in 2003, using monies appropriated in fiscal year 2003 for
    this purpose.
        Voice writing (voice recognition) technologies are improving and
    the Office of Captioning Services is on the cutting edge of testing and
    evaluating these products as they evolve.

    Current Projects
        There are two main objectives for the Office of Captioning Services
    in 2003. The first is to replace existing DOS-based steno-captioning
    technology with Windows-based steno-captioning technology. Second, we
    will continue to work out the details of a proposed pilot project to
    caption hearings for the Judiciary Committee.

                                3. DAILY DIGEST

        The Daily Digest section of the Congressional Record provides a
    concise accounting of all official actions taken by the Senate on a
    particular day. All Senate hearings and business meetings (including
    joint meetings and conferences) are scheduled through the Daily Digest
    office and published in the Congressional Record.

    Chamber Activity
        During the second session of the 107th Congress, the Senate was in
    session a total of 149 days, for a total of 1,043 hours and 23 minutes.
    There were 253 recorded votes. (For additional details, a Comparison of
    Senate Legislative Activity follows).

                                                                    CHART ONE: YEARLY COMPARISON OF THE SENATE LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITIES
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               1989       1990       1991       1992       1993       1994       1995       1996       1997       1998       1999       2000       2001       2002
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Senate Convened.......................        1/3       1/23        1/3        1/3        1/5       1/25        1/4        1/3        1/3       1/27        1/6       1/24        1/3       1/23
    Senate Adjourned......................      11/21      10/28     1/3/92       10/9      11/26      12/01     1/3/96       10/4      11/13      10/21      11/19      12/15      12/20      11/20
    Days in Session.......................        136        138        158        129        153        138        211        132        153        143        162        141        173        149
    Hours in Session......................   1,00319"   1,25014"   1,20044"   1,09109"   1,26941"   1,24333"   1,83910"   l,03645"   1,09307"   1,09505"   1,18357"   1,01751"   1,23615"   1,04323"
    Average Hours per Day.................        7.4        9.1        7.6        8.5        8.3        9.0        8.7        7.8        7.1        7.7        7.3        7.2        7.1        7.0
    Total Measures Passed.................        605        716        626        651        473        465        346        476        386        506        549        696        425        523
    Roll Call Votes.......................        312        326        280        270        395        329        613        306        298        314        374        298        380        253
    Quorum Calls..........................         11          3          3          5          2          6          3          2          6          4          7          6          3          2
    Public Laws...........................        240        244        243        347        210        255         88        245        153        241        170        410        136        195
    Treaties Ratified.....................          9         15         15         32         20          8         10         28         15         53         13         39          3         17
    Nominations Confirmed.................     45,585     42,493     45,369     30,619     38,676     37,446     40,535     33,176     25,576     20,302     22,468     22,512     25,091     23,633
    Average Voting Attendance.............       98.0      97.47      97.16       95.4       97.6      97.02      98.07      98.22      98.68      97.47      98.02      96.99      98.29      96.36
    Sessions Convened Before 12  Noon.....         95        116        126        112        128        120        184        113        115        109        118        107        140        119
    Sessions Convened at 12  Noon.........         14          4          9          6          9          2         15         12         31         17         25         10         12          4
    Sessions Convened after 12  Noon......         27         17         23         10         15         17         12          7          7          2         19         24         21         23
    Sessions Continued after 6 p.m........         88        100        102         91        100        100        158         88         96         93        113         94        108        103
    Sessions Continued after 12 Midnight..          9         13          6          4          9          7          3          1  .........  .........  .........  .........          2          3
    Saturday Sessions.....................          1          3          2          2          2          3          5          1          1          1          3          1          3  .........
    Sunday Sessions.......................  .........          2  .........  .........  .........  .........          3  .........          1  .........  .........          1  .........  .........
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Prepared by the Senate Daily Digest--Office of the Secretary.

    Committee Activity
        Senate committees held a total of 961 meetings in the first session
    of the 107th Congress, and 888 meetings in the second session.

                               4. ENROLLING CLERK

        The Enrolling Clerk prepares, proofreads, corrects, and prints all
    Senate passed legislation prior to its transmittal to the House of
    Representatives, the National Archives, the Secretary of State, the
    United States Claims Court, and the White House.
        During 2002, 43 enrolled bills (transmitted to the President) and
    10 concurrent resolutions (transmitted to Archives) were prepared,
    printed, proofread, corrected, and printed on parchment.
        A total of 526 additional pieces of legislation in one form or
    another, was passed or agreed to by the Senate, requiring processing
    from this office.
        Efforts continue on both sides of the Capitol to generate, process,
    manage and share data on a more uniform basis. XyWrite is the software
    editor currently utilized by House and Senate Enrolling Clerks, House
    and Senate Legislative Counsels, and the Government Printing Office.
    Ultimately both Chambers will generate data using an Extensible Markup
    Language (XML) editor acceptable to all involved.

                               5. EXECUTIVE CLERK

        The Executive Clerk prepares an accurate record of actions taken by
    the Senate during executive sessions (proceedings on nominations and
    treaties) which is published as the Executive Journal at the end of
    each session of Congress. The Executive Clerk also prepares daily the
    Executive Calendar as well as all nomination and treaty resolutions for
    transmittal to the President. Additionally, the Executive Clerk's
    office processes all executive communications, Presidential messages
    and petitions and memorials.

    Nominations
        During the second session of the 107th Congress, there were 1,010
    nomination messages sent to the Senate by the President, transmitting
    23,045 nominations to positions requiring Senate confirmation and 10
    messages withdrawing nominations previously sent to the Senate during
    the 107th Congress. Of the total nominations transmitted, 463 were for
    civilian positions other than lists in the Foreign Service, Coast
    Guard, NOAA, and Public Health Service. In addition, there were 1,565
    nominees in the ``civilian list'' categories named above. Military
    nominations received this session totaled 21,017 (5,813--Air Force;
    6,182--Army; 6,044--Navy; and 2,978--Marine Corps).
        In total, the Senate confirmed 23,633 nominations this session.
    Pursuant to the provisions of paragraph six of Senate Rule XXXI, 193
    nominations were returned to the President during the second session of
    the 107th Congress.

    Treaties
        There were 18 treaties transmitted to the Senate by the President
    during the second session of the 107th Congress for its advice and
    consent to ratification, which were ordered printed as treaty documents
    for the use of the Senate (Treaty Doc. 107-3 through 107-21).
        The Senate gave its advice and consent to 17 treaties with various
    conditions, declarations, understandings and provisos to the
    resolutions of advice and consent to ratification.

    Executive Reports and Roll Call Votes
        There were 12 executive reports relating to treaties ordered
    printed for the use of the Senate during the second session of the
    107th Congress (Executive Report 107-4 through 107-15). The Senate
    conducted 42 roll call votes in executive session, all on or in
    relation to nominations.

    Executive Communications
        For the second session of the 107th Congress, 4,854 executive
    communications, 143 petitions and memorials and 60 Presidential
    messages were received and processed.

                                6. JOURNAL CLERK

        The Journal Clerk takes notes of the daily legislative proceedings
    of the Senate in the ``Minute Book'' and prepares a history of bills
    and resolutions for the printed Senate Journal as required by Article
    I, Section V of the Constitution. The Senate Journal is published each
    calendar year.
        The Journal staff take 90 minute turns at the rostrum in the Senate
    Chamber, noting by hand for inclusion in the Minute Book (i) all orders
    (entered into by the Senate through unanimous consent agreements), (ii)
    legislative messages received from the President, (iii) messages from
    the House of Representatives, (iv) legislative actions as taken by the
    Senate (including motions made by Senators, points of order raised, and
    roll call votes taken), (v) amendments submitted and proposed for
    consideration, (vi) bills and joint resolutions introduced, and (vii)
    concurrent and Senate resolutions as submitted. These notes of the
    proceedings are then compiled in electronic form for eventual
    publication of the Journal, usually at the end of each calendar year.
        In 2002, the Journal Clerk completed the production of the 1,022-
    page 2001 Senate Journal. The 903-page 2002 Journal was sent to the
    Government Printing Office for printing on March 19, 2003.

                              7. LEGISLATIVE CLERK

        The Legislative Clerk sits at the Secretary's desk in the Senate
    Chamber and reads aloud bills, amendments, the Senate Journal,
    Presidential messages, and other such materials when so directed by the
    Presiding Officer of the Senate. The Legislative Clerk calls the roll
    of members to establish the presence of a quorum and to record and
    tally all yea and nay votes. This office prepares the Senate Calendar
    of Business, published each day that the Senate is in session, and
    prepares additional publications relating to Senate class membership
    and committee and subcommittee assignments. The Legislative Clerk
    maintains the official copy of all measures pending before the Senate
    and must incorporate into those measures any amendments that are agreed
    to. This office retains custody of official messages received from the
    House of Representatives and conference reports awaiting action by the
    Senate. This office is responsible for verifying the accuracy of
    information entered into the LIS system by the various offices of the
    Secretary.
        Additionally the Legislative Clerk acts as supervisor for the
    Legislative Department providing a single line of communication to the
    Assistant Secretary and Secretary, and is responsible for overall
    coordination, supervision, scheduling, and cross training.

    Summary of Activity
        The second session of the 108th Congress completed its legislative
    business and adjourned sine die on Wednesday, November 20, 2002. During
    2002, the Senate was in session 149 days, over 1,043 hours and
    conducted 253 roll call votes. There were 653 measures reported from
    committees, 523 total measures passed, and there were 311 items
    remaining on the Calendar at the time of adjournment. In addition,
    there were 2,287 amendments processed.

                        8. OFFICIAL REPORTERS OF DEBATES

        The Official Reporters of Debates prepare and edit for publication
    in the Congressional Record a substantially verbatim report of the
    proceedings of the Senate, and serve as liaison for all Senate
    personnel on matters relating to the content of the Record. The
    transcript of proceedings, submitted statements and legislation are
    transmitted in hard copy and electronically throughout the day to the
    Government Printing Office.

                               9. PARLIAMENTARIAN

        The Parliamentarian's Office performs extensive legislative duties.
    These include advising the Chair, Senators and staff, as well as
    committee staff, House members and staff, administration officials, the
    media and members of the general public, on all matters requiring an
    interpretation of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the precedents of
    the Senate, unanimous consent agreements, as well as provisions of
    public law affecting the proceedings of the Senate. The
    Parliamentarians work closely with the staff of the Vice President of
    the United States and the Vice President himself whenever he performs
    his duties as president of the Senate. The Parliamentarians monitor all
    proceedings on the floor of the Senate, advise the Presiding Officer on
    the competing rights of the Senators on the floor, and advise all
    Senators as to what is appropriate in debate. The Parliamentarians keep
    track of the amendments offered to the legislation pending on the
    Senate floor, and monitor them for points of order. In this respect,
    the Parliamentarians reviewed both more than 1,000 amendments during
    2002 to determine if they met various procedural requirements and
    thousands of pages of conference reports to determine what provisions
    could appropriately be included.
        The Office of the Parliamentarian is responsible for the referral
    to the appropriate committees of all legislation introduced in the
    Senate, all legislation received from the House, as well as all
    communications received from the executive branch, state and local
    governments, and private citizens. In order to perform this
    responsibility, the Parliamentarian conducts extensive legal and
    legislative research. During 2002, the Parliamentarian and his
    assistants referred 1,584 measures and 5,058 communications to the
    appropriate Senate committees. The office works extensively with
    Senators and their staffs to advise them of the jurisdictional
    consequences of particular legislative drafts and evaluates the
    jurisdictional effect of proposed modifications in drafting.

                    FINANCIAL OPERATIONS: DISBURSING OFFICE
                         DISBURSING OFFICE ORGANIZATION

        The mission of the Senate Disbursing Office is to provide efficient
    and effective central financial and human resource data management,
    information and advice to the distributed, individually managed
    offices, and to Members and employees of the United States Senate. To
    accomplish this mission, the Senate Disbursing Office manages the
    collection of information from the distributed accounting locations in
    the Senate to formulate and consolidate the agency level budget,
    disburse the payroll, pay the Senate's bills, prepare auditable
    financial statements, and provide appropriate counseling and advice.
    The Senate Disbursing Office collects information from Members and
    employees that is necessary to maintain and administer the retirement,
    health insurance, life insurance, and other central human resource
    programs to provide responsive, personal attention to Members and
    employees on a unbiased and confidential basis. The Senate Disbursing
    Office also manages the distribution of central financial and human
    resource information to the individual Member Offices, Committees, and
    Administrative and Leadership offices in the Senate while maintaining
    the appropriate control of information for the protection of individual
    Members and Senate employees.
        To support the mission of the Senate Disbursing Office, the
    organization is structured in a manner that is intended to enhance its
    ability to provide quality work, maintain a high level of customer
    service, promote good internal controls, efficiency and teamwork, and
    provide for the appropriate levels of supervision and management. The
    long-term financial needs of the Senate are best served by an
    organization staffed with highly trained professionals who possess a
    high degree of institutional knowledge, sound judgement, and
    interpersonal skills that reflect the unique nature of the United
    States Senate.

                   DEPUTY FOR BENEFITS AND FINANCIAL SERVICES

        The responsibility of this position is to serve as the Senate's
    expert on Federal retirement and benefits, payroll and front office
    processes. Coordination of the interaction between the Financial
    Services, Employee Benefits and Payroll sections is a major
    responsibility of the position. Planning and project management of new
    computer systems and programs is also a primary responsibility.
    Ensuring that job processes are efficient and up to date, modifying
    computer support systems, implementing regulatory and legislated
    changes, designing and producing up to date forms for use in all three
    sections are additional areas of responsibility.
        The first order of 2002 was to reestablish operations in the Hart
    Building after being displaced for three months following the anthrax
    incident.
        Various work during the year included working with the Computer
    Center to expand and change payroll programs, edits, and screens to
    administer: New Offset-CSRS deductions (as well as extensive payroll
    program modification), LWOP for Military Personnel, the Long Term Care
    Program, new FEGLI age bands, and major changes in TSP processing for
    new hires as well as new open TSP seasons.
        In February, the office managed a project to renovate the Senate's
    Personnel Folder Filing System. New automated, vertical storage filing
    cabinets were installed. This project included electrical work, file
    storage, cabinet removal, installation, archival and refiling,
    transportation of cabinets and archived files to an offsite storage
    facility, rebuilding of storage cabinets and reorganization of files.
        In September, work on the scanning of the Senate's Official
    Personnel & Office Folders began as part of our disaster planning. The
    plans include scanning all payroll related documents for offsite
    retrieval in the event of an emergency.
        New mainframe operating system upgrades for O/S 390 were
    implemented in December and a full set of payroll system tests were run
    to ensure that they functioned properly.
        Planning for new programs, which are due to be implemented this
    calendar year, began for flexible spending accounts for child care and
    medical expenses, as well as catch-up TSP payments for staff over age
    50.
        Also under the Deputy for Benefits and Financial Services is the
    Student Loan Repayment Program, which was included in the fiscal year
    2002 Legislative Branch Appropriations Bill. Implementation of the
    Senate Program began April 1, 2002, with 25 Senate employees and 10
    Senate offices participating. As of March 31, 2002, 816 Senate
    employees and 113 Senate offices are participating.
        The legislation establishing the Student Loan Repayment Program
    gives each Senate employing office the authority to implement the
    Program. In the educational sessions provided on the Program, the
    twofold purposes of the law--retention and recruitment--are stressed.

              FRONT COUNTER--ADMINISTRATIVE AND FINANCIAL SERVICES

        The Front Counter is the main service area of all general Senate
    business and financial activity. The Front Counter maintains the
    Senate's internal accountability of funds used in daily operations.
    Reconciliation of such funds is executed on a daily basis. The Front
    Counter provides training to newly authorized payroll contacts along
    with continuing guidance to all contacts in the execution of business
    operations. It is the receiving point for most incoming expense
    vouchers, payroll actions, and employee benefits related forms, and is
    the initial verification point to ensure that paperwork received in the
    Disbursing Office conforms to all applicable Senate rules, regulations,
    and statutes. The Front Counter is the first line of service provided
    to Members, Officers, and employees. All new Senate employees
    (permanent and temporary) who will work in the Capitol Hill Senate
    offices are administered the required oath of office and personnel
    affidavit and provided verbal and written detailed information
    regarding their pay and benefits. Authorization is certified to new and
    state employees for issuance of their Senate I.D. card. Advances are
    issued to Senate staff authorized for an advance for official Senate
    travel. Cash and check advances are entered and reconciled in the Funds
    Advance Tracking System (FATS). Repayment of travel advances is
    executed after processing of certified expenses is complete. Travelers'
    checks are available on a non-profit basis to assist the traveler.
    Numerous inquiries are handled daily, ranging from pay, benefits,
    taxes, voucher processing, reporting, laws, and Senate regulations, and
    must always be answered accurately and fully to provide the highest
    degree of customer service. Cash and checks received from Senate
    entities as part of their daily business are handled through the front
    counter and become part of the Senate's accountability of federally
    appropriated funds and are then processed through the Senate's general
    ledger system.
        In sum, for 2002:
      --The Front Counter issued approximately 2,700 cash advances for
            official Senate travel.
      --Received more than 19,200 checks from Senate entities.
      --Administered oath and personnel affidavits to more than 3,200 new
            Senate staff.
      --Maintained brochures for 11 Federal health carriers and distributed
            approximately 6,000 brochures to staff during the annual FEHB
            open season and to new employees.
      --Provided 38 training sessions to new Office Managers.
        After a smooth transition back into the Hart Building, Front Office
    operations continued to provide the Senate community with prompt,
    courteous and informative advice regarding Front Office functions. A
    reconstruction and audit of the Funds Advance Tracking System were
    successfully completed. This was necessitated by the separate locations
    of operations used during the Hart closing. The ramification of the
    changes to the Thrift Saving Plan's (TSP) open season to employees was
    emphasized this year. Results of the November elections prompted eleven
    new offices that needed training in both Senator-elect regulations and
    assistance in the transition into member status in 108th Congress.

                                PAYROLL SECTION

        The Payroll Section maintains the Human Resources Management System
    and is responsible for the following: processing, verifying, and
    warehousing all payroll information submitted to the Disbursing Office
    by Senators for their personal staff, by Chairmen for their committee
    staff, and by other elected officials for their staff; issuing salary
    payments to the above employees; maintaining the Automated Clearing
    House (ACH) FEDLINE facilities for the normal transmittal of payroll
    deposits to the Federal Reserve; distributing the appropriate payroll
    expenditure and allowance reports to the individual offices; issuing
    the proper withholding and agency contributions reports to the
    Accounting Department; and transmitting the proper (TSP) information to
    the National Finance Center (NFC), while maintaining earnings records
    for distribution to the Social Security Administration, and maintaining
    employees' taxable earnings records for W2 statements, prepared by this
    section. The Payroll Section is also responsible for the payroll
    expenditure data portion of the Report of the Secretary of the Senate.
        Calendar Year 2002 started with the usual processing of TSP forms,
    effective January 1, 2002. With the implementation of new TSP
    regulations, the May 15-July 31, 2002 Open Season reflected a 60
    percent increase in the number of TSP 1 forms submitted for processing.
        The events of September 11, 2001 lingered on as the Payroll Section
    reversed the Offsite operational process by moving all the paperwork
    processed at the alternative location back to the Hart building
    location. The work flow of completed transactions had to be sorted,
    while storage and filing requirements were reviewed for necessary
    changes. Systems like the ACH Fedline program had to be switched back
    to Hart Building IT equipment. Alternative methods of receiving
    correspondence from employees and other agencies had to be expanded in
    order to receive printed data in a timely manner.
        The onset of the Student Loan Program created new objectives for
    the Section. It was first believed that all of the Financial
    Institutions issuing student loans would be able to process the loan
    payment via the ACH Fedline System. To the contrary, we found out that
    only 20 percent of the loans could adequately be processed through the
    Federal Reserve, and most of those payments also required a separate
    listing to be faxed to the processing unit. The remaining 800+ payments
    must be processed by individual checks and composite listings.
        The NFC modified its regulations by allowing payroll deductions for
    employees who have just begun Federal Service. New categories of
    deductions were programed into the Payroll/Personnel System for the TSP
    deduction classes not receiving agency contributions. As each form is
    processed, the Payroll Specialist must further analyze the employee's
    service history and determine if the employee is eligible for agency
    contributions. The TSP also changed the open season periods by moving
    them up one month.
        Members of the Payroll Section worked with members of the Accounts
    Payable Section to establish in-house procedures for processing voucher
    payments directly to vendor and employee bank accounts. Procedures were
    set up for transmitting payments, processing rejections and returns and
    balancing accounts with the Accounting Section.
        The final project of the year was the processing of both incoming
    and outgoing offices under the jurisdiction of S. Res. 344 and 458.

                           EMPLOYEE BENEFITS SECTION

        The primary responsibilities of the Employee Benefits Section (EBS)
    are administration of health insurance, life insurance and all
    retirement programs for Members and employees of the Senate. This
    includes counseling, processing of paperwork, research, dissemination
    of information and interpretation of benefits laws and regulations. In
    addition, the sectional work includes research and verification of all
    prior federal service and prior Senate service for new and returning
    appointees. EBS provides this information for payroll input and once
    Official Personnel Folders and Transcripts of Service are received,
    verifies the accuracy of the information provided and reconciles as
    necessary. Transcripts of Service including all official retirement and
    benefits documentation are provided to other federal agencies when
    Senate Members and staffers are hired elsewhere in the government. EBS
    processes employment verifications for loans, the Bar Exam, the FBI,
    OPM, and the Department of Defense, among others. Unemployment claim
    forms are completed, and employees are counseled on their eligibility.
    Department of Labor billings for unemployment compensation paid to
    Senate employees are reviewed in EBS and submitted by voucher to the
    Accounting Section for payment. Designations of Beneficiary for FEGLI,
    CSRS, FERS, and unpaid compensation are filed and checked by EBS.
        The year began with EBS still located in our temporary quarters at
    Postal Square (PSQ) due to the continued closure of the Hart Building.
    Upon our return to the Hart Building in late January, our initial
    priorities were to locate and respond to anything that had remained
    undone in the Hart Building and to perform those functions that could
    not be completed from our displaced location. It was necessary to pack
    up and move all the files, reports and documents from our stay in PSQ
    and combine and coordinate them with our regular information in a
    seamless fashion.
        Based on the continued call to active duty of military reservists
    and the passage late in 2001 of a Leave Without Pay (LWOP) status for
    Senate employees, EBS worked to construct and develop LWOP procedures,
    informational sheets and notices, tracking devices and computer
    modifications to accommodate this new employment status. These
    procedures were monitored and modified as needed throughout the year.
        During 2002 the new Federal Long Term Care Insurance (LTCI) Program
    was introduced and implemented government wide. EBS worked diligently
    to become educated in all aspects of the program. This required
    constant interaction with LTC Partners and OPM to establish and
    implement procedures and coordination with the Senate Computer Center
    to apply modifications and establish parameters for the implementation
    of the program. Effective introduction of LTCI required extensive
    notification to employees, which included several mail-outs, electronic
    notifications and use of streaming video on Webster. In addition, we
    hosted two seminars on the LTCI program.
        Government-wide implementation of the Centralized Enrollment
    Clearinghouse System (CLER) program for health insurance enrollment
    reconciliation occurred in 2002. The program is still a work in process
    and has required diligent efforts at detecting and eliminating errors.
        In 2002, we began an upgrade to our file room. We had our outdated
    file cabinets replaced by a new automated rotary filing system. The
    installation required the removal and return of all employee personnel
    folders, as well as the retirement to our offsite filing facility, of a
    portion of the older files.
        Based on the lessons learned during our displacement about what
    could and could not be recovered and used offsite, we began to
    aggressively investigate the development and implementation of a
    document imaging system for use in electronically reproducing employee
    personnel folders. Development with the Senate Computer Center is well
    under way and the purchase of the hardware has been made with
    implementation of the process scheduled this year.
        While retirement case processing was about average for the year,
    retirement planning and counseling were very heavy in the second half
    of 2002 due to the impending retirement of 10 Senators and the death of
    Senator Wellstone, and the dissolution of their staffs and the
    potential changes to committee staffs. This resulted in the counseling
    of hundreds of employees including extensive research and calculation
    of Statements of Tentative Retirement Computations. Approximately 100
    retirement cases were processed (including 9 death cases).
        Seminars were held for outgoing Members' staffs, as well as
    committees facing potential reorganization. Information disseminated
    spanned retirement, TSP, health and life insurance, and unemployment
    compensation. Full support was also provided to Senator Wellstone's
    staff and his next of kin following his tragic death. Due to the large
    post-election turnover, EBS also hosted a seminar with the D.C. Office
    of Employment Services for outgoing staff who wished to apply for
    unemployment compensation. This opportunity for staff was well
    received.
        During the annual FEHB Open Season, approximately 700 employees
    changed plans. These changes were processed and reported in record
    time. Once again, we hosted a FEHB Open Season Health Fair, attended by
    about 650 employees. As an additional service, it was open to all other
    federal employees on the Hill, including House, Capitol Police,
    Architect of the Capitol and Senate Restaurant employees.
        There were two TSP Open Seasons in 2002 during which employees
    could change their rate of contribution. The number of changes was
    higher during the end of year Open Season, as the allowable rates of
    contribution increased. In addition, a change to the effective dates of
    the TSP Open Seasons was implemented.
        Much additional information and many downloadable forms were added
    to the Disbursing Office Webster site, as well as the use of newer
    video technologies and links.
        In addition, EBS has been developing many computer-based forms and
    calculators for use in providing benefits information and estimates.
        Two detailed Power Point retirement seminars on CSRS and FERS were
    developed and conducted for interested Senate staff. The seminars were
    well attended and well received. Additionally, EBS staff regularly
    provided a panel participant for the monthly New Staff Orientation
    seminars and quarterly Senate Services Fairs held by the Office of
    Education and Training.
        Interagency meetings were attended on the implementation of the
    Federal LTCI Program, CLER program, and continuing TSP program
    enhancements.
        There was a great deal of turnover and rehire in 2002, as employees
    left staff to work on campaigns and then returned to the Senate after
    the elections. This caused an increase in appointments to be researched
    and processed, retirement records to be closed-out, termination
    packages of benefits information to be compiled and mailed out, and
    health insurance registrations to be processed. Transcripts of service
    for employees going to other federal agencies, and other tasks
    associated with employees changing jobs remained constant this year.
    These required prior employment research and verification, new FEHB,
    FEGLI, CSRS, FERS and TSP enrollments, and the associated requests for
    backup verification.
        Mortgage rates kept employment verifications coming in at a rapid
    pace, averaging over 100 per month. Unemployment verifications remained
    constant throughout the year with a notable spike in December.
        Telephone inquiries, though not specifically tracked, continued at
    record levels.

                     DISBURSING OFFICE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

        Headed by the Deputy for Financial Management, the mission of the
    Disbursing Office Financial Management (DOFM) is to coordinate all
    central financial policies, procedures, and activities to produce an
    auditable consolidated financial statement for the Senate and to
    provide professional customer service, training and confidential
    financial guidance to all Senate accounting locations. In addition, the
    Financial Management group is responsible for the compilation of the
    annual operating budget of the United States Senate for presentation to
    the Committee on Appropriations as well as for the formulation,
    presentation and execution of the budget for the Senate. The DOFM is
    segmented into three functional departments: Accounting, Accounts
    Payable, and Budget. The Deputy coordinates the activities of the three
    functional departments, establishes central financial policies and
    procedures, acts as the primary liaison to the HR Administrator, and
    carries out the directives of the Financial Clerk of the Senate.

                             ACCOUNTING DEPARTMENT

        During fiscal year 2002, the Accounting Department approved nearly
    129,000 expense reimbursement vouchers, processed 1,055 deposits for
    items ranging from receipts received by the Senate operations, such as
    the Stationery Room and the Senate Gift Shop, to canceled subscription
    refunds from Member offices. General ledger maintenance also prompted
    the entry of thousands of adjustment entries that include the entry of
    all appropriation and allowance funding limitation transactions, all
    accounting cycle closing entries, and all non-voucher reimbursement
    transactions such as payroll adjustments, stop payment requests, travel
    advances and repayments, and limited payability reimbursements.
        In March of 2002, the Accounting Department completed the testing
    of the student loans payroll interface and the set-up in FAMIS needed
    for the tracking of the student loan balances. During January 2002, the
    Accounting Department with assistance from our contractor, Bearing
    Point, completed the 2001 year end process to close and reset revenue,
    expense and budgetary general ledger accounts to zero and during July
    2002, a rollover was performed to update in FAMIS' tables and create
    the index codes needed to accommodate data for fiscal year 2003. During
    the summer, the Deputy for Financial Management worked on the task
    force headed by the Senate Gift Shop Director and the Assistant
    Secretary of the Senate to procure and select a contractor to replace
    the Gift Shop point-of-sale retail, inventory and accounting control
    system. Solicitations and written proposals were reviewed and discussed
    and a contractor was selected by the end of October.
        The Accounting and Accounts Payable Department also assisted the IT
    Department in the testing and implementation of the new travel advance
    reporting. The new travel advance reporting became effective in
    September 2002, and with this new process, started accounting for
    travel advances as obligations.
        The Accounting Department was able to test and implement the first
    document purge process in Federal FAMIS. The testing was performed
    during December and the production purge was done successfully last
    month.

    Financial Reporting Requirements--External
        Monthly financial reporting requirements to the Department of the
    Treasury include a Statement of Accountability that details all
    increases and decreases to the accountability of the Secretary of the
    Senate, such as checks issued during the month and deposits received,
    as well as a detailed listing of cash on hand. Also reported to the
    Department of the Treasury is the Statement of Transactions According
    to Appropriations, Fund and Receipt Accounts that summarizes all
    activity at the appropriation level of every penny disbursed by the
    Secretary of the Senate through the Financial Clerk of the Senate. All
    activity by appropriation account is reconciled with the Department of
    the Treasury on a monthly and annual basis. The annual reconciliation
    of the Treasury Combined Statement is also used in the reporting to the
    Office of Management and Budget (OMB) as part of the submission of the
    annual operating budget of the Senate.
        Annually, the Accounting Department transmits all Federal tax
    payments for Federal, Social Security, and Medicare taxes withheld from
    payroll expenditures, as well as the Senate's matching contribution for
    Social Security and Medicare to the Federal Reserve Bank. The
    Department also performs quarterly reporting to the Internal Revenue
    Service (IRS) and annual reporting and reconciliation to the IRS and
    the Social Security Administration. Payments for employee withholdings
    for state income taxes are reported and paid on a quarterly basis to
    each state with applicable state income taxes withheld. Monthly
    reconciliations are performed with the National Finance Center
    regarding the employee withholdings and agency matching contributions
    for the TSP. Monthly, all employee withholdings and agency
    contributions for life and health insurance, and federal retirement
    programs are transmitted to the Office of Personnel Management. Any
    adjustment to employee contributions for any of the health, life, and
    retirement plans from previous accounting periods are also processed by
    the Accounting Department.
        On a semiannual basis, the Accounting Department prepares necessary
    reports and information to be included in the Report of the Secretary
    of the Senate. All organizations and appropriation accounts reported
    are validated 100 percent to the financial system. During 2002, no
    major changes were incorporated to the Secretary's Report. The
    Accounting Department is also working with our contractor, Bearing
    Point, on several new reports that are expected to be completed before
    the end of the fiscal year.

    Financial Reporting Requirements--Internal
        Monthly, the Accounting Department prepares and reviews ledger
    statements to all Member offices and all other offices with payroll and
    non-payroll expenditures. These ledger statements detail all of the
    financial activity for the appropriate accounting period with regard to
    official expenditures in detail and summary form. The reformatting of
    the monthly ledgers was completed during April 2002 to comply with the
    requirements of the Senate Offices.
        In addition, to better assist Senate offices and to facilitate the
    research of voucher payments within Disbursing Office, the Accounting
    Department reviewed and completed requirements to implement four new
    WEB inquiries. The new inquiries (payment number, document number,
    service date and vendor payment) were tested and moved to production in
    September 2002. The following month, the Disbursing Office financial
    management staff was trained on how to use the new inquiries.

    Pro-forma Financial Statements and Auditability Assessment
        During 2001, the Disbursing Office initiated a contract with the
    outside firm (KPMG Consulting) to develop the first U.S. Senate wide
    pro-forma consolidating financial statements. This initiative was based
    on the desire to adopt to the extent possible the financial reporting
    requirements of the Government Management Reform Act of 1996 (GMRA),
    the Chief Financial Officers (CFO) Act of 1990, and comply with the
    Statements of Federal Financial Accounting Standards (SFFAS)
    promulgated by the Federal Accounting Standard Advisory Board (FASAB).
    The main objective of this contract is to develop the first pro-forma
    financial statements of the United States Senate as required by OMB
    Bulletin No. 01-09, ``Form and Content of Agency Financial
    Statements.'' This project was kicked off in November 2001. The final
    report and all required deliverables of the Senate wide financial
    statements for fiscal year 2000 were completed in April 2002. Based on
    the results of this exercise, suggestions for corrective actions were
    given and the Disbursing Office is working in conjunction and with full
    cooperation from the SAA Finance Division to establish a corrective
    action plan and schedule, including a Senate-wide capitalization
    policy. Another corrective action was the need to have written
    accounting procedures for the Secretary's Revolving Funds. With the
    assistance of the Deputy for Financial Management, all the Secretary's
    revolving funds completed their written procedures by December 2002.

                                ACCOUNTS PAYABLE

    Audit Department
        One of the two sections under the Accounts Payable Department is
    the Audit Section. The Accounts Payable Audit Department is responsible
    for auditing vouchers and answering questions regarding voucher
    preparation and the permissibility of the expense, providing advice and
    recommendations on the discretionary use of funds by the various
    accounting locations, identifying duplicate payments vouchered by
    offices, monitoring payments related to contracts, training new Office
    Managers and Chief Clerks about Senate financial practices, training
    Office Managers in the use of the Senate's Financial Management
    Information System, and assisting in the production of the Report of
    the Secretary of the Senate. The Section also monitors the Fund Advance
    Tracking System (FATS) to ensure that advances are charged correctly,
    vouchers repaying such advances are entered, and balances adjusted for
    reuse of the advance funds. An ``aging'' process is also performed to
    ensure that advances are repaid in the time specified by the advance
    travel regulations.
        The Accounts Payable Audit Department, currently a group of eleven,
    has the responsibility for the daily processing of expense claims
    submitted by the 160 accounting locations of the Senate. During the
    first months of the year, the Accounts Payable Audit Department had
    some turnover and some new auditors were hired. The new audit staff has
    been fully trained and during fiscal year 2002, the Department has
    processed approximately 129,000 expense vouchers. The voucher
    processing ranges in scope from providing interpretation of Senate
    rules, regulations and statute, applying the same to expense claims,
    monitoring of contracts and direct involvement with the Senate's
    central vendor file. After relocating back to the Senate Hart Building
    and once again being fully staffed, the Department was able to audit
    vouchers within two days of receipt. On average, and as long as the
    voucher did not have any issues or questions, vouchers were received,
    audited, sanctioned by Rules and paid within the required directive of
    10 business days.
        During December 2002, the Chairman of the Committee on Rules and
    Administration delegated the sanctioning authority of vouchers $35.00
    or less to the Financial Clerk of the Senate. These vouchers are
    sanctioned by the Certifying Accounts Payable Specialists and are
    received, audited, and paid within 5 business days of receipt.
        The Accounts Payable Audit Department provided training sessions in
    the use of new systems, the process for generation of expense claims,
    the permissibility of an expense, and participated with seminars
    sponsored by Secretary of the Senate, Sergeant at Arms, and the Library
    of Congress. The Section was trained 12 new Office Managers and Chief
    Clerks and conducted 4 informational sessions for Senate staff through
    seminars sponsored by the Congressional Research Service (CRS).
        The Accounts Payable Department also assisted the IT Department in
    the testing and implementation of the new travel advance reporting. The
    new travel advance reporting became effective in September 2002 and
    with this new process, travel advances are accounted for as
    obligations. The Accounts Payable Audit Department has been fully
    trained in the new travel advance system and in the use of the four new
    WEB inquiries. Disbursing staff participated in the SAVI (Senate
    Automated Vendor Information) system training to assist Senate staff
    with any questions related to their reimbursements paid either by ACH
    (Automated Clearing House) or by check.

    Disbursements Department
        The second department under the Accounts Payable Department is the
    Disbursements Department. The Accounts Payable Disbursements Department
    consists of four individuals whose primary responsibility is the
    receipt of more than 129,000 individual expense vouchers and the
    writing and delivery of the resulting 53,000 checks in payment thereof.
        During the month of April, the Disbursing Office started making
    payments to Senate staff via ACH (Automated Clearing House). From April
    through December, the Department issued approximately 9,500 wire
    transfers for expense reimbursements. The Department also took over and
    currently maintains the Senate's central vendor file that includes the
    addition of approximately 2,000 to 3,000 new vendors per year to an
    existing vendor file of more than 30,000.
        The Disbursement Department is responsible for researching returned
    checks as vendors request additional information relating to payment
    allocation. The department also prepares the forms required by the
    Department of Treasury for stop payments. These stop payments result
    from employees not receiving salary or expense reimbursements, and
    vendors claiming non-receipt of expense checks.
        This year, the group processed approximately 330 stop pays. During
    the summer, a stop pay tracking table was created in Excel to better
    track their status. The process of reissuing checks and/or subsequent
    collection of erroneously issued checks also falls within the scope of
    this department. On a semiannual basis, the staff here is also
    responsible for filing, rotating and archiving all expense vouchers
    processed and paid by the Disbursing Office.
        Monthly, the Accounts Payable Disbursement Department assists the
    Accounting Department in the preparation and distribution of the
    monthly ledger statements for delivery to the 160 accounting locations
    throughout the Senate. This includes the maintenance of a central file
    of office contacts and the maintenance of a list of special
    instructions for handling the distribution of the statements. The
    ledger statements are produced, sorted, and ultimately delivered or
    picked up according to the list of special instructions.
        The Disbursements Department has been tasked to prepare the
    quarterly State tax returns. The amounts are provided in spreadsheet
    form and payment coupons are prepared for the 43 State jurisdictions.
    The payment coupons are obtained from each jurisdiction either in
    hardcopy format or on-line via the Internet. Vouchers are prepared from
    the payment coupons and checks are generated from the vouchers. Once
    the checks are written, letters of transmittal are prepared and mailed
    to the appropriate State jurisdictions and the District of Columbia.
        The Accounts Payable Disbursements Department also assisted the IT
    Department in the testing and implementation of the new travel advance
    reporting which became effective in September 2002. This Department
    also has been fully trained in the new travel advance system and in the
    use of the four new WEB inquiries. They also participated in the SAVI
    (Senate Automated Vendor Information) system training to assist Senate
    staff with any questions related to their reimbursements paid either by
    ACH (Automated Clearing House) or by check.
        Currently, the Accounts Payable Disbursements Supervisor is in the
    process of training one newly hired staff person and implementing the
    Department of Treasury--Financial Management Service (FMS) on-line stop
    pay process called PACER. This PACER system provides on-line access to
    digital images of negotiated checks for viewing and printing.

                               BUDGET DEPARTMENT

        The third component of the Disbursing Office financial management
    group is the Budget Department. The primary responsibility of the
    Budget Department is to compile the annual operating budget of the
    United States Senate for presentation to the Committee on
    Appropriations. The Budget Department is responsible for the
    preparation, issuance and distribution of the budget justification
    worksheets (BJW). This year the budget justification worksheets were
    mailed to the Senate accounting locations during January and responses
    were received in the first week of February. This department is also
    responsible for the formulation, presentation and execution of the
    budget for the Senate and provides a wide range of analytical,
    technical and advisory functions related to the budget process. The
    Budget Department acts as budget officer for the Office of the
    Secretary, assisting in the preparation of testimony for the hearings
    before the Committee on Appropriations and the Committee on Rules and
    Administration. The group is also responsible for reporting to the
    Office of Management and Budget, via the MAX database, the budget
    baseline estimates that were developed for fiscal year 2004.

                    DISBURSING OFFICE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
                    FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM

        The Disbursing Office Information Technology (IT) Department,
    currently operating with a staff of four, provides both functional and
    technical assistance for all Senate Financial Management activities.
    Activities revolve around support of the Senate's Financial Management
    Information System (FMIS) which is used by approximately 140 Senate
    accounting locations (i.e., 100 Senator's offices, 20 Committees, 20
    Leadership & Support offices, and the Disbursing Office).
    Responsibilities include:
      --Supporting current systems;
      --Testing infrastructure changes;
      --Managing and testing new system development;
      --Planning;
      --Administering the Disbursing Office's Local Area Network (LAN); and
      --Coordinating the Disbursing Office's Disaster Recovery activities
            and Continuation of Operations Plan (COOP).
        The activities associated with each of these responsibilities are
    described in more detail in the sections that follow. Work during 2002,
    was supported by the Sergeant at Arms (SAA) Technology Services staff,
    the Secretary's Information Technology staff, and contracts with
    Bearing Point (formerly known as KPMG).
        The SAA Technology Services staff is responsible for providing the
    technical infrastructure, including hardware (mainframe and servers),
    operating system software (mainframe and servers), database software,
    and telecommunications; technical assistance for these components,
    including migration management, and database administration; and
    regular batch processing. Bearing Point is responsible, under the
    contract with the SAA, for operational support, and under contract with
    the Secretary, for application development. The DO is the ``business
    owner'' of FMIS and is responsible for making the functional decisions
    about FMIS. The three organizations work cooperatively.
        Highlights of the year include:
      --Implementation of three Web FMIS releases, one of these made Travel
            and Petty Cash advances obligations of the office which
            required substantial revisions to the accounting for advances
            (March, July and September 2002);
      --Articulation of a five year Disbursing Office Strategic Initiatives
            plan, which formed the base for Secretary of the Senate's
            request for $5 million in multi-year funds for further work on
            the FMIS project (April 2002);
      --Pilot and Senate-wide implementation of the Senate Automated Vendor
            Inquiry system (SAVI), a Web site on which all Senate staff can
            lookup the status of reimbursements (Pilot--Spring 2002;
            Senate-wide availability--July 2002);
      --Pilot of Web-ESR, a sub-system of SAVI that enables Senate staff to
            create a travel expense summary form on-line and submit it
            electronically to their office manager (Fall 2002);
      --Implementation of a revised Office Information Authorization form
            and scanning of this form. The new form combines three old
            forms, which significantly simplifies the paperwork required by
            the DO. Scanning the forms make them immediately available to
            all DO staff which has improved our efficiency (October 2002);
      --Implementation of a new document approval process for vouchers of
            $35 or less. Under this, vouchers of $35 or less do not go to
            the Committee on Rules and Administration for sanctioning, but
            instead are routed to certifying Accounts Payable specialist
            for review and posting to FAMIS. This has reduced the amount of
            time required to pay a voucher (December 2002); and
      --Implementation of Outlook as the DO's e-mail system (December
            2002).
        In the past four years many subsystems providing additional
    functionality have been added. These subsystems are outlined in the
    table on the following page.

                                                         SENATE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subsystem                         Functionality                           Source                       Primary Users           Implementation
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    FAMIS (Mainframe)...........  Financial general ledger................  Off the shelf federal system    Disbursing Office.............  October 1999
                                  Vendor file                                purchased from Bearing Point.
                                  Administrative functions
                                  Security functions
    ADPICS (Mainframe)..........  Preparation of requisition, purchase      Off the shelf federal system    Sergeant at Arms..............  October 1999
                                   order, voucher from purchase order, and   purchased from Bearing Point.  Disbursing Office
                                   direct voucher documents.                                                Secretary of the Senate
                                  Electronic document review functions
                                  Administrative functions
    Checkwriter (Client-server).  Prints checks and check registers.......  Off the shelf state government  Disbursing Office.............  October 1999
                                                                             system purchased from and
                                                                             adapted to Senate's
                                                                             requirements by Bearing Point.
    Web FMIS (Client-server and   Preparation of vouchers, travel           Custom software developed       All Senators offices..........  October 2000
     intranet).                    advances, vouchers from advance           under Senate contract by       All Committee offices
                                   documents, credit documents and simple    Bearing Point.                 All Leadership & Support
                                   commitment and obligation documents.                                      offices
                                  Entry of detailed budget                                                  Secretary of the Senate
                                  Reporting functions (described below)                                     Sergeant at Arms Disbursing
                                  Electronic document submission and                                         Office
                                   review functions
                                  Administrative functions
    FATS (PC-based).............  Tracks travel advances and petty cash     Developed by SAA Technology     Disbursing Office.............  Spring 1983
                                   advances (available to Committees only).  Services.
                                  Tracks election cycle information
    SAVI (Intranet).............  As currently implemented, provides self-  Off the shelf system purchased  Senate employees..............  Pilot--Spring
                                   service access (via the Senate's          from Bearing Point.                                             2002
                                   intranet) to payment information for                                                                     Senate-wide--
                                   employees receiving reimbursements via                                                                    July 2002
                                   direct deposit.
                                  Administrative functions
    Web ESR (Intranet)..........  A component of SAVI through which Senate  Custom software developed       Senate employees..............  April 2003
                                   employees can create on-line Travel       under contract by Bearing
                                   Expense Summary Reports and submit them   Point.
                                   electronically to their Office Manager/
                                   Chief Clerk for processing.
    Secretary's Report            Produces the Report of the Secretary of   Custom software developed       Disbursing Office.............  Spring 2000
     (Mainframe extracts,          the Senate.                               under contract by Bearing
     crystal reports, and client-                                            Point.
     server ``tool box'').
    Ledger Statements (Mainframe  Produces monthly reports from FAMIS that  Developed by SAA Technology     Disbursing Office Senate        Winter 2000
     database extracts, and        are sent to all Senate ``accounting       Services.                       Accounting Locations.
     crystal reports).             locations''.
    Web FMIS Reports (mainframe   Produces a large number of reports from   Custom software developed       Senate Accounting Locations...  October 2000
     database extracts, crystal    Web FMIS, FAMIS and ADPICS data at        under contract by Bearing
     reports, client server, and   summary and detailed levels. Data is      Point.
     Intranet).                    updated as an overnight process and can
                                   be updated through an on-line process
                                   by accounting locations.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Supporting Current Systems
        The IT section supports FMIS users in all 140 accounting locations,
    and the Disbursing Office Accounts Payable, Accounting, Disbursements
    and Front Office Sections. The activities associated with this
    responsibility include:
      --User support--provide functional and technical support to all
            Senate FMIS users; staffs the FMIS ``help desk''; answer
            hundreds of phone calls a year; and meet with Office Managers
            and Chief Clerks as requested;
      --Technical problem resolution--ensure that technical problems are
            resolved;
      --Monitor system performance--check system availability and
            statistics to identify system problems and coordinate
            performance tuning activities for parallel load and database
            access optimization;
      --Training--provide functional training to all Senate FMIS users.
            During 2002, the IT Department conducted 37 classes, seminars,
            and demonstrations on Web FMIS. The class schedule is issued
            quarterly and the classes offered were:
          Introduction to Web FMIS--conducted eight times. This hands-on
            class covers the basics of preparing, printing, and submitting
            vouchers and travel vouchers, and managing your inbox. Also
            covered are adding items to an office's lookup tables (e.g.,
            vendor and expense category), using search to find records, and
            what information goes in the Unique Invoice Number and Account
            Number fields.
          Web FMIS Budget & Reports Seminar--conducted eight times. This
            demo-style seminar covers how to enter and change an office's
            budget, and how different budgets show on an office's Summary
            of Financial Status Report. Several budgets, from simple to
            complex are discussed, based on the interests of the attendees.
            Also discussed are the on-line reporting functions including
            refreshing report data and exporting report data into another
            application (e.g., Excel). In addition, we look in detail at
            the Analysis by Vendor, Analysis by Expense Category, and
            Analysis by Office Control Number Reports, at the Changed
            Document Report, and other reports based on the interests of
            the attendees.
          Web FMIS Reconciliation Class--conducted five times. This hands-
            on class covers how to reconcile an office's Web FMIS balance
            with the DO's balance on a monthly basis.
          Web FMIS Special Topics--conducted three times. Occasionally a
            ``special topics'' seminar covering different subjects is held.
            Twice, in May and November, the seminar topic was how to use
            commitments and obligations. This seminar is offered at the
            points in the year when offices are most likely trying to
            estimate expenses through the end of the fiscal year.
          User Demos--In advance of each Web FMIS release, we demonstrate
            at a Joint Office Manager Chief Clerks meeting, the new
            functionality included in the release. In addition, we repeat
            this demo for those unable to attend the meeting and conduct a
            ``hands-on'' class covering the same material for those who
            prefer to ``do it'' rather than ``see it''. For Web FMIS
            release 5, we presented this material four times; for release 6
            we presented this material three times; and for release 7 only
            a demo was offered. The release 7 demo also included a demo of
            SAVI functionality.
          DO Staff Training--During 2002 the DO staff received the same
            training as Office Managers and Chief Clerks. For the DO staff,
            the DO IT section conducted a Web FMIS release 5 class twice;
            the Budgets & Reports seminar twice; and the Reconciliation
            class once.
      --Security--30 ADPICS, FAMIS and 80 Web FMIS users and other users as
            requested by Senators and Chairmen, added, deleted, and changed
            user rights for, as well as, maintaining the document approval
            paths and creating new approved paths for vouchers less than
            $35. One of the most important functions the DO IT staff
            perform is maintaining user rights for all ADPICS, FAMIS, and
            Web FMIS users.
      --System Administration--design, test and make entries to tables that
            are intrinsic to the system (i.e., preparation for change in
            fiscal year, change in Senate organization tables or new
            office, new accounting transaction codes, new approval path for
            vouchers of $35 or less, 108th Congress); and
      --Support of Accounting Activities--provide assistance in the cyclic
            accounting system activities. During 2002, the following
            activities were performed--Upload of files into FAMIS, Year End
            rollover, SAVI Information Letter, and Ad hoc queries.
                Infrastructure changes
        The SAA provides the infrastructure on which FMIS operates,
    including the mainframe, the database, security hardware and software,
    the telecommunications network, and a hardware and software
    installation crew and help-desk provider. During 2002, the following
    components of this infrastructure were changed:
      --Mainframe hardware and software--upgrade of the mainframe security
            software (ACF/2), database (DB/2v7), and operating system
            (OS390/2.10 [including CICS and CA/7 upgrades], OS Upgrade for
            mainframe upgrade, and Mainframe Upgrade) required that the
            Disbursing Office extensively test all FMIS subsystems both in
            a testing environment and in the production environment which
            in turn enabled installation of a new mainframe in December
            2002;
      --Printing online via ``Reveal''--installation of the ``Reveal''
            software enables the DO staff to examine mainframe reports
            online and eliminated daily printing of large reports; and
      --Senate ``Helpdesk'' support vendor--the SAA contracted with a new
            company, Signal/Veridian, to provide hardware and software
            installation services for offices and to provide a
            ``helpdesk''. Met with representatives of the company to
            demonstrate the Web FMIS application and answer questions about
            system implementation.

    Managing and testing new system development
        During 2002, we supervised development, performed extensive
    integration system testing and implemented changes to the following
    FMIS subsystems: Web FMIS; Senate Vendor Information (SAVI); Web ESR;
    and Checkwriter.
        Web FMIS.--Three major releases of Web FMIS were done in 2002, and
    one mini release was completed in 2002 but not implemented until the
    beginning of January 2003, detailed requirements for a fourth were
    completed, and general requirements for a fifth were begun. These are:
      --Web FMIS r5--Implemented in March 2002.--This release included a
            number of ease-of-use features in the document entry function
            (e.g., automatic population of end date from start date) and in
            the inbox functions, the ability to refresh report data on user
            demand (i.e., instead of having to wait for the nightly batch
            report cycle to run), the ability to unsubmit a document, and
            the ability to void a document;
      --Web FMIS r6--Implemented in July 2002.--This release included nine
            new or revised reports, the most important of which are two
            cross-FY summary reports that enable easy comparison of data
            from up to four funding periods; a FY-independent research
            function; and improvements in the status and history
            information shown on each document;
      --Web FMIS r7a--Implemented in September 2002.--This release included
            six new or revised reports, the most important of which is the
            Summary of Financial Status by Month; submitting travel advance
            requests and treating advances as obligations of the office,
            which required substantial changes to the accounting underlying
            the travel advance and voucher from advance transactions;
            introduction of a credit document to accompany repayments;
            addition of equipment certification language which eliminates
            stamping the invoice that the equipment is Senate-owned or
            leased; and addition of disbursement type information (i.e.,
            check or direct deposit) in the payment information field on
            each document and in the vendor file;
      --Web FMIS r7a for Windows XP--Implemented in January 2003.--This was
            a technical release that made changes necessary for Web FMIS to
            run on Windows XP PCs, which is the operating system that new
            Senators' offices received. No new functionality was involved
            in this release, but Bearing Point made technical changes to
            the software which we tested;
      --Web FMIS r7b--Implemented April 2003.--This release enables the
            Rules Committee to review documents and perform sanctioning on-
            line. During 2002, we met with Rules Committee Audit staff and
            Bearing Point to complete requirements and detail design
            discussions for this new functionality. Bearing Point completed
            the programming for this functionality as well. Implementation
            of this release was originally scheduled for December 2002, but
            was postponed to April 2003, due to installation of a new
            mainframe computer in November 2002, during the time that this
            release was scheduled for testing. Due to the timing of this
            release, it will also include technical changes to the
            underlying mainframe software, WebSphere, from ``compliance
            mode'' to ``compatibility mode,'' which is required before the
            software can be upgraded to WebSphere release 4, currently
            scheduled for June 2003, and will apply the changes required
            for the Windows XP PC operating system to all supported PC
            operating systems;
      --Web FMIS r8--Release not currently scheduled.--During 2002, we
            began requirements discussions on changing the underlying
            security paradigm of Web FMIS. This would allow us to more
            exactly control the user rights to different kinds of Web FMIS
            users. Implementation was originally scheduled for April 2003,
            but has been postponed due to the revised release 7b
            implementation date;
      --Senate Automated Vendor Inquiry (SAVI).--One of the Senate's goals
            in implementing FMIS was reimbursing employee expenses and
            paying vendors via direct deposit. We have been prepared to pay
            via direct deposit for some time, however the benefit of doing
            so was limited if a notice acknowledging payment still had to
            be sent to the employee. In other words, if we have to send a
            check stub-like notice via mail, why not just send the check
            with check stub via mail? With the Spring 2002 pilot and then
            the Senate-wide implementation of SAVI in July 2002, the Senate
            resolved this issue and took a major step towards meeting the
            direct deposit payment goal. SAVI, an intra-net enabled system,
            allows Senate employees to inquire on the status of payments,
            and provides the deposit information that would be on a check
            stub.
          Since this system is inside the Senate's firewall, it is
            available only to Senate staff. As of July 2, 2002, all Senate
            employees who receive their paycheck via direct deposit were
            given an option to receive any expense reimbursements via
            direct deposit. Implementing direct deposit reimbursements
            required coordination with the Federal Reserve and the Senate
            Credit Union. All Senate staff were notified of this change in
            a Senate-wide mailing, and new staff are notified in a new
            employee mailing. Provisions were made for Senate staff who
            preferred to continue to receive check reimbursements and for
            staff who wanted reimbursements to be deposited to an account
            different from the account for their paychecks. Thus, staff
            ``opt-out'' if they don't want to receive reimbursements via
            direct deposit. On the other hand, Senators have to ``opt-in''
            if they want to receive reimbursements via direct deposit.
          Two releases of SAVI were implemented in 2002. The first was used
            by the pilot and for the July Senate-wide implementation. Based
            on comments from the pilot, we also defined requirements for a
            second release of SAVI that substantially improved the display
            of payment information and provided more useful search
            criteria. This was released in September 2002;
      --Web ESR.--This system, a subsystem of SAVI, enables Senate staff to
            complete an on-line Travel Expense Summary Report (ESR) and
            submit it so that their office manager can ``import'' the data
            and create a voucher, without retyping the ESR data. As of the
            end of December 2002, it was in use by employees in 10 pilot
            offices and was to be implemented in new Senators offices and
            in offices with new office managers. Currently, this
            application is Intra-net based, but its first implementation,
            to a pilot group in the Spring of 2002, was as a client-server
            application. The original application was well received, but
            the pilot users requested enhancements that were difficult to
            provide in a client-server application. We decided to re-write
            the application and tie it to SAVI so that Senate staff could
            use one system to create ESRs and to check the status of
            reimbursements. In the Fall of 2002, the pilot offices gave us
            additional feedback on Web ESR, and during 2002 we began
            defining requirements for the next release of Web ESR.
            Implemented with Web FMIS r7b in April 2003; and
      --Checkwriter.--During 2002, we defined requirements for, tested and
            implemented several new versions of the checkwriter software,
            which enables printing U.S. Treasury Checks, and compiling the
            direct deposit file transmitted to the Federal Reserve. We also
            defined requirements for additional checkwriter releases that
            will be implemented in 2003. In addition, we began
            investigating alternatives for the checkwriter printer to find
            one that provides more flexibility in the event of a disaster.

    Planning
        There are two main planning activities: schedule coordination--
    planning and coordinating a rolling 12 month schedule; and strategic
    planning--setting the priorities for further system enhancements.
        Schedule Coordination.--While we were evacuated from the Hart
    Building due to anthrax contamination, the DO staff worked at Postal
    Square in the same space as the SAA and Bearing Point staff. This
    enabled ad-hoc meetings and easy communication. When the DO staff
    returned to the Hart Building in January 2002, we wanted to continue
    the effectiveness of our co-location. Meetings with the DO, SAA and
    Bearing Point staff have evolved into three types of meetings:
      --Project specific meetings--a useful set of project specific working
            meetings, each of which has a weekly set meeting time and meets
            for the duration of the project (e.g., Document Purge meetings
            and Web FMIS requirements meetings);
      --Technical meeting--a weekly meeting among the DO staff (IT and
            functional), SAA Technical Services staff, and Bearing Point to
            discuss co-ordination among the active projects, including
            scheduling activities and resolving issues; and
      --``Project Office''--a monthly meeting among senior Senate staff
            (e.g.,the Financial Clerk, Rules Committee staff), the Bearing
            Point engagement partner, SAA technical and functional staff,
            DO IT and functional staff, and Bearing Point staff to discuss
            progress on each project.
        Strategic Planning.--The FMIS strategic plan has a longer time
    horizon than the rolling 12-month time frame of the technical meeting
    schedule. It is designed to set the direction and priorities for
    further enhancements. In 2002, a five year strategic plan was written
    by the IT and Accounting staff for Disbursing Office Strategic
    Initiatives. This detailed description of five strategic initiatives
    formed the base for Secretary of the Senate Jeri Thomson's request for
    $5 million in multi-year funds for further work on the FMIS project.
    The five strategic initiatives are:
      --Paperless Vouchers--Imaging of Supporting Documentation and
            Electronic Signatures.--Beginning with a feasibility study and
            a pilot, implement new technology, including imaging and
            electronic signatures, that will reduce the Senate's dependence
            on paper vouchers. This will enable continuation of voucher
            processing operations from any location, should an emergency
            again occur;
      --Web FMIS--Requests from Accounting Locations.--Respond to requests
            from the Senate's Accounting Locations for additional
            functionality in Web FMIS;
      --Payroll System--Requests from Accounting Locations.--Respond to
            requests from the Senate's Accounting Locations for on-line
            real time access to payroll data;
      --Accounting Sub-system Integration.--Integrate Senate-specific
            accounting systems, improve internal controls, and eliminate
            errors caused by re-keying of data; and
      --CFO Financial Statement Development.--Provide the Senate with the
            capacity to produce auditable financial statements that will
            obtain an unqualified opinion.

    Administering the Disbursing Office's Local Area Network (LAN)
        The DO administers its own Local Area Network (LAN), which is
    separate from the LAN for the rest of the Secretary's Office. We
    facilitated two major upgrades to our LAN during 2002, installation of
    new PCs and migration of our e-mail to Outlook, completed several
    projects for the Payroll and Employee Benefits sections, and installed
    new software for the DO staff working on the Report of the Secretary of
    the Senate.
      --New PCs and Laptops.--In August 2002, the 50 DO staff received new
            PCs with the Windows 2000 professional operating system. In
            order for all PCs to be identical, it is our practice to create
            a DO-specific PC template, which is used when the new PCs are
            set up by the vendor. This enables testing of all applications
            that the DO uses, including mainframe applications that are
            used solely by the DO. Thus conflicts between the new operating
            system and the applications we use can be identified and
            resolved prior to installation of 50 PCs. The creation and
            testing of the DO Windows 2000 professional workstations was
            completed before the August 2002 installation date. Following
            this, we co-ordinated the purchase, installation and testing
            for replacement of the DO's ten laptops with laptops using the
            Windows 2000 professional operating system;
      --Outlook.--In December 2002, we migrated our e-mail system from
            cc:Mail to Outlook. This upgrade required installation of a new
            server, training for all the DO staff, and extensive work to
            recreate office mailing lists;
      --Projects for Payroll and Employee Benefits Sections.--We supported
            activities of the Payroll and Employee Benefits sections with
            four specific projects:
        --Coordinated the development of a Payroll Imaging system to
                electronically capture payroll documents turned in at the
                DO front counter, including ordering all required system
                components. This system is still being implemented;
        --Installed the required software and worked with the SAA to
                establish proper communication protocols to provide the
                Employee Benefits section the ability to transmit employee
                health plan information electronically to the National
                Finance Center in order to participate in a new program
                called Centralized Enrollment Clearinghouse System (CLER);
        --Posted Overtime Schedules for different work weeks along with a
                generic time sheet on the DO website. This eliminated
                maintaining hard copies of the various work weeks at our
                front counter;
        --In October 2002, we implemented a revised permissions form, the
                Office Information Authorization form, which combined three
                old forms. This significantly simplified the paperwork that
                offices are required to submit in order to add, delete or
                change user rights for Web FMIS users. Additionally, these
                forms are now scanned and therefore available to all DO
                staff the same day that the document is received. This has
                eliminated the need for a database of users and improved
                efficiency; and
        --Migrated the DO Fedline system from a DOT matrix printer to a
                laser printer.
      --Software for the Report of the Secretary of the Senate.--Several DO
            staff review and edit data for the Report of the Secretary of
            the Senate. This requires special software and dictionaries. We
            performed the following on this software: Coordinated the
            update and installation of the ``Toolbox'' software (provided
            by Bearing Point) on the new PCs; reviewed existing spell check
            dictionaries, and worked with Bearing Point to make the
            required updates; and established procedures to ensure that
            dictionaries are maintained after each reporting cycle.

    Coordinating the Disbursing Office's Disaster Recovery Activities
        The DO's disaster recovery activities include two related
    activities:
      --Disaster Recovery Testing--participating in the computer system
            disaster recovery tests conducted by the SAA; and
      --Coordinating the Continuation of Operations Plan (COOP)--the COOP
            is the broader focused activity and addresses all aspects of DO
            operations, not just computer operations.
        Disaster Recovery Testing.--Since 1995, the SAA has contracted with
    an offsite contractor for backup services in case of a disaster
    affecting the Senate's main data center. The Senate's Payroll system
    and FMIS are included in this recovery process. Since the contract's
    inception, the Senate has tested its ability to restore systems and
    perform normal activities at least once, and often twice a year.
    Disbursing Office staff and SAA Procurement staff are active
    participants in the planning and execution of these tests. For 2002 two
    tests were planned: one in late February and one in the late fall. Only
    one test, the February test, was actually held. In this test, the
    mainframe subsystems of FMIS (i.e., ADPICS and FAMIS) were tested
    successfully, but two critical subsystems, checkwriter and Web FMIS,
    were not tested successfully. The checkwriter testing failed for the
    second disaster recovery test in a row, and Web FMIS was not tested at
    all. Both were scheduled to be included in the fall 2002 test, but that
    test was cancelled because the contractor's computer was not running
    the same version of the mainframe operating system, OS390 v2.10, which
    the Senate implemented in August 2002. The tests were subsequently
    rescheduled for February of 2003 and subsequently conducted with
    favorable results.
        Disaster Recovery Background.--Every night, data and software from
    the Senate's mainframe computer systems are backed up to a magnetic
    cartridge and taken to First Federal Corporation, which provides a
    secure off-site facility. In the event of a disaster in the SAA
    computing facilities at Postal Square, SAA technical staff would
    immediately arrange to have the data, software, and appropriate
    operating instructions forwarded from the off-site facility to one of
    the contractor's data centers. Senate staff would travel to this
    facility to oversee the restoration of all software and data on the
    contractor's computer. By contract, restoration would be complete
    within 24 hours and systems would then be available to users. Sungard's
    facilities can currently support up to 48 concurrent Senate users.
        Disaster Recovery of the Payroll System.--Several key components
    are necessary for access to the payroll system after the restoration of
    data at the contractor's facility is complete. At least one terminal
    identification (term-ID) must be coded in the payroll system to allow
    CICS access because the payroll application has an internal security
    module that ties a user to a specific term-ID that controls user
    access. Another key component is FTP software that allows the movement
    of files from point to point.
        Most payroll payments are made via Direct Deposit to the Federal
    Reserve Bank using the Automated Clearing House (ACH). After the
    payroll system is closed-out for the payroll period, the SAA
    programmers provide an ACH data set which is transmitted to the Federal
    Reserve Bank in Atlanta, Georgia, via a specially configured PC
    containing an encryption board and a specialized modem. During our
    evacuation from the Hart Building, the DO did not have access to the
    Fedline PC. The DO entered into an open-ended agreement with the Senate
    Federal Credit Union that allows the DO to transmit from their facility
    in Alexandria, VA. The Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta must be notified
    prior to any transmission changes, but this agreement gives us the
    flexibility to transmit from an alternate access point in the event we
    encounter transmission problems in the future.
        Disaster Recovery for FMIS.--The DO has participated in disaster
    recovery testing of mainframe FMIS facilities since the system was
    implemented in October 1998. For the February 2002 test, DO and SAA
    Procurement staff tested the various modules of the mainframe
    application to ensure they were functioning correctly at the back-up
    site. Using workstations connected to the Senate's fiber network as
    well as laptop computers dialing into the offsite location, users have
    tested various types of document preparation and posting to FAMIS. In
    addition, batch report testing, and system inquiries into both the
    procurement and financial modules were tested. Finally, various batch
    processing tasks were tested to ensure that they perform as expected.
    In the February 2002 testing, these tests were completed
    satisfactorily.
        Three components of FMIS, checkwriter, Web FMIS, and printing of
    ADPICS purchase orders and vouchers, have not been tested
    satisfactorily. Testing of the ``checkwriter'' process, which generates
    checks in payment to vendors, failed in the February 2002 test because
    communications between the check writing facilities in the Hart
    Building and the contractor's data center could not be completed in the
    testing time frame allowed under the Senate's contract. This was a
    repeat of the problem experienced in the spring 2001, despite a longer
    testing time frame for the February 2002 test.
        No disaster recovery testing of Web FMIS was accomplished during
    2002. Such testing required installation of additional hardware and
    software at the contractor's facility. Testing of Web FMIS was
    scheduled for the fall 2002 recovery testing, but did not happen due to
    the cancellation of the fall 2002 disaster recovery test described
    above.
        Printing of ADPICS purchase orders and vouchers is not possible
    with the current disaster recovery communications infrastructure of
    ``dial-up'' lines. Workaround facilities or a revised infrastructure
    have not been finalized for this functionality. As a result, entities
    that prepare ADPICS purchase orders and vouchers, primarily the
    Secretary of the Senate and the SAA, would not be able to print these
    documents in the event of a disaster. The proposed Alternate Computer
    Facility would have more advanced infrastructure and thus such
    documents would be able to be printed.
        Coordinating COOP.--During the summer of 2001, the DO staff wrote a
    Continuation of Operations Plan (COOP). This document addresses issues
    beyond the scope of disaster recovery. The plan was activated on
    October 21, 2001, when the DO staff were evacuated from the Hart
    Building due to anthrax contamination, and deactivated in January 21,
    2002, when we returned. Prior to our reoccupation of our Hart office
    space, we tested all DO office systems to ensure that they were
    operational and facilitated a review of our office space by a disaster
    restoration specialist from an outside contractor. Additionally, we
    participated in the planning and execution of the June 22, 2002 COOP
    exercise.

                             ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES

                        1. CONSERVATION AND PRESERVATION

        The Office of Conservation and Preservation develops and
    coordinates programs directly related to the conservation and
    preservation of Senate records and materials for which the Secretary of
    the Senate has statutory authority. Initiatives include:
    deacidification of paper and prints, phased conservation for books and
    documents, collection surveys, exhibits, and matting and framing for
    the Senate Leadership.
        As part of several Senate traditions, for more than 22 years, this
    office has bound a copy of Washington's Farewell Address for the annual
    Washington's Farewell Address ceremony. In 2002, a volume was bound and
    read by Senator Jon S. Corzine, and this year, Senator Saxby Chambliss
    read the Address and received a copy of the bound edition.
        In addition, the office continued its work for the Leader's Lecture
    Series with the fabrication of two speech holder boxes and leather
    notebooks. The office also fabricated for the Office of
    Interparliamentary Services, seven marbled paper slipcases for the
    book, The United States Capitol: Photographs by Fred J. Maroon.
        At the direction of the Secretary of the Senate, and the Senate
    Gift Shop, marbled paper liners were fabricated for twelve mahogany
    boxes to house a ceremonial gavel presented at the Commemorative Joint
    Meeting of the Congress of the United States in New York City. A Bible
    was gold embossed for the occasion on September 6, 2002.
        The Office of Conservation and Preservation also completed the
    following: gold-embossed 148 mats for the Senators' group picture of
    the 107th Congress, embossed 140 books for the Senate Leadership, and
    matted and framed 406 items for the Senate Leadership.
        As mandated in the 1990 Senate Library Collection Condition Survey,
    the office continued to conduct an annual treatment of books identified
    by the survey as needing conservation or repair. In 2002, conservation
    treatments were completed for 95 volumes of a 7,000 volume collection
    of House hearings. Specifically, treatment involved recasing each
    volume as required, using alkaline end sheets, replacing acidic tab
    sheets with alkaline paper, cleaning the cloth cases, and replacing
    black spine title labels of each volume as necessary. In 2003, the
    Office of Conservation and Preservation will continue preservation of
    the remaining 4,277 volumes.
        In addition, this office sent 481 books from the Senate Library to
    the Library section of Government Printing Office for binding, and
    assisted the Senate Library with four exhibits located in the Senate
    Russell building basement corridor. For the Curator's office,
    Conservation and Preservation assisted with the Brumidi exhibit located
    on the first floor of the Capitol.
        On an ongoing basis, this office assists Senate offices with
    conservation and preservation of documents, books, and various other
    items.

                                   2. CURATOR

        The Office of Senate Curator, under the direction of the Secretary
    of the Senate, who is the Executive Secretary of the Senate Commission
    on Art, administers the museum programs of the Senate for the Capitol
    and Senate office buildings. The curator and staff suggest
    acquisitions, provide appropriate exhibits, engage in research, and
    write and edit publications. In addition, the office studies,
    identifies, arranges, protects, preserves, and records the historical
    collections of the Senate, including paintings, sculpture, and
    furnishings; and exercises supervisory responsibility for the chambers
    in the Capitol under the jurisdiction of the Senate Commission on Art.
    All records of research and documentation related to these areas of
    responsibility are available for use by Senators' offices, the media,
    scholars, and the public. With the establishment of the United States
    Capitol Preservation Commission, the Senate Commission on Art has
    become the designated recipient of objects with Senate association
    received by the Preservation Commission, and is tasked to ``provide to
    the Capitol Preservation Commission such staff support and assistance
    as the Preservation Commission may request.''

    Collections: Commissions, Acquisitions, and Management
        The Senate Commission on Art unveiled new portraits of Senators
    Blanche Kelso Bruce and James Eastland last year. Other commissions
    currently in progress include paintings of Senators Bob Dole and George
    Mitchell for the Senate Leadership Portrait Collection; Senators Arthur
    Vandenberg and Robert Wagner for the Senate Reception Room; and
    Margaret Chase Smith.
        Thirty-one objects were accessioned into the Senate collection this
    year. These included three notable items associated with 19th century
    Assistant Doorkeeper Isaac Bassett: a snuff box; walking stick; and
    scrapbook of news clippings, letters, and various mementos related to
    Bassett's Senate years. The majority of the newly accessioned objects
    were historic prints.
        Twenty-six new foreign gifts were reported to the Select Committee
    on Ethics and deposited with the Curator's Office. These have been
    catalogued and are maintained by the office in accordance with the
    Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act. Many of these gifts reflect the
    historic, unprecedented visit of senators to countries such as
    Uzbekistan and Afghanistan.
        The Senate collection and Foreign Gifts collection were inventoried
    in 2002. A cyclical schedule to complete a wall-to-wall inventory of
    all collections every three years was established by the Registrar.
    Every year all objects on display in the Capitol and all Senate Office
    Buildings are inventoried in order to verify that no changes in
    location or condition have occurred. In addition, an inventory was
    completed of all fine and decorative arts, memorabilia, publications,
    and manuscripts located in a 4th floor storage room in the Capitol and
    the offsite warehouse. In 2003, all prints, drawings, and advertising
    images in storage will be inventoried.
        The Sergeant at Arms also approved the Secretary's request to
    obtain a lease through General Services Administration (GSA) for museum
    quality off-site storage, as the Senate Curator was asked to vacate its
    existing space. Fifty-one items, primarily historic furniture, which
    had been stored at the warehouse were temporarily relocated in October
    2002, to an off-site until such time as a GSA lease is negotiated. The
    final result will be an environmentally controlled storage space
    suitable for the storage and preservation of historic objects.
        The Associate Registrar and Curatorial Assistant initiated a
    project to professionally photograph the more than 1,000 historic
    prints in the Senate's collection. For emergency purposes, a pair of
    4''  5'' color transparencies will be created for each print, allowing
    for one complete set to be stored off-site. The in-office working copy
    will be used for image requests, future publications, and new web site
    postings. This year, the transparencies will be transferred to CD's,
    along with adding the images and associated database information to the
    Senate web site, and compiling an updated checklist publication of the
    Senate's entire historic print collection. 861 prints have been
    photographed to date.

    Conservation and Restoration
        A total of 25 objects received conservation treatment in 2002.
    These included three historic clocks, one gilded window valance,
    fifteen Senate Chamber desks, and six Russell Senate Office Building
    chairs.
        This year the major project of conserving all one hundred Senate
    Chamber desks passed the halfway point. Twice a year, during Senate
    recess periods, desks are removed from the Senate Chamber and sent out
    for restoration. Treatment is extensive, and follows a detailed
    protocol developed in 1997 to address the wear and degradation of these
    historic desks due to continued heavy use. Sixty-one desks have been
    restored to date, and the project is on schedule for completion in
    August 2005. The program also involves thorough documentation of the
    condition, construction details, wood type, and measurements.
    Additional initiatives will include: professional photography; posting
    desk information on the Senate web site; developing a maintenance
    program to continue to preserve the desks; and treating the inkwells
    and sand blotters located in each desk. As part of its preventive
    maintenance program, the Curator's office continues to work with the
    Senate Sergeant at Arms Cabinet Shop to install rubber bumpers on the
    end of the Senate Chamber chairs to further eliminate damage to the
    desks.
        Six historic chairs, originally purchased for the Russell Senate
    Office Building in 1909, were studied and restored. The chairs were
    examined by professional conservators in order to determine the
    original finish and upholstery methods, and to serve as prototypes. A
    detailed protocol treatment to restore all 1909 Russell chairs to their
    historic appearance was established.
        A comprehensive Collection and Historic Structures Care manual has
    been developed. The manual will provide basic, practical information
    needed to enable non-curatorial staff within the Capitol complex to
    plan and implement sound collections care and building maintenance
    programs. The primary purpose of the manual is to teach specialized
    handling practices, identify acceptable repair, maintenance, and care
    treatments, and establish necessary monitoring and maintenance
    schedules. In addition, the Associate Curator and Registrar conducted
    training sessions for the Capitol Police on the care and protection of
    art in the Capitol. The staff also continues to work with housekeeping
    personnel on maintenance issues related to the fine and decorative arts
    collection.

    Historic Preservation
        One of the office's directives is to work with the Architect of the
    Capitol to ensure the preservation of the architectural and decorative
    elements within the Senate wing of the Capitol, with emphasis on those
    spaces of primary historic and architectural significance. After making
    substantial progress in 2001, on the development of the Senate
    Preservation Program by defining a policy and procedures, the office
    spent much of the year focusing on the functionality of the program and
    how it could effectively interact with the Office of the Architect of
    the Capitol and congressional offices. Based on such considerations,
    the office identified infrastructure systems and effective procedures
    that will allow the staff to conduct and collect research, document
    current projects, respond to and approve upcoming project scopes in a
    timely manner, and develop and direct preservation projects. The
    results of those efforts include: an historic structures report
    program; a detailed index to Bill Allen's History of the U.S. Capitol;
    a draft historic context and period of significance statement for the
    Capitol; paint analysis guidelines; and office attendance at the
    Architect of the Capitol's project update meetings.
        In an effort to significantly advance the preservation program by
    putting policies and procedures into practice (in order to test and
    refine them), the office outlined two Senate-controlled preservation
    projects as test cases: the Senate Reception Room preservation project
    and the Historic American Building Survey (HABS) documentation project.
    The first phase of the Reception Room project, the development of an
    Historic Structures Report, is currently underway and will continue
    through 2003. Regarding the HABS project, the office has developed a
    plan and first phase proposal for review.
        Along with the important work of developing and implementing a
    Senate Preservation Program, the Curator's office, working in
    partnership with the Architect of the Capitol, continued to serve as
    project coordinator for the Democratic leadership suite rehabilitation
    project. Over the past year, the following tasks were completed:
    application of tinted varnish on the S-223 and S-224 enframements;
    painting the walls and enframements in S-222; painting the enframements
    in S-221; application of gold leaf in S-222, S-223, and S-224;
    restoration of the ceiling murals in S-222 and S-223; consolidation of
    the ceiling plaster in S-221; conservation of the crystal chandeliers
    in S-222, S-223, and S-224; restoration of three 1909 Russell Senate
    Office Building chairs for S-223; installation of gilded window cornice
    replicas in S-221 and S-223; and installation of new curtains in S-222
    and new rugs in S-222 and S-224.
        Serving as the Senate's authority on preservation, the office has
    extended professional advice, guidance, and services to the Architect
    of the Capitol and various congressional offices on numerous upgrade,
    renovation, preservation, and repair projects in the Senate wing of the
    Capitol. These projects include testing and stabilization planning for
    the President's Room ceiling plaster; preservation of the second floor
    corridor; mural conservation and restoration of the Brumidi Corridors;
    handicap access for the Old Supreme Court Chamber; and renovation of S-
    312.

    Historic Chambers
        The Curator's staff maintains the Old Senate and Old Supreme Court
    Chambers, and coordinates periodic use of both rooms for special
    occasions. By order of the U.S. Capitol Police, the Old Senate Chamber
    has been closed to visitors since September 11, 2001. Twenty-nine
    requests were received from current Members of Congress for after-hours
    access to the chamber. Four special events were held in the room. Of
    significance was former Vice President Walter Mondale's lecture
    delivered in the chamber as part of the Leader's Lecture Series. In
    addition, the Chamber was used for an educational interview with former
    Majority Leader Bob Dole conducted by the National Constitution Center
    in Philadelphia regarding the history of debate in the Senate. Senate
    Historian Richard Baker also presented a lecture to the newly-elected
    Senators of the 108th Congress. The Chamber was also used for the re-
    enactment swearing-in ceremony for Senator Dean Barkley of Minnesota,
    and again on January 7, 2003, for the opening of the 108th Congress. In
    addition, B-roll footage of the room was taken by NBC to illustrate the
    historic significance of the 19th century Senate Disbursing Office
    ledgers recently found.
        On April 1, 2002, the Old Supreme Court Chamber was opened to the
    public for the first time since September 11, 2001. Nineteen requests
    were received by current Members of Congress for admittance to the Old
    Supreme Court Chamber after-hours. New carpeting was installed in the
    public area of the Old Court, and two exhibits were de-installed to
    allow easier access to the room for visitors.

    Loans To and From the Collection
        A total of 63 historic objects and paintings are currently on loan
    to the Curator's office on behalf of Senate leadership in the Capitol.
    The Curator's staff returned eleven paintings to the South Dakota Art
    Museum at the expiration of their loan period, and requested nine new
    paintings from the museum for display in the Democratic leadership
    suite. One outgoing loan from the Senate collection was approved for
    the Octagon Museum; two objects from the collection and two replicas
    were loaned for display as part of the exhibition, Inside the Temple of
    Liberty.
        The Curator's office began work to assemble information on Senate
    objects under consideration for loan to the exhibition space in the
    main gallery of the Capitol Visitor Center. Approximately 50 objects
    have been identified at this time. In addition, the office facilitated
    a loan request to the Smithsonian Institution's National Museum of
    American History on behalf of the Senate Commission on Art. The
    Curator's office has identified two large, historic vases for display
    in the public area of the Capitol Visitor Center, and tentative
    approval was received from the Smithsonian pending final confirmation
    of conditions in the display location.
        The Secretary's china was distributed and returned three times in
    2002. It was used for events such as a dinner for the retiring
    Republican Senators of the 107th Congress and a Senate leadership
    dinner. The official Senate chinaware was inventoried and used at 31
    receptions for distinguished guests, both foreign and domestic.

    Publications and Exhibitions
        Much of the office's focus in 2002, was devoted to producing the
    five-hundred page catalogue entitled U.S. Senate Fine Art Collection,
    which will provide previously unpublished information on the 160
    paintings and sculptures in the U.S. Senate. Each work of art is
    illustrated with a full-page color photograph, accompanied by an essay
    and secondary images that place the object in historical and aesthetic
    context. The publication features an introductory essay by art
    historian and principal author William Kloss to provide a comparative
    perspective on the collection. The book is the definitive new resource
    on the fine art in the United States Senate. Staff worked with the
    Government Printing Office on all aspects of the design and proofing of
    the publication. A printer has been selected and delivery of the
    publication is expected in the summer of 2003.
        Several brochures were reprinted, including: The United States
    Congress & Capitol: A Walking Tour Handbook, volumes I and II; The
    Senate Vestibule; and The President's Room. In addition, the office
    published a new brochure, The Republican Leadership Suite.
        The office deinstalled I Do Solemnly Swear, an exhibition of
    presidential inauguration images and a photographic diary of
    Inauguration Day 2001, and reinstalled the exhibition The United States
    Capitol: Photographs by Fred J. Maroon. The first phase of the
    exhibition Constantino Brumidi: Artist of the Capitol was installed
    under the west stairwell of the Brumidi Corridors, on the first floor
    of the Senate wing. The second phase of the exhibit will be completed
    in 2003.

    Policies and Procedures
        The office undertook a major initiative to create a strategic plan,
    and started by reorganizing and prioritizing office objectives and
    developing a mission statement.
        Progress continued on preparation of a Collections Management
    Policy to be approved by the Commission on Art. The introductory
    section of the policy was reorganized to create a clear statement of
    the principles and goals that guide the Office of Senate Curator in the
    development and care of the Senate collections.

    Collaborations, Educational Programs, And Events
        As part of the seminar series conducted under the auspices of the
    Secretary of the Senate and the Sergeant at Arms, the Curator's staff
    continued to deliver periodic addresses on various aspects of the
    Senate's art and history. Staff conducted or assisted with several
    sessions, including ``Congress & the Capitol: Tour Guide Series'' and
    ``The Vice Presidential Bust Collection.''
        Curator staff participated as team members for the redesign of the
    Senate web site, which was launched in the fall of 2002. For the first
    time, visitors to the Senate web site can view images and catalogue
    information for all fine art in the Senate collection. Results of this
    increased visibility have already been seen, as the number of requests
    from the public for images of art in the Senate collection has nearly
    doubled.

    Objectives for 2003
        Conservation and preservation concerns remain a priority. Projects
    in 2003, will include the restoration of 15 Senate Chamber desks during
    the August and fall recess periods, conservation of the frame for
    Pocahontas; and the restoration of two historic overmantel mirrors.
        Policy initiatives and strategic planning are a major endeavor.
    Additionally, the Collections Management Policy will be completed and
    submitted for peer review by museum professionals.
        A comprehensive restructuring of the Senate collection database
    will be completed. Once an outside contractor has organized the files
    and reports to the specifications of the office, collections staff will
    complete the work of cleaning up data contained in fields and create
    all additional reports and layouts needed for current collections
    related projects. An additional goal is to evaluate the options for
    display of object images in the layouts used to view the Senate
    collection database and to establish image field standards.
        Regarding the Senate Preservation Program, the Curator's office
    will begin to establish the systems necessary for the office to meet
    its preservation responsibilities and to function as the Senate's
    authority on preservation issues. The office will complete the first
    phase of the Senate Reception Room preservation project. In addition,
    the office will present to the Senate Commission on Art a proposal for
    the HABS documentation project, with emphasis on the establishment of
    CAD-related databases and documentation procedures. In the area of
    physical preservation, the office will continue to serve as the project
    coordinator for the Democratic leadership suite renovation and provide
    assistance with preservation issues related to Architect of the
    Capitol's Senate projects. In conjunction with the Architect of the
    Capitol, the office will develop a system that will assure the
    involvement of the Curator's staff in all Senate wing project planning.
    Such a plan will require the Curator's office to review all Senate wing
    projects for their effect on historic resources.
        Publications scheduled for 2003, include a brochure on the history
    of the Senate Democratic leadership suite; the Senate Appropriations
    Committee, Room S-219; and on 19th century Senate employee Isaac
    Bassett. The office will install informational panels for important
    Senate art work as part of its educational mandate with the paintings
    of George Washington at Princeton and The Recall of Columbus the first
    to be highlighted.
        Internet exhibits scheduled include web sites on the political
    cartoons of Puck, a 19th century satirical magazine, the drawings of
    Lily Spandorf illustrating the filming of the motion picture Advise and
    Consent, the Senate Chamber desks, and information on current
    conservation/preservation projects.
        As part of its emergency preparedness plan, the office will
    microfilm several important record series. Collections and history
    files, and the Isaac Bassett Papers, will be reproduced in microfilm or
    fiche, as well as digitized for both research and web publication.

                   3. JOINT OFFICE OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING

        The Joint Office of Education and Training, a shared responsibility
    between the Secretary of the Senate and the Sergeant at Arms, provides
    employee training and development opportunities for 7,000 Senate staff
    both in Washington D.C. and in the states. There are four branches
    within the department:
      --The technical training branch is responsible for providing
            technical training support for approved software packages used
            in either Washington or the state offices.
      --The computer training staff provides instructor-led classes; one-
            on-one coaching sessions; specialized vendor provided training,
            computer based training; and informal training and support
            services.
      --The professional training branch provides courses for all Senate
            staff in areas including: management and leadership
            development, human resources issues and staff benefits,
            legislative and staff information, new staff and intern
            information.
      --The health promotion branch provides seminars, classes and
            screenings on health related and wellness issues. This branch
            also coordinates an annual Health Fair for all Senate employees
            and four blood drives each year.
        In 2002, The Joint Office of Education and Training offered 565
    classes with 5,566 Senate employees participating. The registration
    desk handled 13,248 requests for training and documentation.
        Of the above total, in the technical training area 321 classes were
    held with a total attendance of 1,883 students. An additional 1,686
    staff received coaching on various software packages and other computer
    related issues.
        In the professional development area, 244 classes were held with a
    total attendance of 3,683 students. Individual managers and supervisors
    were also encouraged to request customized training for their offices
    in areas of need.
        The Office of Education and Training made itself available to work
    with teams on issues related to team performance, communication or
    conflict resolution. During 2002, 50 requests for special training or
    team building were met. Professional development staff also traveled to
    State offices to conduct specialized training/team building during the
    year.
        In health promotion, 896 Senate staff participated in Health
    Promotion activities throughout the year. These activities included:
    cancer screening, bone density screening and seminars on health related
    topics. Additionally 1,163 staff participated in the Annual Health Fair
    held in September.
        The Office of Education and Training continues to coordinate with
    the Office of Security and Emergency Preparedness to provide security
    training for Senate staff. In 2002, the Office of Education and
    Training coordinated 87 sessions of Escape Hood Training for 3,514
    Senate staff.
        Since most of the classes offered are practical only for D.C. based
    staff, the Office of Education and Training continues to offer the
    ``State Training Fair,'' now three years old. In 2002, three sessions
    of this program were offered to state staff. We also implemented the
    ``Virtual Classroom,'' an internet based training library of 300+
    courses. To date, 134 state office staff representing 49 Senators are
    using the training option.

                        4. CHIEF COUNSEL FOR EMPLOYMENT

        The Office of the Senate Chief Counsel for Employment (``SCCE'') is
    a non-partisan office established at the direction of the Joint
    Leadership in 1993 after enactment of the Government Employee Rights
    Act (``GERA''), which allowed Senate employees to file claims of
    employment discrimination against Senate offices. With the enactment of
    the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (``CAA''), Senate offices
    became subject to the requirements, responsibilities and obligations of
    11 employment laws. The SCCE is charged with the legal representation
    of Senate offices in all employment law cases at both the
    administrative and court levels. Also, on a day-to-day basis, the
    office provides legal advice to Senate offices about their obligations
    under employment laws. Accordingly, each of the 180 offices of the
    Senate is an individual client of the SCCE, and each office maintains
    an attorney-client relationship with the SCCE.
    Background
        Each of the SCCE attorneys came to the office after having
    practiced as employment law litigators in major, national law firms
    representing Fortune 100 corporations. All services the office provides
    are the same legal services the attorneys provided to their clients
    while in private practice. The areas of responsibilities of the SCCE
    can be divided into the following categories: Litigation (Defending
    Senate Offices in Federal Court); Mediations to Resolve Lawsuits;
    Court-Ordered Alternative Dispute Resolutions; Preventive Legal Advice;
    Union Drives, Negotiations and Unfair Labor Practice Charges; OSHA/
    Americans With Disability Act (``ADA'') Compliance; Layoffs and Office
    Closings In Compliance With the Law; and Management Training Regarding
    Legal Responsibilities.
    Litigation, Mediations, Alternative Dispute Resolutions
        The SCCE represents each of the 180 employing offices of the Senate
    in all court actions (including both trial and appellate courts),
    hearings, proceedings, investigations, and negotiations relating to
    labor and employment laws. The SCCE handles cases filed in the District
    of Columbia and cases filed in any of the 50 states. The SCCE
    represents a defendant Senate office from the inception of a case
    through U.S. Supreme Court review. The office handles all work
    internally without the assistance of outside law firms or the
    Department of Justice.
        During 2002, the SCCE defended Senate offices against 33 lawsuits,
    which required approximately 11,000 attorney work hours \1\. No case
    was lost.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Attorney hours spent on each case include, but are not limited
    to, time for conducting the initial investigation of allegations;
    mediation with employee; negotiating settlements; reviewing employing
    office files; interviewing witnesses; investigating and responding to
    the complaint; preparing for pretrial and trial proceedings, including
    taking witness depositions, conducting extensive discovery with
    opposing counsel (propounding and responding to interrogatories,
    requests for production of documents, etc.), interviewing expert
    witnesses, preparing, researching and filing any necessary motions with
    the court, preparing witnesses for trial, preparing exhibits for trial;
    trying the case; preparing post-trial briefs; preparing appellate
    briefs; arguing before the appellate courts.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Preventive Legal Advice
        At times, a Senate office will become aware that an employee is
    contemplating suing, and the office will request the SCCE's legal
    advice and/or that the SCCE negotiate with the employee's attorney
    before the employee files a lawsuit. The successful resolution of such
    matters substantially reduces an office's liability.
        Also, the SCCE advises and meets with Members, chiefs of staff,
    office managers, staff directors, chief clerks and general counsels at
    their request. The purposes of the advice and meetings are to educate
    and inform Members, officers and employees and to prevent litigation
    and to minimize liability in the event of litigation. For example, on a
    daily basis, the SCCE advises Senate offices on matters such as
    disciplining/terminating employees in compliance with the law, handling
    and investigating sexual harassment complaints, accommodating the
    disabled, determining wage law requirements, meeting the requirements
    of the Family and Medical Leave Act, and management's rights and
    obligations under union laws and OSHA.

    Union Drives, Negotiations, and Unfair Labor Practice Charges
        The Office provides the following with respect to a union drive:
    conducts training sessions for managers and supervisors regarding their
    legal obligations during a union campaign, negotiates an election
    agreement with the union, advises the client in selecting its
    representatives for the election, conducts training sessions for the
    employer representatives regarding improper conduct at elections, and
    conducts an investigation to determine whether ground rules exist to
    challenge the election results.

    OSHA/ADA Compliance
        The SCCE provides advice and assistance to Senate offices by
    assisting them with complying with the applicable OSHA and ADA
    regulations; representing them during Office of Compliance inspections;
    advising State offices on the preparation of the Office of Compliance's
    Home State OSHA/ADA Inspection Questionnaires; assisting offices in the
    preparation of Emergency Action Plans; and advising and representing
    Senate offices when a complaint of an OSHA violation has been filed
    with the Office of Compliance or when a citation has been issued. In
    2002, the SCCE handled 8 OSHA complaint procedures.

    Layoffs and Office Closings in Compliance with the Law
        The SCCE provides legal advice and strategy to individual Senate
    offices regarding how to minimize legal liability in compliance with
    the law when offices reduced their forces.
        In addition, pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining
    Notification Act (``WARN''), offices that are closing must follow
    certain procedures for notifying their employees of the closing and for
    transitioning them out of the office. The SCCE tracks office closings
    and notifies those offices of their legal obligations under the WARN.
    In 2002, the SCCE advised 10 Senate offices of their legal obligations
    under this law.

    Management Training Regarding Legal Responsibilities
        The SCCE conducts legal seminars for the managers of Senate offices
    to assist them in complying with employment laws, thereby reducing
    their liability. In 2002, the SCCE gave 59 legal seminars to Senate
    offices. Among the topics covered were: Preventing and Addressing
    Sexual Harassment in the Workplace; The Congressional Accountability
    Act of 1995: What Managers Need to Know About Their Legal Obligations;
    Managers' Obligations Under the Family and Medical Leave Act; The Legal
    Pitfalls of Hiring the Right Employee: Advertising, Interviewing, Drug
    Testing and Background Checks; Disciplining, Evaluating and Terminating
    an Employee Without Violating Employment Laws; Management's Obligations
    Under the Americans With Disabilities Act; and Equal Pay for Equal
    Work: Management's Obligations Under the Equal Pay Act.

    Administrative/Miscellaneous Matters
        The SCCE provides legal assistance to employing offices in
    preparing and updating employee handbooks, office policies,
    supervisors' manuals, sample job descriptions, interviewing guidelines,
    and job evaluation forms to ensure that they are legally compliant.

    Technological Advances
        The SCCE is continuing its implementation of two electronic systems
    that put the office at the forefront of electronic offices. First, the
    SCCE has installed and implemented a comprehensive document management
    system. The system profiles and indexes every document in the office,
    regardless of whether the document was created internally or received
    from an outside source. Thus, the office maintains all-electronic
    files. The system saves hours of time by eliminating electronic
    directory/folder-type searches, and filing cabinet searches. It also is
    instrumental in preserving institutional knowledge.
        Second, the SCCE continues its conversion to a ``paperless''
    office. It has completed Phases I and II and most of Phase III of the
    3-phase process, which involves scanning and OCRing every document the
    office receives from an outside source. This means that all paper in
    the office, whether created on our computers or received from outside
    the office, is electronically accessible. This paperless system saves
    time and office space. In addition, it allows staff members to access
    electronically every office document from remote locations, such as a
    courtroom, and it allows the office to remain fully operational in the
    event of an unanticipated closing of the Hart building.

                                  5. GIFT SHOP

        With each successive year since its establishment, the Senate Gift
    Shop has continued to provide outstanding products and services that
    maintain the integrity of the Senate as well as increase the public's
    awareness of the mission and history of the U.S. Senate. The Gift Shop
    provides services to Members, Officers and employees of the Senate, as
    well as constituents and visitors. Products include a wide variety of
    souvenirs, collectibles, and fine gift items created exclusively for
    the Senate. Services include special ordering of personalized products
    and hard-to-find items, custom framing, gold embossing, engraving, and
    shipping.

    Facilities
        For several years, the services offered by the Senate Gift Shop
    were over-the-counter sales to walk-in customers at a single location.
    Today, after 10 years in operation, and as a result of extended
    services and continued growth, the Gift Shop now provides service from
    three different locations. Services from these locations include walk-
    in sales, telephone orders, fax orders, mail orders, and a variety of
    special order and catalog sales.

    Sales Activity
        The Gift Shop's gross sales for fiscal year 2002 are recorded at
    $1,418,065.88. The cost for goods sold during this same period was
    $1,102,433.12. This accounts for a gross profit of $315,632.76. Records
    show total gross sales in fiscal year 2001 were $1,585,062.49. This
    represents a decrease in sales of $166,996.61 from fiscal year 2001 to
    fiscal year 2002, largely due to the impact of September 11, 2001, and
    the anthrax incident.
        In addition to tracking profit from gross sales, the Senate Gift
    Shop maintains a revolving fund and a record of on-hand inventory. As
    of October 1, 2002, the balance in the revolving fund was $880,022.88
    with on-hand inventory valued at $1,997,419.86.
        At the request of the Secretary, the General Accounting Office will
    conduct an audit of the fiscal year 2002 transactions of the Senate
    Gift Shop's Revolving Fund.

    Technology Upgrades
        One of the most important objectives for 2003, is replacing our
    outdated software application, Basic Four, which is more than 20 years
    old and no longer meets the increasingly unique needs of the Gift Shop.
    During the first three quarters of 2002, the Secretary of the Senate,
    through the Senate Gift Shop, and with the assistance of staff from the
    Senate Offices of Disbursing, and the Customer Support Division of the
    Sergeant at Arms, studied proposals in search of an outside vendor who
    would provide and install the most suitable retail and financial
    management software package. The necessary funds for this upgrade were
    included in the Secretary's budget request for fiscal year 2003 and
    have been appropriated. The selected vendor will provide required
    technical assistance during implementation, training of Gift Shop
    staff, and continued technical support of the new system.

    Accomplishments and New Products in 2002

                Official Congressional Holiday Ornaments
        The year 2002 marked the beginning of the Gift Shop's third
    consecutive ``four-year ornament series.'' Each ornament in the 2002-
    2005 series of unique collectibles will feature an architectural
    milestone of the United States Capitol with each image of the Capitol
    and corresponding historical text taken from the book, History of the
    United States Capitol: A Chronicle of Design, Construction, and
    Politics by William C. Allen, architectural historian in the office of
    the Architect of the Capitol.
        The 2002 ornament, our 10th annual ornament, pictures the original
    architectural design of the Capitol by William Thornton. In keeping
    with tradition, the authentic colors of the original drawing were
    reproduced onto white porcelain stone and set with a brass frame
    finished in 24kt gold.
        Holiday sales of this ornament in 2002 were strong and additional
    sales are expected throughout 2003. Revenue from the sale of more than
    35,000 of these ornaments has generated more than $40,000 in
    scholarship funding for the Senate Child Care Center.

                Pickard China Porcelain ``Liberty'' Box
        The ``Liberty'' box is the first in a series of four porcelain
    boxes that will display different images from the Constantino Brumidi
    fresco painted on the ceiling of the President's Room located in the
    Senate Wing of the United States Capitol. ``Liberty'' is one of four
    allegorical figures that represents the foundations of the government--
    the other three are Executive, Religion, and Legislation. These boxes
    will be released on an annual basis.

                Temple of Liberty Greeting Cards
        Peter Waddell, a local artist, created the ``Temple of Liberty''
    collection. His oils on canvas depict the interiors of the Capitol
    Building, and the visitors to it, as they might have appeared in the
    19th century when the Capitol was still in its early years of
    construction. The Senate Gift Shop secured exclusive rights to
    reproduce these images onto greeting cards which are now sold as boxed
    sets. The beautiful tones and colors of Mr. Waddell's works have been
    faithfully reproduced on the face of the cards. On the reverse of each
    of these cards is the artist's written interpretation of that
    particular painting. The Gift Shop reviewed the written interpretation
    to confirm both clarity and factuality.

                Capitol Visitor Center Coins
        When the U.S. Mint terminated its promotion and sale of the Capitol
    Visitor Center (CVC) coin in June 2002, the Gift Shop, with the
    assistance and guidance of Senate Legal Counsel, arranged to purchase
    the balance of the more than 22,000 already minted CVC coins. In order
    to better promote the CVC and to better showcase the CVC coins, the
    Gift Shop has successfully incorporated the coin into a variety of
    appropriate gift items:
      --CVC coins encased in Lucite paperweights have sold well since their
            development last year.
      --During the latter half of 2002, the Gift Shop worked with a vendor/
            manufacturer to create ladies' and men's wristwatches and
            pocket watches with CVC coins serving as the face.
      --Other items incorporating the use of the coins are in various
            stages of development and will be introduced later in 2003.

                Products Created for the Commemorative Joint Session of
                        Congress
        The Secretary of the Senate worked with the Senate Gift Shop to
    create and develop an official gavel and a variety of presentation and
    gift items suitable for the Commemorative Joint Session of Congress
    held in New York City on September 6, 2002.
        In an attempt to create a unique gavel that appropriately defined
    this moment in history, the Gift Shop first consulted with the masonry
    team under the Architect of the Capitol to determine if marble that was
    once part of the Capitol could be used. Next, the Gift Shop selected a
    contractor to produce a replica of the original ivory gavel used to
    preside over Senate proceedings. Upon completion of the prototype of
    the gavel, the Senate Gift Shop enlisted the assistance of the Senate
    Office of Conservation and Preservation to modify a wooden box,
    provided by the Gift Shop, to showcase the commemorative gavel. In the
    meantime, the Senate Gift Shop researched appropriate historical text
    and composed custom insert cards that were reproduced with the
    assistance of the Senate Service Department. A dozen marble gavels were
    presented at the Commemorative Joint Session.

    Projects and New Ideas for 2003

                United States Senate Fine Art Guide
        The Gift Shop is working with the Senate Curator in order to secure
    copies of the forthcoming publication, United States Senate Fine Art
    Guide. The book will be sold in both the Dirksen and Capitol Gift
    Shops.

                Capitol Trees
        During the early construction stages of the CVC, the Senate Gift
    Shop contracted with a company to recover felled trees from the Capitol
    grounds. The recovered trees have been milled and kiln dried. The
    resultant 12,000 board feet of cut lumber is stored in a warehouse in
    West Virginia. The Gift Shop is in the process of developing products
    from the recovered trees. Items will include presentation pieces for
    official use and a variety of commemorative collectors' items available
    for sale to the general public.

                108th Congressional Plate
        The series of Official Congressional Plates will continue this year
    with the design, development, and manufacture of the 108th
    Congressional Plate. The first stage of choosing a design for the 108th
    Congressional Plate will begin soon. After reviewing proofs and working
    through the many design changes, the goal is to have a finished product
    arrive in mid-November, in time for holiday sales.

                              6. HISTORICAL OFFICE

        Serving as the Senate's institutional memory, the Historical Office
    collects and provides information on important events, precedents,
    dates, statistics, and historical comparisons of current and past
    Senate activities for use by Members and staff, the media, scholars,
    and the general public. The Office advises Senators, officers, and
    committees on cost-effective disposition of their non-current office
    files and assists researchers in identifying Senate-related source
    materials. The Office keeps extensive biographical, bibliographical,
    photographic, and archival information on the 1,775 former Senators. It
    edits for publication historically significant transcripts and minutes
    of selected Senate committees and party organizations, and conducts
    oral history interviews with key Senate staff. The photo historian
    maintains a collection of approximately 40,000 still pictures, slides,
    and negatives that includes photographs and illustrations of most
    former Senators, as well as news photographs, editorial cartoons,
    photographs of committees in session, and other images documenting
    Senate history. The Office develops and maintains all historical
    material on the Senate website.

    Fiscal Year 2002 and Continuing Editorial Projects
        The Senate Leader's Lecture Series.--This series brings
    distinguished speakers to the Senate to present insights about the
    Senate's recent history and long-term practices. From 1998 through
    2002, lectures featuring former Senate presidents and party floor
    leaders on the topic of Senate leadership were held in the Capitol's
    historic Old Senate Chamber before an audience of current Senators and
    invited guests. The Historical Office has provided editorial and
    production support for the series, including the September 4, 2002,
    lecture by former Vice President Walter Mondale. Text and video of all
    nine lectures are available on the Senate's website, and the Historical
    Office is preparing a book edition for publication in 2003.
        Executive Session Transcripts of the Permanent Subcommittee on
    Investigations, 1953-1954.--The Historical Office completed editing and
    annotating 3,800 pages of previously unpublished executive-session
    hearing transcripts produced by the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on
    Investigations (PSI) under the chairmanship of Senator Joseph R.
    McCarthy (1953-1954). The Government Printing Office has recently
    delivered all five volumes to the PSI for a public announcement and
    press conference within the next few weeks. This publication will allow
    researchers nationwide to have equal access to these highly sought
    after and richly revealing historical documents.
        Biographical Directory of the United States Congress.--Since the
    most recent printed edition of the Biographical Directory of the United
    States Congress appeared in 1989, the assistant historian has added
    dozens of new biographical sketches and has revised and updated most of
    the database's 1,875 Senate entries. A current version of the database
    is available online at http://bioguide.congress.gov. The assistant
    historian has recently completed necessary revisions and additions of
    data to allow for expanded online search capabilities. Work is
    proceeding on the next print edition, tentatively planned for
    publication in 2004.
        Administrative History of the Senate.--During 2002, the assistant
    historian revised an earlier chapter structure and focused on the years
    1789 to 1861 in this historical account of the Senate's administrative
    evolution. This study traces the development of the offices of the
    Secretary of the Senate and Sergeant at Arms, considers nineteenth and
    twentieth-century reform efforts that resulted in reorganization and
    professionalization of Senate staff, and looks at how the Senate's
    administrative structure has grown and diversified over the past two
    centuries.
        Documentary History of the Senate.--The Historical Office is
    conducting an ongoing documentary publication program to bring together
    fundamental source materials that will help explain the development of
    the Senate's constitutional powers and institutional prerogatives.
    Currently in production are volumes on Senate impeachment trials, the
    Senate's consideration of controversial treaties, and the evolution of
    the Senate's standing rules. For the impeachment trial volume, working
    drafts have been prepared to summarize each case, with selection of key
    documents and writing of textual notes underway. For the controversial
    treaties volume, much of the research has been completed and major
    chapters have been drafted. Work on the rules volume has proceeded to
    provide coverage from 1789 through the 1850s.
        ``The Senate of the United States''.--Between 1988 and 1994, the
    Government Printing Office published The Senate, 1789-1989, a four-
    volume reference work by Senator Robert C. Byrd. During 2002, the
    Historical Office began work on a consolidated, updated, and
    illustrated one-volume edition of ``Byrd's History.'' This work will be
    available for distribution in 2005 through the Senate Gift Shop.
        Senate web site redesign.--Historical Office staff played a key
    role on history content in the redesign of the Senate web site. The
    history content amounts to about 60 percent of the static content on
    the site, or more than 5,000 pages. The office has continuing
    responsibility for expanding and updating the history content and for
    adding history-based features to illuminate ongoing Senate news events,
    as well as coordinating efforts among the various content teams.
        ``Idea of the Senate''.--This narrative book will be based on the
    memoirs of Senators, providing eyewitness accounts of the Senate from
    its early years to the modern era. Each chapter in the book will focus
    on the writings of one Senator. Additional primary and secondary
    sources will be examined for contextual information. The Historical
    Office's researcher-writer has completed preliminary project research
    and has begun drafting the first chapter on John Quincy Adams.
        Capitol Visitor Center Exhibition Content Development.--The Senate
    historian assisted in preparing detailed plans for the 20,000 square-
    foot exhibition gallery of the Capitol Visitor Center. Three staff
    historians prepared scripts for major exhibitions on the historical
    role of Congress in helping to realize the nation's basic aspirations
    and on the chronological history of the Senate.
        Member Services.--At the request of the Senate Democratic Leader,
    the Senate historian prepared and delivered a ``Senate Historical
    Minute'' at each of thirty-five Senate Democratic Conference weekly
    meetings during the year. These four-hundred-word Minutes are designed
    to enlighten members about significant events and personalities
    associated with the Senate's institutional development, and with
    familiar objects and places within the Capitol. The nearly 200 Minutes
    prepared since 1997, are available as a feature on the Senate website.
        Members' Office Records Management and Disposition Assistance.--The
    Senate archivist continued to assist Members' offices with planning for
    the preservation of their permanently valuable records, with special
    emphasis on archiving electronic information from computer systems and
    transferring valuable records to a home state repository. Forming a
    team with customer support service staff from the Office of the
    Sergeant at Arms, the archivist worked with all Senators' offices that
    closed at the end of the 107th Congress, including the office of
    Senator Paul Wellstone, to prepare the collections for donation. The
    handbook entitled ``Closing a Senate Office'' was updated, and
    assistance was given in the compilation of ``Opening a Senate Office.''
    The latter was published and also broadcast on the transition office
    intranet site. As a follow-up to the Congressional Papers Forum that
    was held in August 2001, the archivist edited The Congressional Papers
    Forum: The Third Report of the Advisory Committee on the Records of
    Congress. The archivist began a comprehensive revision of Records
    Management Handbook for United States Senators and Their Archival
    Repositories which will be published in 2003.
        Committee Records Management and Disposition Assistance.--The
    Senate archivist provided each committee with staff briefings, record
    surveys, guidance on preservation of information in electronic systems,
    and instructions for the transfer of permanently valuable records to
    the National Archives' Center for Legislative Archives. Over 3,000 feet
    of records were transferred to the Archives. The Office's archival
    staff continued to provide processing assistance to committees and
    administrative offices in need of basic help with noncurrent files. The
    archivist worked with the House of Representatives' archivist to
    inventory the records of the anthrax contamination cleanup and is
    working with Secretary of the Senate and Clerk of the House counsels to
    develop protocols for the transfer of these records to the Center for
    Legislative Archives. In 2003, a records disposition guidelines for the
    offices under the Secretary's jurisdiction will be published.
        Oral History Program During Fiscal Year 2002.--The Historical
    Office concluded its series of twenty-three debriefing interviews with
    staff involved with the dislocation following the attacks of September
    11, 2001, and the October 2001 delivery of letters containing anthrax
    to the Hart Senate Office Building. This adds to the already extensive
    collection of oral history interviews that provide personal
    recollections of Senate careers dating from 1910 to the present. Oral
    history interviews were also conducted with Tom C. Korologos, former
    administrative assistant to Senator Wallace Bennett and White House
    Senate liaison; Jade West, former staff director of the Republican
    Policy Committee; and J. Stanley Kimmitt, former Secretary for the
    Majority and Secretary of the Senate.
        Photographic Collections.--The photo historian continued to expand
    the Office's 40,000-item photographic collection by obtaining images of
    former Senators not previously represented in the collection, and
    documenting Senate life by photographing historically significant
    Senate events, including hearings of Senate committees. Digital images
    of frequently used photographs were created in order to promote their
    use and safeguard the originals. Images can now be transmitted to
    patrons via e-mail or CD, or can be printed onto photographic paper in
    the Historical Office. The photo historian also continued to catalog
    photographic negatives into an image database in order to increase
    intellectual control over the Office's image collection.
        Conference of Congressional Research Center Directors.--The Senate
    Historical Office, the Center for Legislative Archives at the National
    Archives, and the Robert C. Byrd Center for Legislative Studies just
    completed a conference at the Byrd Center in Shepherdstown, West
    Virginia. This first-of-its kind meeting brought together the directors
    of 20 university-based congressional research centers. Among those who
    attended were the directors of center associated with the public
    service careers of the following U.S. Senators: Howard Baker, Bob Dole,
    Everett Dirksen, Margaret Chase Smith, Strom Thurmond, George Aiken,
    Thomas Dodd, Wendell Ford, Hubert Humphrey, Richard Russell, John
    Stennis, John Glenn and Robert C. Byrd.
        Historic Senate Salary and Mileage Ledger, 1790: 1880.--The Library
    of Congress has scanned all 400 pages in an electronic version of this
    major resource, which documents the administrative operations of the
    Senate during its first 90 years. It will be available to researchers
    on senate.gov within the next few weeks.

                               7. HUMAN RESOURCES

        The Office of Human Resources (HR) was established in June 1995, as
    a result of the Congressional Accountability Act. The Office focuses on
    the development and implementation of human resources policies,
    procedures, and programs for the Office of the Secretary of the Senate,
    both to fulfill the legal requirements of the workplace and to
    complement the organization's strategic goals and values.
        This includes recruiting and staffing; providing guidance and
    advice to managers and staff; training; performance management; job
    analysis; compensation planning, design, and administration; leave
    administration; records management; employee handbooks and manuals;
    internal grievance procedures; employee relations and services; and
    organizational planning and development.
        HR also administers the Secretary's Public Transportation Subsidy
    program and the Summer Intern Program that offers college students the
    opportunity to gain valuable skills and experience in a variety of
    Senate support offices.

    Classification and Compensation Review
        The Secretary of the Senate is conducting a complete classification
    and compensation study which entails a thorough review of the entire
    system. This classification study will include a comprehensive
    collection of current job classifications and specifications for every
    position in the Office and the pay plan and bands will reflect the
    accurate and equitable layout of all staff within the organization. HR
    staff has conducted job audits/interviews with each incumbent to ensure
    all roles and responsibilities are accurately factored into the study.

    Policies and Procedures
        HR will annually update and revise the Employee Handbook of the
    Office of the Secretary.

    Assisting the Secretary and Department Heads
        HR continues to work with the Executive Office and department heads
    to establish objectives that reflect the mission of the Senate and the
    Secretary's Office. HR has met with each department head and discussed
    their departmental and personal objectives, challenges and results of
    the past year, and to assist each department head in establishing new
    objectives for this calendar year and beyond.

    Attraction and Retention of Staff
        HR is responsible for the advertisement of new vacancies or
    positions, screening applicants, interviewing candidates and assisting
    with all phases of the hiring process. HR works closely with the
    applicable department to ensure the process moves smoothly and
    expeditiously. HR acts as the liaison to the Secretary before any
    payroll actions are presented, so that the Secretary has ample
    knowledge of all hiring decisions or recommendations. As new staff
    joins the office, HR is in charge of the orientation to the office's
    policies.
        HR is also responsible for the management of performance-related
    issues. In addition, the HR staff finds ways to solicit suggestions and
    feedback from the Secretary's department heads and staff in an ongoing
    effort to continually improve processes and procedures.

    New Programs
        HR has initiated development of an Elder Care Fair that will be
    available for all Senate staff interested in learning more about local
    and nationwide services available to assist the elderly and those
    responsible for their care. HR is working closely with the Senate
    Office of Education and Training and the Employee Assistance Program to
    identify and contact agencies that may be of assistance to Senate
    staff.

    Training
        In conjunction with the Senate Chief Counsel for Employment, HR has
    worked to prepare training for department heads and staff. Some of the
    topics include Sexual Harassment, Interviewing Skills, Conducting
    Background Checks, Providing Feedback to Employees and Goal Setting.
    These skills will further enhance the ability of our staff to comply
    with office policies and advance in their professional development.

                             8. INFORMATION SYSTEMS

        The staff of the Department of Information Systems provide
    technical hardware and software support for the Office of the Secretary
    of the Senate. Information Systems staff also interface closely with
    the application and network development groups within the Sergeant at
    Arms (SAA), the Government Printing Office (GPO), and outside vendors
    on technical issues and joint projects. The Department provides
    computer related support for the all LAN-based servers within the
    Office of the Secretary of the Senate. Information Systems staff
    provide direct application support for all software installed
    workstations, evaluate new computer technologies, and implement next
    generation hardware and software solutions.
        The primary mission of Information Systems Department is to
    continue to provide the highest level of customer satisfaction and
    computer support for all departments within the office of Secretary of
    the Senate. Emphasis is placed on the creation and transfer of
    legislation to outside departments and agencies.
        The Senate chose Windows NT as the standard network operating
    system in 1997. The continuing support strategy is to enhance existing
    hardware and software support provided by the Information Systems
    Department, and augment that support with assistance from the Sergeant
    at Arms whenever required. The Secretary's Network supports
    approximately 300 user accounts and patron accounts in the Capitol,
    Hart, Russell and Dirksen, along with the Page School.
        For information security reasons, Secretary departments implement
    isolated computer systems, unique applications, and isolated local area
    networks. The Secretary of the Senate network is a closed local area
    network to all offices within the Senate. Information Systems staff
    continue to provide a common level of hardware and software integration
    for these networks, and for the shared resources of inter-departmental
    networking. Information System staff continue to actively participate
    in all new project design and implementation within the Secretary of
    the Senate operations.
        In addition, the staff of Information Systems has continued to
    expand its responsibilities. Information System staff has helped to
    backfill the retirement of Senate Library technical personnel. Improved
    diagnostic practices were adopted to stretch support across all
    Secretary departments. Several departments, namely Disbursing, Office
    of Public Records, Chief Counsel for Employment, Office of Public
    Records, Page School, Senate Security, and Stationery/Gift Shop have
    dedicated information technology staff within those offices.
    Information Systems personnel continue to provide first level escalated
    hardware and software support for these office staff members.

    Summary

                Senate Mail Infrastructure Project (SMI)
        The original plan involved replacing all CC:MAIL servers and
    gateways with a de-centralized Microsoft Outlook solution. The
    Secretary's office previously had six post offices in six different
    server domains. There was no central Public Address Book for all
    Secretary employees. Additionally, Secretary mail requirements needed
    to be refined to insure the implemented solution was both cost-
    effective and reliable for the Office of the Secretary.
        The Microsoft Outlook Client implementation began in August within
    the Disbursing Office. The SAA scheduled implementation for the
    remainder of the office staff occurred in December 2002. The initial
    plan, which outlined all staff employees be enrolled in one central
    server, was modified to implement three independent Mail servers; the
    first for Disbursing, the second for Chief Counsel, and all other
    office staff enrolled in the third post office. Support for each
    Exchange server is provided by that appropriate office. Five of the six
    cc:mail post offices were completed in 2002. The Office of Employment
    Counsel is pending further review by the SAA Design Team.

                Disbursing Office Hardware/Software Upgrade
        Desktop systems in the Disbursing Office were over 4 years old and
    required replacement. New hardware and web-based applications, along
    with several legacy applications were installed in 2002. All
    workstations, monitors, and printers were replaced for Disbursing
    office staff.

                Office of Public Records Upgrades
        FileNet servers were retired in fiscal year 2002. This was based on
    the SAA Application Development Branch rewriting the existing OPR
    software. Three Microsoft SQL servers were consolidated into one server
    configuration, and then replicated at the Postal Square location. For
    archival purposes, a Volkswagen-size optical jukebox was retired and
    replaced with Quantum snap server Updated scanners. Software was
    purchased to upgrade existing office equipment. In the event of a
    possible office relocation, arrangements have been made for the OPR
    staff to operate and continue their scanning operation.

                Digital Sender Project
        A Secretary wide-initiative was developed to provide all staff with
    the ability to scan, save, and electronically capture paper documents
    in pdf format for archival purposes. In 2002, six additional HP Digital
    sender scanners were purchased for the following departments: Chief
    Counsel, Stationery, Gift Shop, Page School, Webmaster, and Bill Clerk.

    Hardware and Software Upgrades
        Approximately 88 percent of all department computer workstations
    were upgraded and all legacy applications migrated to the Microsoft
    Windows 2000 operating system in 2002. These departments include:
    Disbursing, Human Resources, Public Records, Historian, Chief Counsel,
    Interparliamentary Services, Bill Clerk, Legislative Clerk, Enrolling
    Clerk, Parliamentarian, Daily Digest, Executive Clerk, Senate Library,
    Stationery, Gift Shop, and Webster Hall.

                         9. INTERPARLIAMENTARY SERVICES

        The Office of Interparliamentary Services (IPS) has completed its
    21st year of operation. IPS is responsible for administrative,
    financial, and protocol functions for all interparliamentary
    conferences in which the Senate participates by statute, for
    interparliamentary conferences in which the Senate participates on an
    ad hoc basis, and for special delegations authorized by the Majority
    and/or Minority Leaders.
        The statutory interparliamentary conferences are: 1. NATO
    Parliamentary Assembly; 2. Mexico-United States Interparliamentary
    Group; 3. Canada-United States Interparliamentary Group; and 4.
    British-American Parliamentary Group.
        In May 2002, the 43th Annual Meeting of the Canada-U.S.
    Interparliamentary Group was held in Rhode Island. Arrangements for
    this successful event were handled by the IPS staff.
        Planning is now underway for the 42nd Annual Meeting of the Mexico-
    U.S. Interparliamentary Group and the British-American Parliamentary
    Group meetings to be held in the United States in 2003. Advance work,
    including site inspection, will be undertaken for the 45th annual
    Canada-U.S. Interparliamentary Group meeting to be held in the United
    States in 2004. Preparations are also underway for the spring and fall
    sessions of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly.
        All foreign travel authorized by the Leadership is arranged by the
    IPS staff. In addition to delegation trips, IPS provided assistance to
    individual Senators and staff traveling overseas. Senators and staff
    authorized by committees for foreign travel continue to call upon this
    office for assistance with passports, visas, travel arrangements, and
    reporting requirements.
        IPS receives and prepares for printing the quarterly financial
    reports for foreign travel from all committees in the Senate. In
    addition to preparing the quarterly reports for the Majority Leader,
    the Minority Leader, and the President Pro Tempore, IPS staff also
    assist staff members of Senators and committees in filling out the
    required reports.
        Interparliamentary Services maintains regular contact with the
    Office of the Chief of Protocol, Department of State, and with foreign
    embassy officials. Official foreign visitors are frequently received in
    this office and assistance is given to individuals as well as to groups
    by the IPS staff. The staff continues to work closely with other
    offices of the Secretary of the Senate and the Sergeant at Arms in
    arranging programs for foreign visitors. In addition, IPS is frequently
    consulted by individual Senators' offices on a broad range of protocol
    questions. Occasional questions come from state officials or the
    general public regarding Congressional protocol.
        On behalf of the Leadership, the staff arranges receptions in the
    Senate for Heads of State, Heads of Government, Heads of Parliaments,
    and parliamentary delegations. Required records of expenditures on
    behalf of foreign visitors under authority of Public Law 100-71 are
    maintained in the Office of Interparliamentary Services.

                                  10. LIBRARY

        The Senate Library provides legislative, legal, business, and
    general reference services to the United States Senate. The Library's
    comprehensive legislative collection consists of congressional
    documents dating from the Continental Congress. In addition, the
    Library maintains executive and judicial branch materials and an
    extensive book collection on politics, history, and biography. These
    sources, plus a wide array of online systems, assist the Library staff
    in providing nonpartisan, confidential, timely, and accurate
    information services.

    Information Services

                Patron Services
        Information Services responded to 40,359 requests during 2002, a
    4.6 percent increase above the 2001 total. This total included 24,205
    phone, fax, and e-mail requests and 10,145 walk-in visits by Senate
    staff who used resources in the Library. Tabulated for the first time
    are the 6,009 times Hill staff accessed the Hot Bills List on LIS.
    Patrons borrowed 1,952 books and documents and 4,467 information
    packages were delivered to Senate offices.
        The Library's request totals have increased at an annual rate of
    four percent over the past two years. The Senate's information needs
    are dramatically changing with desktop access to major online services
    and research products. The Library has responded to these changing
    information needs by offering new services and products and by
    continuing an aggressive outreach program to the Senate community. New
    services include the LIS training sessions, regularly scheduled, two-
    hour sessions which utilize the librarians' extensive online skills and
    considerable legislative experience. The Library's LIS telephone help
    line provides continuing assistance. The Library has also made many key
    sources available through the Senate Intranet, such as Information
    Resources in the Senate Library, a 55-page annotated bibliography that
    is tailored to the needs of Hill offices; and Presidential Vetoes, a
    two-volume set that traces the legislative history of every veto since
    1789. The provision of this effective database training and valuable
    access to resources quickens the transition for new Senate staff in
    particular.
        Additional indicators that reflect the continued strong activity
    are the 3,847 faxes sent and the 132,903 photocopies produced by the
    Library. In addition, the Micrographics Center produced 4,421 printed
    pages from the extensive collection of newspapers, magazines, and
    executive branch and congressional materials.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Phone, Fax, E-mail.........................................       24,205
    Walk-in Visitors...........................................       10,145
    Hot Bills List on LIS......................................        6,009
                                                                ------------
          TOTAL REQUESTS.......................................       40,359
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

                Client Relations
        Public relations has always been an integral part of the Library's
    activities. The constant arrival of new staff underscore the importance
    of successful outreach programs. Senate staff were introduced to the
    many Library services during the 44 tours and seminars conducted during
    2002. The schedule includes the quarterly ``Services of the Senate
    Library Seminars,'' two ``State Fairs,'' five ``District-State
    Seminars,'' and eight ``New Staff Seminars.'' In addition, the Library
    conducted two special seminars for the Senate Page School. The success
    of these efforts can be seen in the 364 new Library accounts that were
    established for Senate staff during 2002.
        The Library regularly assists researchers, authors, and academics,
    and gives special tours to professional groups and students. During
    2002, scholars from Tokyo University and the University of Cairo
    conducted research in the Library. Researchers from England included
    Paul Lennon, a House of Commons staff member, and author Dr. Michael
    Dunne from Cambridge University. Special tours were given to staff from
    the State Department, Government Printing Office, Congressional
    Research Service, Justice Department, and Trinity College, and to
    Parliament librarians from India and representatives from Tokyo's Far
    Eastern Booksellers.
        For the fifth year, the Library hosted activities in honor of
    National Library Week. The events for 2002, included an open house,
    dessert reception, and a book discussion. The guest speaker for the
    book discussion was Senator Bill Frist, who discussed his book When
    Every Moment Counts: What You Need to Know about Bioterrorism from the
    Senate's Only Doctor. Forty-seven staff attended the book discussion
    and 125 attended the afternoon dessert reception. These annual events
    are an excellent public relations tool that appeal to frequent users
    and also introduce new Senate staff to the wide array of Library
    services.
        The Russell Building corridor displays continue to be popular,
    informative, and educational. The displays provide staff and visitors
    an excellent opportunity to enjoy rare and unique books from the
    Senate's rich collection. During 2002, the displays included The Nine
    Capitals of the United States; Montgomery C. Meigs, Capitol Builder;
    and one honoring African-American History Month.
        A major goal is to provide the Library's online catalog through
    Webster, the Senate's Intranet site, to the entire Senate community.
    The catalog has more than 150,000 items providing access to the books,
    legislative documents, periodicals, newspapers, and legal materials.
    With funds appropriated for fiscal year 2003, new Oracle-based software
    will be purchased, as soon as it is available, to move this project
    along. Patron access to library catalogs is a standard service and the
    Library will continue to work to make the catalog available to every
    Senate office. In other outreach activity, the Library received a new
    Webster address that makes it easier for Senate staff to access the
    valuable information posted on the site (webster.senate.gov/library).

                LIS
        A major Library objective is to increase and improve access to the
    wealth of data and information on the Legislative Information System
    (LIS). Two key sources were added to the LIS homepage: the Hot Bills
    List and the Fiscal Year 1988 to Fiscal Year 2003 Appropriations
    Tables. These two sources list legislation and key documents associated
    with the legislation, along with links to the full text of documents.
    The availability of LIS to every Capitol Hill office ensures that all
    congressional staff will be able to access these resources.
        The Library's role in LIS development continues to expand as staff
    work closely with the Congressional Research Service, Senate Computer
    Center, and Senate staff. The Library teamed with CRS on major
    redesigns of the bill summary and status pages; provided definitions
    and documentation for the Amendment Tracking System; and initiated a
    numbering system for issues of the Senate Executive Calendar. Other
    ongoing projects include improvements in the Congressional Record
    search requirements, LIS Alert Service training, and a proposed
    database tracking congressional committee hearings. In all of these
    efforts, the Library's 28 years of experience in legislative systems
    (starting with Aquarius 1975) is invaluable to the success of LIS.

                Senate.gov
        The 2002 redesign of senate.gov involved extensive participation by
    Library staff. The Library has developed and maintains more than 200
    site pages that provide informative text and hundreds of information
    links to additional source material. The staff's extensive knowledge of
    the legislative process was critical to the success of Active
    Legislation, a selective listing of key legislation with electronic
    links to the full text of all related documents through Thomas and GPO
    Access. The Virtual Reference Desk is an online vertical file that
    traces 200 years of American history, congressional activity, and
    legislative initiatives. Other contributions include annotated
    bibliographies on a variety of subjects including books by current
    Senators, Capitol art and architecture, and key sources on Congress and
    politics. Informative How To guides have been expertly developed to
    assist researchers identify and locate government documents online and
    through local libraries.

    Technical Services

                Acquisitions
        The Library acquired 9,797 new items in 2002, which includes books,
    congressional and executive branch documents, and microforms. This
    represents a 4 percent increase over the previous year. Included in the
    new items were 628 books and reference volumes (an 80 percent increase
    from last year), 5,799 congressional documents, and 3,370 executive
    branch publications. The 80 percent increase in new book arrivals was
    due to the fourth quarter 2001 mail delivery embargo and the resulting
    large number of arrivals during the first quarter of 2002.
        Two major acquisitions were the Unpublished U.S. Senate Committee
    Hearings, 1977-1980 and Presidential Executive Orders and
    Proclamations, 1921-1983. The 1,040 unpublished Senate hearings were
    previously only available at the National Archives, and the executive
    orders completes a collection that totals more than 58,000 presidential
    documents. These titles, which provide the full text of the documents
    with excellent indexes, are important additions to the permanent
    collection.
        The Acquisitions Librarian selected several titles for the
    Library's collection throughout 2002. Works on the early republic,
    constitutional history, biographies of the founders, and American
    expedition were very prominent. Representative titles include Journals
    of Benjamin Henry Latrobe, 1795-1820; Latrobe's View of America, 1795-
    1820; John Marshall and the Heroic Age of the Supreme Court; Aaron
    Burr: Conspiracy to Treason; Original Journals of the Lewis and Clark
    Expedition, 1804-1806; John Adams and the Founding of the Republic;
    Martin Van Buren and the Emergence of American Popular Politics; and
    John Hancock: Merchant King and American Patriot. New acquisitions are
    announced in the monthly New Books List. The list is available through
    the Library's Intranet site and distributed to Senate offices.
        In other acquisitions activity, the Congressional Documents Clerk
    captured 2,000 pages from committee Web sites. Congressional sites are
    carefully monitored for those elusive materials that are only available
    online and often only available for a limited time. The Senate Finance
    Committee made a significant addition to the permanent collection by
    donating materials dating from the 1930s, and the Clerk prepared five
    volumes of hearings and 11 volumes of committee prints from these
    previously unavailable materials. The Library received 100 committee
    print volumes from the House Appropriations Committee following the
    loss of their storage area due to the Capitol Visitor Center
    construction. These volumes were reviewed, prepared and added to the
    Senate's collection.

                Cataloging
        The cataloging team added a total 4,558 new titles to the Library's
    catalog, which included 3,451 congressional publications. Efforts
    focused on rare Senate treaties, executive reports, and older committee
    hearings. The Senate Library is often the only depository for these
    rare items and the cataloging requires great skill and considerable
    experience with legislative materials. This original cataloging is
    extremely time consuming and demands great care to meet the Library's
    quality standard. As the important retrospective cataloging project
    continues, the overall cataloging totals will decline, which occurred
    during 2002 with a 22 percent decline.

                Government Publications Collection
        Although the total number of government documents received during
    2002 was virtually unchanged from the previous year's level, a dramatic
    change did take place: there is a one-third decline in paper documents
    in favor of electronic dissemination. The Cataloguing Technician and
    the Reference Librarians are reviewing the list of electronic titles
    provided through GPO. Once selections are finalized, URL links to the
    documents will be added to the Library's online catalog.
        This is the second year of the Library's ongoing review of
    executive branch publications received through the Federal Depository
    Library Program. In this two-phase project, librarians review every
    title received and then evaluate the existing holdings. The review team
    is headed by the Cataloging Technician, who is joined by the Government
    Documents Clerk and the Head of Information Services. In 2002, 6,730
    outdated, superseded, or surplus items were withdrawn from the
    collection, and 4,385 of these items were offered to other federal
    depository libraries. It was gratifying that 2,587 items (59 percent)
    were claimed and delivered to requesting libraries. During the second
    phase, 185 item numbers were deselected from the Library's depository
    selection list. Retention or removal decisions are determined by patron
    use and alternative access, primarily online availability.

                Warehouse
        A detailed review of the Library's offsite storage requirements was
    submitted to the Sergeant at Arms in September 2002. The proposal
    considered growth for both ten and twenty years, utilized fixed
    shelving, and provided for industry standard environmental controls and
    security. Current storage facilities are less than optimum, creating
    some potential risk to our rare collections. However, the Library
    continues to work with the Sergeant at Arms to address this issue.

                Library.Solution, the Library's Integrated Online Catalog
        The Library's computerized catalog, Library.Solution, provided by
    The Library Corporation (TLC), was installed in January, 2000. The
    system houses 152,149 items containing bibliographic records to
    legislative and legal materials, books, periodicals, serials, and
    microforms. Through the watchful oversight and perseverance of the Head
    of Technical Services, the system's performance has dramatically
    improved. In 2002, there were several new software upgrades for
    circulation and serials that improved module flexibility and
    functionality. The increased functionality reduced daily maintenance
    and improved search capabilities (regular catalog maintenance is
    necessary for efficient and accurate retrieval). During 2002, 25,495
    maintenance transactions were recorded, which included creating and
    editing authority headings, editing existing records, barcoding new
    volumes, editing PURLS from electronic resources, and withdrawing
    records for discarded materials.

    Collection Maintenance, Preservation, Binding, and Equipment
        Maintenance and preservation projects have resulted in a better-
    organized and environmentally protected collection. The Library's
    historic collection of more than 125,000 volumes requires constant
    monitoring of environmental conditions. The prevention of mold is
    accomplished by maintaining temperatures below 70 degrees and humidity
    levels below 50 percent. However, these levels can be very difficult to
    achieve in the Russell Building location. Dehumidifiers operate 24
    hours a day and satisfactorily control the humidity, but the
    ventilation system is not always capable of maintaining acceptable air
    quality and temperature levels. Another major concern is the
    crisscrossing maze of century-old water pipes hovering just a few feet
    above the historic collection. To mitigate this concern, constant
    monitoring is necessary and historic volumes have been moved to safer
    areas.
        The Library has begun to develop in-house expertise in regard to
    bookbinding and paper conservation. The Congressional Documents Clerk
    works closely with the Secretary's Department of Conservation and
    Preservation to learn basic skills.
        In response to the Senate's transition to electronic access to
    information, the Library acquired a book scanner and a second microform
    reader printer. It is now possible to scan documents from text sources
    and microform and electronically transmit those images to any
    workstation anywhere. The versatility of this technology cannot be
    overstated since images can be stored, edited, or reproduced to meet
    the individual needs of the user.

    Staff Development
        During 2002, Library staff participated in 58 training sessions,
    workshops, and professional development seminars. New Library staff
    have a particularly active training schedule and veteran staff are
    required to maintain and upgrade skill levels. Database training
    sessions included Lexis-Nexis, Westlaw, OCLC, Excel, CQ Online,
    PhotoShop, and Web publishing. Technical Services staff attended
    several skill enhancement classes including copy cataloging, Library of
    Congress subject headings, serial holdings, and cataloging concepts.
    Reference Librarians completed the CRS Advanced Legislative Process
    Institute in November, and other staff completed Documentum Web
    Publishing Training in October. Other activities included seminars on
    the legislative process, bookbinding techniques, legal research,
    disaster recovery, effective writing, and several seminars focused on
    Capitol history.

    UNUM, Newsletter of the Office of the Secretary of the Senate
        UNUM, Newsletter of the Office of the Secretary of the Senate, was
    published four times during 2002. The Chief Editor continues to lead a
    team of talented volunteers and cope with constant deadlines and
    revised text. Joined by two experienced co-editors, along with other
    contributors from the Library staff, the newsletter includes detailed
    profiles of offices and individuals within the Secretary's Office,
    institutional histories and book reviews, in addition to other current
    and pertinent topics of interest to the Senate community.

    Other Projects
        The Library continued to support the Friends of Tyler School, a
    tutoring program for Capitol Hill's Tyler Elementary School, by making
    weekly donations of unneeded magazines. These are basic educational
    resources that would be unavailable to most of the children. Other
    surplus magazines were sent to the Senate Page School for inclusion in
    the packages sent to soldiers stationed overseas.
        The Senior Reference Librarian proofread and copyedited the soon-
    to-be published catalog of the Office of Senate Curator.

    Budget
        The sixth year of aggressive budget reviews delivered reductions
    totaling $12,511.52. The targeted expenditure categories were
    subscriptions and standing orders ($5,011.52) and online service
    contracts ($7,500.00). The reductions for the past six years total
    $59,205.34, and these efforts have been critical in offsetting cost
    increases for core materials. The Senate's ever-changing information
    needs require comprehensive annual reviews of collection expenditures.
    These evaluations can be difficult, but they ensure that the Senate
    will receive the highest level of service using the latest technologies
    and the best available resources. These considerable goals will be
    accomplished within budget and without compromising service.

    Major Library Goals for 2003
        Major 2003 goals are the continuation of the active client
    relations program and personalized service that have been key to the
    Library's success. Our long-term goal of 40,000 annual requests was
    reached in 2002. The goal now is to build on this success with an
    additional 3 percent increase in 2003.
        The aggressive budget review program will continue in 2003, with
    the target for another three percent reduction. During the six years of
    budget reviews, most of the major reductions have been implemented, so
    future reductions will be less substantial. The key to all reductions
    is that they not comprise information services to the Senate.
        Document preservation is a critical issue, and the Library will
    continue working with the two major recovery firms, BMS Catastrophe and
    Munters. These firms can restore critical working papers and historic
    documents that have suffered from fire or water damage.
        The senate.gov design team will continue to maintain existing pages
    and expand the offerings made available to the public. The site will
    provide many new products, including several that will provide a
    greater understanding of Congress, the legislative process, and
    representative democracy.
        Teams from Technical Services and Information Services will
    continue the review of executive branch materials and significant
    portions of that collection will be deaccessioned. The titles will be
    discontinued from Library's depository selections list and deleted from
    the online catalog. All deaccessioned holdings will be offered to other
    libraries and information centers.

                                                 SENATE LIBRARY STATISTICS FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2002--ACQUISITIONS
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Books           Government Documents             Congressional Publications
                                                 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                       Reports/      Total
                                                    Ordered    Received      Paper       Fiche     Hearings     Prints       Bylaw       Docs
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    January.....................................          20          37         194          53         300          12          23         114         733
    February....................................          27          35         179         108         154          15          21          61         573
    March.......................................          30          25         201          23         223          10          25          62         569
                                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          1st Quarter...........................          77          97         574         184         677          37          69         237       1,875
                                                 ===========================================================================================================
    April.......................................          20          44         301          43         294          18          65         166         931
    May.........................................          16          45         183         230         267          11          72         119         927
    June........................................          25          51         175          80         235          18          76         169         804
                                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          2nd Quarter...........................          61         140         659         353         796          47         213         454       2,662
                                                 ===========================================================================================================
    July........................................          28          60         296         138         244          10          79         107         934
    August......................................           5          65         134          86         284          13          29         196         807
    September...................................          30          67         144          41         364           9          36         287         948
                                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          3rd Quarter...........................          63         192         574         265         892          32         144         590       2,689
                                                 ===========================================================================================================
    October.....................................          30          81         167         135         237          13          99         421       1,153
    November....................................          15          73         151          43         241          10          25         120         663
    December....................................          17          45         162         103         251          13          26         155         755
                                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          4th Quarter...........................          62         199         480         281         729          36         150         696       2,571
                                                 ===========================================================================================================
          2002 Total............................         263         628       2,287       1,083       3,094         152         576       1,977       9,797
          2001 Total............................         321         347       3,431         724       3,054         293         391       1,225       9,465
                                                 ===========================================================================================================
    Percent Change..............................      -18.07       80.98      -33.34       49.59        1.31      -48.12       47.31       61.39        3.51
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  SENATE LIBRARY STATISTICS FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2002--CATALOGING
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                               OCLC Records Produced
                                                       Hearing #s ------------------------------------------------------------------------------    Total
                                                        Added to                  Government Documents          Congressional Publications         Records
                                                         LEGIS        Books    -----------------------------------------------------------------   Produced
                                                                                   Paper        Fiche       Hearings      Prints    Docs./Pubs.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    January.........................................            0           53           10           85          130           14           41          333
    February........................................           15           35           51            1          437            3           69          596
    March...........................................            1           33           17           13          249            7           50          369
                                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          1st Quarter...............................           16          121           78           99          816           24          160        1,298
                                                     =======================================================================================================
    April...........................................           23           29           13            1          207           16           30          296
    May.............................................           10           24           29           43          388            3           33          520
    June............................................            9           33            8            2          255           17           55          370
                                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          2nd Quarter...............................           42           86           50           46          850           36          118        1,186
                                                     =======================================================================================================
    July............................................            0           39           30           10          384            6           55          524
    August..........................................            0           11           35            0          134            6           26          212
    September.......................................            5           35          203            7          205           13           59          522
                                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          3rd Quarter...............................            5           85          268           17          723           25          140        1,258
                                                     =======================================================================================================
    October.........................................            0           60           20            0          144           17           12          253
    November........................................           36           48           18            0          215           14           21          316
    December........................................            0           30           54           21          125            7           10          247
                                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          4th Quarter...............................           36          138           92           21          484           38           43          816
                                                     =======================================================================================================
          2002 Total................................           99          430          488          183        2,873          123          461        4,558
          2001 Total................................          103          772          411          531        3,668          236          207        5,825
                                                     =======================================================================================================
    Percent Change..................................        -3.88       -44.30        18.73       -65.54       -21.67       -47.88       122.71       -21.75
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           SENATE LIBRARY STATISTICS FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2002--DOCUMENT DELIVERY
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                         Micrographics  Photocopiers
                                                       Volumes    Materials  Facsimiles   Center Pages      Pages
                                                       Loaned     Delivered                 Printed        Printed
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    January........................................         219         384         743           651        10,436
    February.......................................         155         386         631           356         8,230
    March..........................................         200         406         650           966        10,125
                                                    ----------------------------------------------------------------
          1st Quarter..............................         574       1,176       2,024         1,973        28,791
                                                    ================================================================
    April..........................................         203         511         389           195        14,912
    May............................................         142         366         640           139        11,026
    June...........................................         203         402         648           733        14,524
                                                    ----------------------------------------------------------------
          2nd Quarter..............................         548       1,279       1,677         1,067        40,462
                                                    ================================================================
    July...........................................         284         410         732           160         9,220
    August.........................................          97         322         482           252        10,647
    September......................................         127         310         625           208        15,976
                                                    ----------------------------------------------------------------
          3rd Quarter..............................         508       1,042       1,839           620        35,843
                                                    ================================================================
    October........................................         154         429         622           275         9,626
    November.......................................          96         261         486           342         9,295
    December.......................................          72         280         500           144         8,886
                                                    ----------------------------------------------------------------
          4th Quarter..............................         322         970       1,608           761        27,807
                                                    ================================================================
          2002 Total...............................       1,952       4,467       7,148         4,421       132,903
          2001 Total...............................       2,148       4,791       4,551         7,810       168,769
                                                    ================================================================
    Percent Change.................................       -9.12       -6.76       57.06        -43.39        -21.25
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             11. SENATE PAGE SCHOOL

        The United States Senate Page School provides a smooth transition
    from and to the students' home schools. The pages are given as sound a
    program, both academically and experientially, as possible during their
    stay in the nation's capital, balancing a unique work situation with
    the Senate's demanding schedule.

    Summary of Accomplishments
        Accreditation for the page school continues until December 31,
    2008. The Middle States Commission on Secondary Schools reviewed the
    progress report filed by the U.S. Senate Page School and determined no
    further reports are required.
        In the last school year, two page classes successfully completed
    their semester curriculum. Closing ceremonies were conducted on June 7,
    2002, and January 24, 2003, the last day of school for each semester.
        Extended educational experiences were provided to pages. Nineteen
    field trips, seven guest speakers, opportunities to compete in writing
    contests, to play musical instruments, and to continue foreign language
    study with the aid of tutors were all afforded pages. Twelve field
    trips to educational sites were provided for summer pages as an
    extension of the page experience. National tests were administered for
    qualification in scholarship programs as well.
        Given the uniqueness of the pages' roles, greater coordination of
    communication among all responsible parties--the Secretary's Office,
    the Sergeant at Arms, Page Program, Page School, and Cloakrooms--has
    been established. In addition, an evacuation plan and COOP have been
    completed. Pages and staff have practiced evacuations to primary and
    secondary sites. Escape hood training is provided to all pages, staff,
    and tutors and staff have been retrained in CPR.
        Faculty have also pursued professional development opportunities
    with additional courses.
        A community service project has been embraced by pages and staff,
    now for three classes. Items for gift packages were collected,
    assembled, and shipped to military personnel in Afghanistan, Kuwait,
    Oman, Germany, Japan and the U.S.S. Essex. Pages included letters of
    support to the troops participating in Operation Enduring Freedom. In
    gratitude, letters, a certificate of appreciation and flags were sent
    to the Page School by the 145th and the 774th Expeditionary Airlift
    Squadrons.

    Summary of Goals
        For the coming year, the goals of the administration and staff of
    the Senate page school include:
      --Tutoring by teachers on an as-needed basis, and individualized
            small group instruction will be offered.
      --Foreign language tutors will provide instruction in French,
            Spanish, and German.
      --The focus of field trips will be sites of historic, political, and
            scientific importance.
      --Staff development options will include additional computer
            training, seminars conducted by Education and Training, subject
            matter conferences conducted by national organizations, and
            formal graduate work.
      --Creation of curriculum to support a summer academic session will be
            completed for consideration.

                       12. PRINTING AND DOCUMENT SERVICES

        The Office of Printing and Document Services is responsible for
    managing the printing and/or distribution of the Senate's official
    Title 44, U.S. Code printing requirements. The office manages Senate
    Printing expenses, and functions as the Government Printing Office
    (GPO) liaison to schedule and/or distribute Senate bills and reports to
    the Senate Chamber, staff, and the public. The department provides page
    counts of Senate hearings to commercial reporting companies and Senate
    committees; orders and tracks all paper and envelopes provided to the
    Senate; provides general printing services for Senate offices; and
    assures that all Senate printing is in compliance with Title 44, U.S.
    Code, as it relates to Senate documents, hearings, committee prints,
    and other official publications.
        During 2002, OPDS staff maintained all services and fulfilled all
    daily requirements of the office. Additionally, the office has
    continued to implement efforts to consolidate duties and cross-train
    personnel, thereby ensuring office continuity. Under this ``cross-
    working'' program newly learned skills are continually honed and
    customer service is upgraded. Printing department staff and document
    specialists work hand-in-hand to provide quick response to changes
    within the department and provide better human resource management.
        During 2002, OPDS provided commercial reporting companies and
    corresponding Senate committees a total of 952 billing verifications of
    Senate hearings and business meetings. This is an average of 50
    hearings/meetings per committee, a 4.1 percent increase over 2001.
    Billing verifications are how the reporting committees request payment
    from a Senate committee for transcription services. Although some
    hearings are cancelled or postponed, they still require payment to the
    reporting company.
        The OPDS utilizes a program developed in conjunction with the
    Sergeant at Arms Computer Division that provides more billing accuracy
    and greater information gathering capacity, while adhering to the
    guidelines established by the Senate Committee on Rules and
    Administration for commercial reporting companies to bill the Senate
    for transcription services.

                                      HEARING TRANSCRIPT AND BILLING VERIFICATIONS
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                           PERCENT
                                                                      2000         2001         2002     CHANGE 2002/
                                                                                                             2001
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Billing Verifications.......................................          910        1,004          952         -5.4
    Average per Committee.......................................           43           48           50          4.1
    Total Transcribed Pages.....................................       61,898       72,799       71,558         -1.7
    Average Pages/Committee.....................................        2,814        3,467        3,766          8.6
    Transcribed Pages Cost......................................     $401,231     $479,921     $471,807         -0.2
    Average Cost/Committee......................................      $18,238      $22,853      $24,832          8.6
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

        During fiscal year 2002, the OPDS prepared 5,794 printing and
    binding requisitions authorizing the GPO to print and bind the Senate's
    work, exclusive of legislation and the Congressional Record. This is an
    increase of 8.2 percent over the number of requisitions processed
    during fiscal year 2001. Because the requisitioning done by the OPDS is
    central to the Senate's printing, the office is uniquely suited to
    perform invoice and bid reviewing responsibilities for Senate Printing.
    Within the OPDS cost accounting duties lies its ability to review and
    assure accurate GPO invoicing as well as play an active role in helping
    to provide the best possible bidding scenario for Senate publications.
        In addition to processing requisitions, the Printing Services
    Section coordinates job scheduling, proof handling and job tracking for
    stationery products, Senate hearings, Senate publications and other
    miscellaneous printed products, as well as monitoring blank paper and
    stationery quotas for each Senate office and committee. The OPDS also
    coordinates a number of publications for other Senate offices,
    including the Curator, the Historian, Disbursing, and Legislative
    Clerk, along with the U.S. Botanic Garden, U.S. Capitol Police and the
    Architect of the Capitol. Last year's major printing projects included
    the Report of the Secretary of the Senate, the New Senator's Guide, the
    Senate Manual, Leader's Lecture Series brochure, the U.S. Senate
    Catalogue of Fine Art, as well as a 500 page four-color case bound
    book, History of the United States Capitol.
        The Service Center within the OPDS is staffed by experienced GPO
    detailees that provide Senate committees and the Secretary of the
    Senate's Office with complete publishing services for hearings,
    committee prints, and the preparation of the Congressional Record.
    These services include keyboarding, proofreading, scanning, and
    composition. The Service Center provides the best management of funds
    available through the Congressional Printing and Binding Appropriation
    as committees have been able to decrease or eliminate additional
    overtime costs associated with the preparation of hearings.
        The DocuTech Service Center within the OPDS is also staffed by
    experienced GPO detailees that provide Member offices and Senate
    committees with on-demand printing and binding of bills and reports, as
    well as supplementing depleted legislation. In 2002, the DocuTech
    Center produced 656 jobs for a total of 801,888 printed pages.
        The Document Services Section coordinates requests for printed
    legislation and miscellaneous publications with other departments
    within the Secretary's Office, Senate committees, and the GPO. This
    section ensures that the most current version of all material is
    available, and that sufficient quantities are available to meet
    projected demands.

                                         DOCUMENT SERVICES--CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           2000            2001            2002
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total Pages Printed.............................................          28,232          25,051          29,690
        For the Senate..............................................          12,469          14,084          14,489
        For the House...............................................          15,763          10,967          15,201
    Total Copies Printed & Distributed..............................       1,300,000       1,300,000       1,268,603
        To the Senate...............................................         450,842         318,572         439,953
        To the House................................................         308,842         459,477         301,383
        To the Executive Branch and the Public......................         540,316         492,915         532,813
    Total Production Costs..........................................     $14,966.755     $15,428,530     $13,488,381
        Senate Costs................................................      $6,364,265      $7,452,933      $6,339,539
        House Costs.................................................      $7,920,490      $7,333,134      $6,609,307
        Other Costs.................................................        $682,000        $642,462        $539,535
    Per Copy Cost...................................................          $11.51          $12.14          $10.63
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

        In 2002, a total of 29,690 pages were printed in the Congressional
    Record. Of this total, 14,489 were printed for the Senate, and 15,201
    pages were printed for the House of Representatives. These page counts
    are comprised of the Proceedings of the Senate and the House of
    Representatives, Extension of Remarks, Daily Digest and miscellaneous
    pages. This is 4,639 more pages than were produced in 2001, an increase
    of 18.5 percent. A total of approximately 1.3 million copies of the
    Congressional Record were printed and distributed in 2002. The Senate
    received 439,953 copies, the House 301,383, with the remaining 532,813
    delivered to the Executive Branch agencies and the general public.
        The OPDS continually tracks demand for all classifications of
    Congressional legislation. Twice a year the office adjusts the number
    of documents ordered by classification. The goal is to adjust numbers
    ordered in each classification to closely match demand and thereby
    reduce waste. In recent years, the OPDS has taken a more aggressive
    approach to reducing waste of less requested legislation. The office
    supplements depleted legislation where needed by producing additional
    copies in the DocuTech Service Center as previously mentioned. While
    OPDS curtails waste, at the same time, the office pledges never to run
    out of copies of legislation.
        The primary responsibility of the Documents Services Section is to
    provide services to the Senate. However, the responsibility to the
    general public, the press, and other government agencies is virtually
    indistinguishable from these services provided to the Senate. Requests
    for material are received at the walk-in counter, through the mail, by
    fax, phone, and e-mail. Recorded messages, fax, and e-mail operate
    around the clock and are processed as they are received, as are mail
    requests.

                                              SUMMARY OF ANNUAL STATISTICS
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    CONGRESS/    CALLS      PUBLIC      FAX                 COUNTER
                     CALENDAR YEAR                   SESSION    RECEIVED     MAIL     REQUEST     E-MAIL    REQUEST
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    1999..........................................    106/1st     27,570      6,872      5,162        N/A    156,454
    2000..........................................    106/2nd     17,356      4,066      3,129        112     95,186
    2001 \1\......................................    107/1st     16,186      3,449      2,093        621     88,769
    2002 \1\......................................    107/2nd     15,732      3,637      1,866        662     55,930
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ NOTE: From October 17, 2001 until January 22, 2002, the Document Room was displaced to the Capitol and
      operated with one telephone and one computer.

    Online Ordering
        The OPDS is continuing to seek new ways to use technology to assist
    Members and staff with added services and enhancements to current
    methods. Beginning in late 2000, Senate offices, by way of a link to
    the Secretary of the Senate's home Web page, could order legislative
    documents online. Via the same link, a Legislative Hot List Link was
    launched where Members and staff can confirm arrival of printed copies
    of the most sought after legislative documents. The site is updated
    several times daily, and each time new documents arrive from GPO in the
    Document Room. Efforts are also under way to provide the capability of
    online ordering of blank paper for Member offices and Senate
    committees.

                               13. PUBLIC RECORDS

        The Office of Public Records receives, processes, and maintains
    records, reports, and other documents filed with the Secretary of the
    Senate involving the Federal Election Campaign Act, as amended; the
    Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995; the Senate Code of Official Conduct:
    Rule 34, Public Financial Disclosure; Rule 35, Senate Gift Rule
    filings; Rule 40, Registration of Mass Mailing; Rule 41, Political Fund
    Designees; and Rule 41(6), Supervisor's Reports on Individuals
    Performing Senate Services; and Foreign Travel Reports.
        The office provides for the inspection, review, and reproduction of
    these documents. From October, 2001, through September, 2002, the
    Public Records office staff assisted more than 2,000 individuals
    seeking information from reports filed with the office. This figure
    does not include assistance provided by telephone, nor help given to
    lobbyists attempting to comply with the provisions of the Lobbying
    Disclosure Act of 1995. A total of 95,630 photocopies were sold in the
    period. In addition, the office works closely with the Federal Election
    Commission, the Senate Select Committee on Ethics and the Clerk of the
    U.S. House of Representatives concerning the filing requirements of the
    aforementioned Acts and Senate rules.

    Fiscal Year 2002 Accomplishments
        The office deployed its disaster recovery plan prepared in fiscal
    year 2001 with the closure of the Hart Senate Office Building. Based
    upon the review of that plan and a ``look backward'' to see how the
    plan worked, the office made changes to the plan in order to be even
    better prepared. An off-site scanning facility was established in
    coordination with the Sergeant at Arms. Additionally, the identical
    hardware and software are nearly in place in the Public Records office
    to allow for reciprocity for Public Records and SAA scanning functions.
    The office staff was also involved as participants on the content teams
    for senate.gov.

    Automation Activities
        During fiscal year 2002, the Senate Office of Public Records
    transferred its public financial disclosure and FECA records from WORM
    disk storage to digital storage on a server by rewriting these two
    applications. The value to the Senate is that in the event of a COOP
    activation, these records become easily accessible off site.

    Federal Election Campaign Act, as amended
        The Act required Senate candidates to file quarterly reports in an
    election year. Filings totaled 3,320 documents containing 213,968
    pages. The page count represents a greater than 100 percent increase
    over last year. This was due to changes in the FECA forms that reduced
    the amount of information that could be disclosed on a page.

    Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995
        The Act requires semi-annual financial and lobbying activity
    reports. As of September 30, 2002, 5,536 registrants represented 17,575
    clients and employed 21,089 individuals who met the statutory
    definition of ``lobbyist.'' The total number of lobbying registrations
    and reports were 36,587.

    Public Financial Disclosure
        The filing date for Public Financial Disclosure Reports was May 15,
    2002. The reports were available to the public and press by Friday,
    June 14th. Copies were provided to the Select Committee on Ethics and
    the appropriate State officials. A total of 2,457 reports and
    amendments were filed containing 14,084 pages. There were 359 requests
    to review or receive copies of the documents.
    Senate Rule 35 (Gift Rule)
        The Senate Office of Public Records received over 1,320 reports
    during fiscal year 2002.

    Registration of Mass Mailing
        Senators are required to file mass mailings on a quarterly basis.
    The number of pages was 655.

    Plans for Fiscal Year 2003
        The Public Records office plans to enhance its lobbying web site by
    offering an on-line tutorial video that provides e-filers with
    information that makes the program easier to use. The office is also in
    the process of developing a manual detailing the policies and
    procedures of the Public Records Revolving Fund. In addition, at the
    request of the Secretary, the General Accounting Office will conduct an
    audit of the fiscal year 2002 transactions of Public Records' Revolving
    Fund. At the request of the Secretary, the General Accounting Office
    will conduct an audit of the fiscal year 2002 transactions of the
    Public Records' revolving fund.

                              14. SENATE SECURITY

        The Office of Senate Security is responsible for the administration
    of classified information programs in Senate offices and committees. In
    addition, OSS serves as the Senate's liaison to the Executive Branch in
    matters relating to the security of classified information in the
    Senate.

    Personnel Security
        In 2002, OSS processed 1,833 personnel security actions. Seventy-
    two investigations for new security clearances were initiated last
    year, and eighty security clearances were transferred from other
    agencies. Senate regulations, as well as some Executive Branch
    regulations, require that individuals granted Top Secret security
    clearances be reinvestigated at least every five years. Staff holding
    Secret security clearances are reinvestigated every ten years. During
    the past 12 months, reinvestigations were initiated on 59 Senate
    employees. OSS processed 140 routine terminations of security
    clearances during the reporting period and transmitted 288 outgoing
    visit requests.
        The remainder of the personnel security actions consisted of
    updating access authorizations and compartments. In addition, 206
    records checks were conducted at the request of investigative agencies
    supporting the personnel security program.

    Security Awareness
        OSS conducted or hosted 78 security briefings for Senate staff.
    Topics included: information security, counterintelligence, foreign
    travel, security managers' responsibilities, office security
    management, and introductory security briefings.

    Document Control
        OSS received or generated 2,419 classified documents consisting of
    69,670 pages during calendar year 2002. Additionally, 114,712 pages
    from 3,244 classified documents which were no longer required for the
    conduct of official Senate business were destroyed. OSS transferred 674
    documents consisting of 27,275 pages to Senate offices or external
    agencies. Overall, Senate Security completed 6,337 document
    transactions and handled over 211,657 pages of classified material in
    2002, an increase of 17.2 percent.
        In addition to the classified documents destroyed by OSS,
    approximately 866 linear feet of sensitive but unclassified material
    was destroyed for various committees.
        Secure storage of classified material in the OSS vault was provided
    for 106 Senators, committees, and support offices. This arrangement
    minimizes the number of multiple storage areas throughout the Capitol
    and Senate office buildings, thereby affording greater security for
    classified material.

                              15. STATIONERY ROOM

        The Senate Stationery Room's principal functions are: (1) to sell
    stationery items for use by Senate offices and other authorized
    legislative organizations, (2) to select a variety of stationery items
    to meet the needs of the Senate environment on a day-to-day basis and
    maintain a sufficient inventory of these items, (3) to purchase
    supplies utilizing open market procurement, competitive bid and/or GSA
    Federal Supply Schedules, (4) to maintain individual official
    stationery expense accounts for Senators, Committees, and Officers of
    the Senate, (5) to render monthly expense statements, (6) to insure
    receipt of all reimbursements for all purchases by the client base via
    direct payments or through the certification process, (7) to make
    payments to all vendors of record for supplies and services in a timely
    manner and certify receipt of all supplies and services, and (8) to
    provide delivery of all purchased supplies to the requesting offices.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Fiscal Year      Fiscal Year
                                                   2002            2001
                                               Statistical      Statistical
                                                Operations      Operations
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Gross Sales............................      $4,628,342       $3,610,804
    Sales Transactions.....................          61,479           62,970
    Purchase Orders Issued.................           6,218            6,770
    Vouchers Processed.....................           7,376            7,951
    Metro Fare Media Sold..................          41,558           19,621
        $20.00 Media.......................         (36,943)  ..............
        $10.00 Media.......................          (1,978)  ..............
        $5.00 Media........................          (2,637)  ..............
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Stationery Room continues to work on the final phase of the
    voucher upload process. Fiscal year 2002 was the first full year in
    which voucher information was submitted using a customized spreadsheet
    interface with the Disbursing Office to pay vendors. This process has
    eliminated the duplicate efforts previously required in the voucher
    payment process between the Stationery Room and the Disbursing Office.
    The final phase to be completed in fiscal year 2003 will incorporate an
    automated voucher payment reconciliation.
        During fiscal year 2002, the Stationery Room completed the
    formation, development and deployment of its automated physical
    inventory process. This process utilizes radio frequency technology
    which is transmitted from the inventory data collectors back to the
    application software residing on the servers. This new process has
    eliminated the download time which was previously required to transfer
    data.
        The Accounts Receivable interface with the Disbursing Office was
    finalized after development and testing. Initially started in the
    middle of fiscal year 2000, this process involves importing expenditure
    information from each customer account that is certified for
    reimbursement in a Disbursing Office system format. It is then
    transmitted via e-mail and uploaded to the Disbursing Office system for
    reimbursement to the Stationery Room Revolving Fund. This process has
    eliminated the need for issuance of paper checks which required
    considerable staff time for both organizations in the past.
        Implementation of the Web FMIS access for the Stationery Room was
    installed for testing during March 2002, and additional programming was
    needed to address issues to accommodate Revolving Fund accounts. This
    project will eventually allow for key Stationery Room staff to access
    the Disbursing Office via the Web to perform a number of operations,
    which were previously time consuming and staff intensive. This project
    has been three years in the making due to the shear volume of
    transactions generated by the Stationery Room. Time-out errors also
    occurred because of this volume and were recently resolved by the FMIS
    project team.
        The Stationery Room will draft a requirements report during fiscal
    year 2003, that will outline upgrading to new application software for
    the operation, using appropriated monies for fiscal year 2003. It is
    envisioned that this document will be all inclusive and will take into
    account the latest technologies in the industry and the unique needs of
    the Senate.
        In addition, at the request of the Secretary, the General
    Accounting Office will conduct an audit of the fiscal year 2002
    transactions of the Stationery Room's Revolving Fund.

                                 16. WEBMASTER

        The Webmaster is responsible for the three web sites that fall
    under the purview of the Secretary of the Senate: the public Senate Web
    site, www.senate.gov (except individual Senator and Committee pages);
    the Secretary web site on the Senate intranet, Webster; and an intranet
    site currently under construction that is intended for use by Secretary
    staff only. The focus of the past year was a redesign of the Senate Web
    site.

    The Senate Web Site: http://www.senate.gov
                Background
        The senate.gov Web site was created in 1995. A 1998 redesign for
    the 106th Congress included a database for Senator/Committee
    information; daily updates on legislative activities; roll call vote
    tallies; and an expanded section, Learning About the Senate section. A
    project to redesign www.senate.gov and implement a Web Content
    Management System (WCMS) began in the fall of 2001 and continued
    through 2002. The new web site was launched October 30, 2002, and work
    continued through the rest of the year on further enhancements. Plans
    are underway to launch special presentations and micro-sites in phased
    launches in 2003 and 2004.
        Implementation of a Web Content Management System provided many
    advantages to the Senate including: allowing content to be published by
    content owners without web formatting skills; completing a content
    analysis and restructuring using XML tags allowing for repurposing of
    content; a new design and navigation structure based on the content
    analysis, best practices and customer usability studies; and the
    creation of seven content teams to identify new content and maintain
    current content on the site. Over thirty Senate staff worked on the
    project.

                Training and Support Requirements
        Documentation and how-to manuals for working with the WCMS were
    provided by a contractor. Senate staff are continually training and are
    constantly working to support the WCMS and the Web site.

                Future www.senate.gov Projects
        Possible further enhancements to the web site over the next two to
    three years include increasing content, improving content presentation,
    and creating special multimedia presentations such as using XML to
    structure and present the Isaac Bassett collection; converting to a web
    format two animated features developed by the Curator for the Capitol
    kiosk; developing a special feature on Senate desks; and producing a
    retrospective on inaugurals. These special presentations are small
    projects that may be priced and contracted separately.

                Webster
        Webster, the Senate Intranet, is available only to Senate staff
    within the Senate complex and in state office locations. The Webster
    intranet navigation is currently divided by organization. Senate staff
    must know which organization provides a service in order to locate
    information about that service on the web site. The Secretary and the
    Sergeant at Arms are currently evaluating the feasibility of initiating
    a project to redesign Webster to include a comprehensive list of
    services across all service organizations and a common navigation and
    user interface that would be agreed on by the major contributors.
        The Secretary's presence on Webster would be redesigned
    accordingly. A requirements analysis would be necessary to determine
    which of the Secretary's many services Senate staff want to access
    online and how best to deliver them. The Disbursing Office and the
    Office of Public Records already offer fillable forms online and staff
    can order documents from the Document Room via an online ordering form.
    Any redesign plan will likely include development of an online ordering
    system for Stationery supplies. The Documentum 4i Content Management
    System used for senate.gov could also be used for Webster.

                  LEGISLATIVE INFORMATION SYSTEM (LIS) PROJECT

        The Legislative Information System (LIS) is a mandated system
    (Section 8 of the 1997 Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2 U.S.C.
    123e) that provides desktop access to the content and status of
    legislative information and supporting documents. The 1997 Legislative
    Branch Appropriations Act (2 U.S.C. 181) also established a program for
    providing the widest possible exchange of information among legislative
    branch agencies. The long-range goal of the LIS Project is to provide a
    ``comprehensive Senate Legislative Information System'' to capture,
    store, manage, and distribute Senate documents. Several components of
    the LIS have been implemented, and the project is currently focused on
    a Senate-wide implementation and transition to a standard system for
    the authoring and exchange of legislative documents that will greatly
    enhance the availability and re-use of legislative documents within the
    Senate and with other legislative branch agencies. The LIS Project
    Office manages the project and oversees the Senate's outside
    contractors.

    Background: LIS
        An April 1997 joint Senate and House report recommended
    establishment of a data standards program and recommended the Standard
    Generalized Markup Language (SGML) as ``an appropriate technology on
    which to base the preparation of legislative information and document
    management systems.'' Since that time, as anticipated, a subset of SGML
    known as the eXtensible Markup Language (XML) became an industry
    standard, and in December 2000, the Senate Committee on Rules and
    Administration and the Committee on House Administration jointly
    accepted XML as the primary data standard to be used for the exchange
    of legislative documents and information.
        Following the implementation of the Legislative Information System
    (LIS) in January 2000, and the transfer of operations and maintenance
    of the LIS to the Office of the Sergeant at Arms (SAA) in March 2000,
    the LIS Project Office shifted its focus to procuring system
    development services in support of an LIS Augmentation Project (LISAP).
    The LISAP is focused on the data standard component to provide a
    Senate-wide implementation and transition to XML for the authoring and
    exchange of legislative documents. This component of the LISAP also
    includes the review and update of existing document type definitions
    (DTD), development of new DTDs, the conversion of legacy documents to
    XML formats, and conversion of documents in other formats to XML.
        A database of documents in XML format and an improved exchange
    process will result in quicker and better access to legislative
    information and will provide documents that can be more easily shared,
    reused, and re-purposed. Parts of one XML document can be reused in
    another XML document because the document structure is similar and the
    format of the data (XML) is standard. As more and more documents are
    created in the XML format, the necessity for re-keying or converting
    from one format to another (HTML to WordPerfect or XyWrite locator to
    Word or Word to WordPerfect, etc.) will disappear.
        The LISAP incremental development approach has helped the LIS
    Project Office build user acceptance, manage costs and adjust quickly
    when needed. The initial focus for the LISAP is to develop an XML
    authoring system for the Office of the Senate Legislative Counsel (SLC)
    and the Office of the Enrolling Clerk for bills, resolutions and
    amendments. Collaboration of Secretary of the Senate and Sergeant at
    Arms staff, augmented with strong contractor support, provides a great
    team effort and much progress has been achieved in the past year.

    LISAP: 2002
        In October 2001, the LIS Project Office added a software engineer
    and provided oversight for two consultants to conduct an eight week
    evaluation of an XML authoring application being built by the Office of
    the Clerk for the House Office of the Legislative Counsel and the House
    Enrolling Clerk. The application, built in XMetaL, was in limited use
    for House simple resolutions, and the Senate contract looked at its
    applicability for Senate simple resolutions, as well as its potential
    for use for larger, more complex documents. Although the House
    application proved to be a very ambitious, well-conceived effort that
    provided most of the high priority requirements identified by the SLC,
    it did not support their general editing activities in an easy,
    straight-forward manner. Following a briefing for the Clerk and House
    developers, the Senate chose to move forward with XMetaL as the XML
    editor on which the Senate authoring application would be built.
        Two Senate staff were added to the LIS Project Office in 2002. A
    systems analyst was hired by the Office of the Sergeant of Arms in
    February and a systems analyst was hired by the Office of the Secretary
    in June. Two consultants returned in March to assist in the design and
    development of several functions with the editor to address the general
    editing requirements of the SLC. By the end of the contract, the
    project team had determined that it was possible to solve the SLC's
    general editing issues, and the Senate staff began building the
    authoring application in June. The first release of the Senate's
    Legislative Editing in XML Application (LEXA) was completed in
    September, followed by a release of additional functionality in
    December. In January 2003, eight attorneys and one staff assistant from
    the SLC began testing LEXA and providing feedback to the developers.
    LEXA was greeted with praise and enthusiasm from the SLC, and the
    testing/feedback cycle has yielded valuable information for the Senate
    development team. The development team will continue to refine and
    enhance LEXA over the next few months, adding the ability to create
    amendments, reported bills, and documents with tables.
        While LEXA was being developed by Senate staff, a contractor was
    engaged in June 2002 to begin addressing the requirements and design of
    a Document Management System (DMS) for the SLC. The first phase of
    development will be completed in February, and a second phase of
    development and implementation is planned to begin in March. The DMS,
    which will be integrated with LEXA, will provide the ability for the
    SLC to track and manage all work requests, legislative drafts, and
    internal office documents in a variety of formats including XML,
    XyWrite, Word, WordPerfect, e-mail, and PDF. The DMS will also provide
    search and retrieval and a means to exchange documents with the Senate
    Enrolling Clerk, the GPO, the House Office of the Legislative Counsel,
    and the Senate Appropriations Committee. The expansion of a DMS
    approach into other Senate offices will facilitate greater
    accessibility to legislative documents.
        Prior to roll-out of LEXA and the DMS, the contractor will develop
    a training program that will provide transition training for the entire
    office of the SLC and the Senate Enrolling Clerk, a printed and online
    reference manual, and computer-based training for new hires. The
    Contractor completed a short contract in January 2003, to gather the
    training requirements and prototype the products. Training will begin
    late this year, most likely immediately following adjournment.
        Another important element of the LISAP involves data conversion. In
    June 2002, the Senate contracted to convert Senate bills and
    resolutions and the SLC's drafts from the 106th and 107th Congresses
    from their current ``locator-coded'' format to XML. This conversion
    effort is to be completed by the end of March, and the documents will
    be loaded into the SLC's DMS for use in subsequent legislative
    documents authored in XML. The conversion software will be integrated
    into LEXA/DMS in order to provide the ability to convert a single
    document or batch of documents from earlier Congresses as needed. The
    Senate has also contracted on a project to convert the XML data back to
    locator codes for printing through GPO's Microcomp composition software
    and for exchange with offices that are still working in Xywrite and not
    yet ready to work with XML documents. Concurrent work on the bi-
    directional conversions has greatly benefitted both conversion
    projects.
        Another project undertaken in 2002 was a move toward creating the
    Congressional Record in XML. The Congressional Record is an important
    research tool and historical document, and having the electronic data
    available in XML format will one day provide the ability to produce a
    much more useful and powerful searchable database than is possible
    today. One of the first steps in that direction is to create a document
    type definition (DTD) that describes the structure and contents of the
    Record. The Senate contracted to create a DTD for the Senate portions
    of the Record. The contractor also developed a high level strategy for
    a phased transition to an XML Congressional Record including time and
    resources required, hardware and software requirements, and change
    management considerations.
        To support the applications and interfaces for the authoring and
    exchange of legislative documents, LISAP deliverables include project
    plans; requirements and design documents; implementation, deployment
    and training plans; documentation; training materials; and training
    classes.

    LISAP: 2003
        Plans for 2003, include the completion and deployment of LEXA and
    the DMS for the SLC and the Enrolling Clerk. Deployment to those
    offices must include the development and delivery of the training
    program and conversion of documents already created for the 108th
    Congress. One other set of documents that needs to be converted is the
    compilation documents of existing law that are created and maintained
    by the House and Senate Legislative Counsels.
        Completion of LEXA for the SLC for bills, resolutions and
    amendments will establish a framework on which to build applications
    for other offices and other legislative documents. Elements in bills
    are common to other legislative document types including conference
    reports, compilations, committee reports, the U.S. Code and the
    Congressional Record. Authoring applications for additional document
    types produced in other offices can be constructed by reusing certain
    functions built for the bill's application where common elements and
    requirements exist.
        The LISAP will also begin to address the needs of other Senate
    offices, starting with the Appropriations Committee. A contract project
    to determine unique requirements for drafting appropriations bills and
    to assess the feasibility and requirements for a document management
    system for the Committee is under development.
        The legislative process yields other types of documents such as the
    Senate and Executive Journals and the Legislative and Executive
    Calendars. Much of the data and information included in these documents
    is already captured in and distributed through the LIS/DMS database
    used by the clerks in the Office of the Secretary. The LIS/DMS captures
    data that relates to legislation including bill and resolution numbers,
    amendment numbers, sponsors, co-sponsors, and committees of referral.
    This information is currently entered into the database and verified by
    the clerks and then keyed into the respective documents and reverified
    at GPO before printing. An interface between this database and the
    electronic documents could mutually exchange data. For example, the
    LIS/DMS database could insert the bill number, additional co-sponsors,
    and committee of referral into an introduced bill while the bill draft
    document could supply the official and short titles of the bill to the
    database.
        The Congressional Record, like the Journals and Calendars, includes
    data that is contained in and reported by the LIS/DMS database.
    Preliminary DTDs have been designed for these documents, and
    applications could be built to construct XML document components by
    extracting and tagging the LIS/DMS data. These applications would
    provide a faster, more consistent assembly of these documents and would
    enhance the ability to index and search their contents. The LIS Project
    Office will coordinate with the Systems Development Services Branch of
    the Office of the Sergeant at Arms to begin design and development of
    XML applications and interfaces for the LIS/DMS and legislative
    documents. As more and more legislative data and documents are provided
    in XML formats that use common elements across all document types, the
    Library of Congress will be able to expand the LIS Retrieval System to
    provide more useful searches.

                                     ______

                    Prepared Statement of Timothy S. Wineman

        Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to present to your
    Committee, the Budget of the United States Senate for fiscal year 2004.
        Mr. Chairman, the fiscal year 2004 budget estimates for the Senate
    have been included in the Budget of the United States Government for
    fiscal year 2004. This Budget has been developed in accordance with
    requests and proposals submitted by the various offices and functions
    of the Senate. The total budget estimates for the Senate are
    $753,747,000 which reflect an increase of $79,416,000 or 11.78 percent
    over the amount appropriated for fiscal year 2003 and does not reflect
    any adjustments to these estimates which may be presented to your
    Committee during these hearings. The total appropriations for the
    Senate for fiscal year 2003 are $674,331,000. An individual analysis of
    the budget estimates for all functions and offices has been included in
    the Senate Budget Book, previously provided to your Committee.
        The budget estimates for fiscal year 2004 are divided into three
    major categories as follows:

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Senate Items............................................    $133,968,500
    Senate Contingent Expense Items.........................     612,279,500
    Senate Joint Items......................................       7,499,000
                                                             ---------------
          TOTAL.............................................     753,747,000
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Specifically, Mr. Chairman, the fiscal year 2004 budget estimates
    reflect increases over the fiscal year 2003 enacted levels as a result
    of: (1) the anticipated 3.9 percent cost-of-living adjustment for
    fiscal year 2004, and the annualization costs of the fiscal year 2003
    4.27 percent cost-of-living adjustment; (2) the cumulative under
    funding of previous fiscal years in the Senators' Official Personnel
    and Office Expense Account due mainly to increases in population
    categories of various states and increases in the Administrative and
    Clerical Assistance Allowance authorized by the Legislative Branch
    Appropriations Acts, 1999, 2000, 2002, and 2003; (3) personnel
    adjustments, other than the cost-of-living; (4) increases in agency
    contributions applicable to the cost-of-living adjustments and other
    personnel increase requests; and (5) other miscellaneous and
    administrative expense increases.
        Mr. Chairman, I submit for the consideration of your Committee, the
    Budget of the United States Senate for fiscal year 2004.

        Senator Campbell. Thank you. Some of the questions require
    an extensive answer, so I will submit them in writing since we
    have a very short time. That is unless you want to wait until
    we get done voting twice, which will be 45 minutes or more with
    you sitting around.
        Ms. Reynolds. Your preference. So whichever you would like.

                       SELECTION OF ARTISTS FOR PORTRAITS

        Senator Campbell. Let me ask you a couple of easy ones
    first because I am particularly interested in the arts, having
    made my living in it for years and years before I ever got in
    public office. How are the portraits you mentioned of Senator
    Dole and one other.
        Ms. Reynolds. Mitchell?
        Senator Campbell. Yes. Are those done by bid or how do you
    pick who does those?
        Ms. Reynolds. I am going to defer, if I might, to our
    curator on that. She is here to come up and educate us on that.
        Senator Campbell. Please, your name for the record.
        Ms. Skvarla. Diane Skvarla.
        Senator Campbell. Why don't you come up here, Diane.
        Ms. Skvarla. Diane Skvarla, Senate curator.
        We select an advisory group of curators and historians to
    help us in the selection process of the artists. In the case of
    Mitchell and Dole, there are such curators as the curator of
    the National Portrait Gallery, the director of the National
    Gallery of Art, and a variety of other curators from the home
    State.
        Senator Campbell. So that becomes a committee and they
    decide? If an artist is out there and wants to have his name in
    the hopper, what do they do? Write a letter saying I----
        Ms. Skvarla. That is it exactly. They send their portfolio
    to our office and we consider them. Absolutely. And we keep
    them on file.
        Senator Campbell. And is there a standard fee that you pay
    them?
        Ms. Skvarla. The Senate Commission on Art has established a
    standard fee for the leadership work.
        Senator Campbell. How much is it for a painting?
        Ms. Skvarla. $40,000.

                                  CURTIS CHAIR

        Senator Campbell. Thank you. Another thing that I want to
    become one of the joys of the Secretary's Office is retrieving
    some things for the new visitor center. I talked to you about
    it before. One was a chair. That sounds kind of crazy, thinking
    of a chair as an art piece. But it was hand-carved years ago
    for Charles Curtis who was the Vice President of the United
    States. It was a chair he used on the podium. Somebody called
    me about it 15 or 18 years ago. I may have mentioned this. It
    was a private antique store I think, and they wanted to sell it
    to me. And I was not in the market to buy a chair for the price
    they wanted. I could have bought a car cheaper than that chair.
    So I passed on it, but I know that Senator Dodd and several
    others now are really trying to get some interest going to
    reacquire some of the things that historically were in the
    Senate and now are somewhere else.
        I have gotten a couple of partial pictures of that chair,
    and I do not know where it is, but I understand it is in
    private hands somewhere now. I would hope maybe you would help
    us try to find the owner of that and see if they would like to
    sell it to the Senate or donate it and get a tax write-off or
    do something where we could reacquire that with some of the
    other things we are looking for.
        Ms. Reynolds. With the help of the curator's office, I can
    tell you we are very much in the hunt for that chair.
        Senator Campbell. A good chair.
        Ms. Reynolds. Your chair.
        Senator Campbell. No, it is not mine. It was a good chair.
        Ms. Reynolds. Senator Curtis' chair I should say. That is
    right. The chair.
        As of close of business yesterday, we had talked with the
    just-previous owner and we are in hopes of----
        Senator Campbell. Was it an antique store or a private
    owner?
        Ms. Skvarla. It was the antique store that we actually had
    spoken to, the owner of the antique store, but it now is in
    private hands and she is trying to locate it. She sold it about
    2 years ago.
        Senator Campbell. Well, hopefully when we do find that,
    maybe we can convince them of the importance to not only the
    Senate but to the country to try to preserve some of the things
    where all Americans will be able to see things like that in the
    new visitor center.

                             CAPITOL VISITOR CENTER

        Speaking of the visitor center, I know you have only been
    here 4 months. What is your assessment on how it is coming
    along? I know they have had to make some changes after 9/11 and
    that is going to add to the cost of it. When I look out there,
    not being an engineer, it just looks like a big hole so far,
    but I know there is definite progress being made and you are
    much more tuned in to it than I am.
        Ms. Reynolds. Thank you for asking. Obviously, I know we
    will all look forward to hearing Mr. Hantman's comments this
    afternoon on the visitor center.
        I will tell you that in my time here the work on the
    visitor center in terms of the time that it occupies on my own
    schedule and our staff, as we facilitate weekly meetings, both
    a joint meeting with our colleagues on the House side and then
    again here on the Senate side, both on Mondays and Thursdays,
    the time that it takes is extraordinary, but certainly
    worthwhile. The project is one of such complexity and
    magnitude. I share your thoughts. As someone who is obviously
    not an engineer, not a construction manager, it is mind-
    boggling in many respects.
        Again, I know Mr. Hantman will address this. Clearly the
    awarding of the sequence 2 contract was a major goal that we
    got through just before the recess.
        They are making tremendous progress. You may notice as you
    come in, even in the mornings--and I have noticed this. I walk
    to work sometimes and come up the Hill. As early now as 6:30 in
    the morning, those big dumptrucks are loaded up to move that
    dirt out of here every day. So they are making progress. But
    again, it is a project of enormous complexity and magnitude and
    one that each day, there is a different moving piece to the
    puzzle, if you will. But it is an exciting project.
        And it is for all of us to remember that at the end of the
    day, we moved in this direction for security concerns when we
    lost our officers here in that tragic shooting, but clearly
    since 9/11, since October 15th with our anthrax incident, the
    world has changed for us once again. So the security
    enhancement, both for our whole community here, in addition to
    our visitors--you know, the short-term pain and long-term gain
    will be well worth this.
        And in addition, the educational component for our visitors
    will be so greatly enhanced.
        So I think we will end up in 2005 with a project of which
    we can all be very proud and one that will serve this
    institution very well in the years to come.
        Senator Campbell. Well, I am excited about that too. Before
    9/11, the halls were just full of children. You almost could
    not get through to get to vote because there were so many. I
    really miss the little buggers now.
        I did not realize how I could miss those crowds of kids,
    but I do. When that visitor center is opened, I am sure that is
    going to one of the main places they go before they come into
    the Capitol.

                         ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

        Well, thank you, and I will submit some questions for you
    dealing with employment retention and two or three other
    things, if you could get back to us on those. Thank you.
        Ms. Reynolds. Thank you, sir. I appreciate it.
        [The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
    were submitted to the Office for response subsequent to the
    hearing:]

             Questions Submitted by Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell

        Question. Secretary Reynolds, your office has numerous
    initiatives underway to improve the operations of the Senate.
    What are your highest priorities for the year ahead?
        Answer. Our single highest priority is to continue to
    provide the best possible legislative, financial and
    administrative services to the U.S. Senate. To that end, in the
    year ahead, I would cite five specific areas of concentration:
        1. We will continue to make significant progress on our two
    mandated projects, the Financial Management Information System
    and the Legislative Information System Augmentation Project,
    for which we have received substantial appropriations.
        2. Our ongoing work with the Sergeant at Arms in Continuity
    of Operations and Continuity of Government planning will enable
    us to support carrying out the Senate's constitutional
    functions in the event of an emergency or some unforeseen
    circumstance.
        3. We will continue to strengthen our bench in each of our
    25 departments to ensure that our personnel continue the
    tradition of outstanding talent and skill in serving the
    Senate. Succession planning and cross-training, especially
    among our legislative specialities, remain a critical component
    of this focus and our overall operation.
        4. We take very seriously our curatorial role in protecting
    and preserving the Senate wing of the Capitol, and through the
    Historical Office, providing the Senate's institutional memory.
    With the approval of the Senate Commission on Art, we hope to
    approve a preservation policy this year and develop initiatives
    that will allow us to further enhance the Senate's collection
    with historic furnishings and fine art acquisitions.
        5. Using our appropriated dollars from fiscal year 2003, we
    will make much needed technology upgrades, particularly in
    Captioning Services and the Gift Shop. In addition, we hope to
    enhance www.senate.gov, for the further benefit of the general
    public.
        Question. The fiscal year 2002 legislative branch bill
    provided authority for repayment of student loans to Senate
    employees. It is my understanding that 109 of the roughly 900
    employees participating in the first year of the program were
    terminated from the program. Termination occurs if one fails to
    meet the one-year service requirement. This is an
    extraordinarily high termination rate. What is your sense as to
    the effectiveness of the student loan program as a recruitment
    and retention tool for the Senate? Could your office proceed
    with a study of the program, through a survey of offices, to
    determine how it is operating?
        Answer. Since the program is so new, it has yet to reach
    the maturation point where one could point definitively to its
    impact. In addition, while my office has responsibility for
    establishing the sample student loan agreement and addressing
    payment issues, each Senate office oversees the program in
    regard to its own employees.
        Although the rate of those breaking the student loan
    repayment contract appears substantial, continued favorable
    responses from Senate offices give us an overall impression
    that the program has been well-received. Moreover, we know that
    the number of offices using the program and consequently, the
    number of employees participating, has grown steadily during
    each month of this past year. Anecdotal evidence from
    participating offices also seems to indicate that the program
    has been used, at least through the first year, almost
    exclusively for retention purposes.
        In the next few days, I will meet with Senate office
    managers and administrators, and plan to discuss this subject.
    My goal is to create a small working group from several Senate
    offices to devise a means, perhaps through an informal,
    confidential survey, to give us both additional anecdotal
    evidence and statistical evidence of the program's use and
    effectiveness as a retention and recruitment tool. I look
    forward to reporting back to the Committee on our progress and
    results.
                            ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL

    STATEMENT OF ALAN M. HANTMAN, FAIA, ARCHITECT OF THE
                CAPITOL
        Senator Campbell. We will now hear from Mr. Hantman. If you
    will come up and just grab a chair and pull it up there.
        As we did with Ms. Reynolds, if you want to submit your
    complete written testimony, that will be fine because we are
    going to simply run out of time unless you want to wait around
    for an hour. That does not appeal to me either.
        Mr. Hantman. No. I appreciate that, Mr. Chairman. I would
    appreciate doing that.
        Mr. Chairman, I welcome this opportunity to testify today
    and I thank this committee for its support over the years. It
    has allowed us to complete many critical projects and assure
    continuously improving service at the Capitol, the Senate
    office buildings, and throughout the Capitol complex.
        My budget request for fiscal year 2004 meets my
    responsibilities for facilities management, for project
    delivery, and the stewardship at the Capitol complex.
        But just as importantly, it responds to the demands of our
    customers, the requirements for fire and life safety, as well
    as new security requirements. It has been a challenge, Mr.
    Chairman, to build this budget request in this fiscally
    constrained environment and balance these requirements against
    our current workload.
        We are requesting $513.9 million for fiscal year 2004,
    which is $57 million, or 12.5 percent, above the enacted fiscal
    year 2003 budget, including the fiscal year 2003 supplemental.
    The most significant factor in this increase is the request for
    funds to purchase the shared alternate computer facility at
    some $61 million.
        Other significant projects in this request include $40.8
    million to continue with the West Refrigeration Plant expansion
    project, $26.5 million for phase two of the design of the U.S.
    Capitol Building master plan, and $18.7 million to replace the
    high-voltage switchgear in nine buildings on the campus. Some
    other key items include $6.5 million to improve Capitol power
    plant operations, and $4.7 million for steam humidifiers in the
    Hart Senate Office Building. Details of each project, of
    course, are included in the formal statement so I will not go
    into them.
        These projects are in addition to more than 200 projects
    now underway. Among them are substantial projects necessary to
    meet the demand for heightened security as a result of our
    ongoing war on terrorism. In this environment, the AOC is
    carrying out its mission to provide Congress and the public
    with a wide range of professional expertise and services to
    preserve and enhance the Capitol complex and related facilities
    by completing many important projects.
        We have also undertaken significant efforts to improve the
    agency and take on what I like to call the magnificent
    challenges associated with maintaining and preserving our
    Capitol. One of our greatest challenges, Mr. Chairman, is to
    sensitively incorporate modern systems for health, safety,
    security, and accessibility into these historic buildings.
        Although our workload is immense, I am proud to say in the
    first quarter of 2003, 98 percent of our projects were
    completed within budget.
        Not only are we working to complete projects on time and
    within budget, we are doing our work much more safely, and with
    the generous support of Congress, we have increased our safety
    and our professional staff. We have modified our work practices
    and procedures and reduced our total injury and illness rate by
    some 53 percent and our lost time injury/illness rate by 36
    percent in just the last 2 years.
        There is an awful lot of good story over there, Mr.
    Chairman, and most of it is in the written record. So I will
    end my public testimony at this point in time and welcome any
    questions you might have.
        [The statement follows:]

                  Prepared Statement of Alan M. Hantman, FAIA

        Mr. Chairman, members of the Committee, I welcome this opportunity
    to testify before you today. The Office of the Architect of the Capitol
    (AOC) has always worked closely with the Sub-Committee for the
    Legislative Branch on Appropriations in a successful and collaborative
    relationship. I thank the Committee for its generous support which has
    allowed us to complete many critical projects, provide exemplary
    service, and assure continuity of operations at the Capitol, the Senate
    Office Buildings and throughout the Capitol complex. My budget request
    for fiscal year 2004 meets my responsibilities for facilities
    management, project delivery, and the stewardship of the Capitol
    complex. But just as importantly this budget responds to the demands of
    our customers, the requirements for fire and life safety, as well as
    new security requirements. It has been a challenge to build this budget
    request in this fiscally constrained environment and balance these
    requirements against our current workload. I have personally reviewed
    the budget request with each of my Superintendents to ensure we fulfill
    our responsibilities as effectively and efficiently as possible
    reviewing the base amounts and looking for areas of savings.
        We are requesting $513.9 million for fiscal year 2004, ($447.1
    million excluding the items for the House of Representatives)--$57.1
    million or 12.5 percent above the enacted fiscal year 2003 budget
    including the fiscal year 2003 supplemental. This does not include the
    authority to use $4.4 million reimbursement of utilities provided to
    non-legislative branch agencies. The most significant factor in this
    increase is the request for funds to purchase the shared Alternate
    Computer Facility at $61 million. Other significant projects in this
    request are: $40.8 million to continue with the West Refrigeration
    Plant Expansion project; $26.5 million for Phase II of the design of
    the U.S. Capitol Building Master Plan; $18.7 million to replace the
    high-voltage switchgear in nine buildings; and $12.6 million for the
    design of new Library of Congress facilities and a condition assessment
    for the Library of Congress Buildings and Grounds. Other key items in
    my budget request include $6.5 million to improve Capitol Power Plant
    operations; $4.7 million to replace steam humidifiers in the Hart
    Senate Office Building; $4.3 million to refurbish Bartholdi Park; $4.2
    million to prepare a Capitol Complex Master Plan; $4.2 million to build
    an underground fuel storage tank for the Capitol Power Plant, and $4.1
    million to install a fire protection water tank at Ft. Meade.

                              PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS

    Alternate Computer Facility--$61,000,000
        This request will fund the purchase of the land and buildings for
    the Alternate Computer Facility (ACF). Per Public Law 107-206, Section
    905(a), the AOC is authorized, subject to the availability of
    appropriations, to acquire buildings and facilities for use as computer
    backup facilities for offices in the legislative branch. The AOC
    entered into a 10-year lease in November 2002, with a single option of
    an additional ten years, for such a facility in Manassas, Virginia. The
    facility selected was one of two adjoining buildings, with the
    legislative branch occupying one building and the other occupied by
    commercial tenants. Included in the lease, is an option for the AOC to
    buy both buildings and the surrounding land within the first five
    years. Due to the design and interdependencies between the two
    buildings (e.g., common utility systems and mechanical rooms) it is not
    feasible to buy only one of the two buildings. Based on preliminary
    analysis in June of 2002, it is more advantageous to the government to
    procure both buildings than to continue a full 20-year lease for one
    building based on comparing the present value of the cost of ten years
    worth of lease payments to the cost of purchasing the entire building.
    We will undertake full due diligence in support of this purchase this
    summer. Continued leasing of the ACF will result in fiscal year 2005
    acquisition costs rising to $63,000,000 as priced in the lease
    agreement.

    West Refrigeration Plant Expansion--$40,800,000
        This project provides funding for the final increment for the West
    Refrigeration Plant Expansion Project. The total project cost is $81.8
    million. The existing West Refrigeration Plant operates at its maximum
    capacity during peak summer load conditions and if the project is not
    funded, the Capitol Power Plant will be unable to meet the cooling
    needs of the Capitol complex. The Capitol Visitor Center (CVC) will
    also impose additional loads when it becomes operational in 2005. These
    demands make it critical that this project be completed before the CVC
    is completed. Construction of the West Refrigeration Plant Extension
    will accommodate new chillers and include all necessary auxiliary
    equipment, such as cooling towers, pumps, heat exchangers, piping and
    controls. It is imperative that this project be completed in time to
    meet future demands.

    U.S. Capitol Master Plan Phase II--$26,500,000
        This project will provide initial design funding to implement the
    U.S. Capitol Master Plan which addresses upgrades to the
    infrastructure/support systems of HVAC; fire protection and life
    safety; security; electrical; lighting; vertical transportation;
    telecommunications; system integration; and plumbing systems throughout
    the Capitol Building. The scope is fundamentally an infrastructure
    upgrade coupled with limited architectural changes designed to meet
    fire and life safety codes for the interior of the U.S. Capitol. The
    proposed work includes upgrades to the Senate and House Chambers; a
    building-wide sprinkler system; an upgrade of the HVAC system to
    include smoke evacuation features; an essentially new electrical system
    to include new distribution wiring and panels and new or refurbished
    lighting and special electronic systems; additional vertical
    circulation; and upgraded public toilet facilities. The new special
    electronic systems include security, fire alarm, information
    technologies fiber optic backbone and legislative call systems. The
    Master Plan will not affect existing architectural design except in
    those areas where upgrades necessitate architectural modifications. We
    are currently in the process of engaging a consultant to conduct a
    feasibility and constructability analysis for construction phasing with
    emphasis on accelerating the life safety, fire protection, and other
    Master Plan recommendations and initiatives that can be accomplished
    with minimum disruption to building occupants and business operations.
    The analysis will also include the feasibility of accelerating life
    safety and fire protection recommendations on the House and Senate
    Chambers. If this phase of the Master Plan is not funded, the
    correction of basic fire and life safety deficiencies will be deferred,
    potentially resulting in harm to human life in the event of a fire or
    emergency evacuation.

    Replace High Voltage Switchgear in Nine Buildings--$18,672,000
        This project will provide funds to replace High Voltage Switchgear
    in nine Capitol complex buildings. High Voltage Switchgear ensures
    adequate reliable electric power supply through power distribution
    interfaces with the PEPCO incoming feeders. It works at 13,800 volts
    and contains high voltage power breakers and system protective metering
    devices and constitutes the backbone of the electric power distribution
    system. The replacement switchgear will ensure maximum technical
    uniformity between switchgear in different buildings and simplify
    maintenance. The switchgear in all buildings are very old (in most
    cases 42 to 50 years old) and are either at the end of their life
    expectancy or are no longer logistically supported by the manufacturer.
    Currently, a single failure of high voltage equipment will not, in most
    cases, interrupt normal power supply. However, two consecutive failures
    (if the first one cannot be promptly fixed) would result in a major
    power supply breakdown to a building, possibly for days entailing
    significant costs to repair.

    Design, Study and Condition Assessment for Library of Congress--
            $12,602,000
        This line item provides flexibility to meet the needs of the
    Library of Congress by performing studies, designs and condition
    assessments to improve project planning and programming. Specific
    initiatives under this category are:
      --Replace Drinking Water System.--Design revisions to the drinking
            water system to ensure long-term safety and reliability of
            water supply.
      --Logistics Warehouse Facility, Ft. Meade.--New warehouse facility at
            Ft. Meade enabling the LOC to consolidate, increase service and
            eliminate current leased facilities.
      --Offsite Storage Facility.--Design of new off-site facility to house
            platinum level collections for the LOC.
      --Book Storage Module 5, Ft. Meade.--Design new Book Storage Module 5
            at Ft. Meade to house general collections to alleviate safety
            and overcrowding issues.
      --Master Plan, Ft. Meade.--Continuation of conceptual level master
            plan study at Ft. Meade to plan and resolve utility issues.
      --Replace Bathroom Exhaust Systems, Jefferson Building.--Design
            upgrades to mechanical exhaust system to alleviate building
            code violations.
      --Upgrade Book Conveyor System.--Design upgrades to the book conveyor
            system fire wall penetration resulting from a Citation from the
            Office of Compliance.
      --Study, Damper Smoke Control.--Design a comprehensive smoke
            management system to ensure safe egress of building occupants
            and respond to a Citation from the Office of Compliance.
      --Upgrade Emergency Lighting.--Design upgrades to all emergency
            lighting systems to ensure code compliance and the safety of
            building occupants.
      --Steam-to-Steam Humidification.--Design upgrades to all building
            humidification systems to improve operations, indoor air
            quality and collections preservation.
      --Repair/Replace Copper Roof, Adams Building.--Design repairs to
            deteriorated copper roof currently leaking and at the end of
            its expected life cycle.
      --ADA Bathroom Renovations, Adams Building.--Design upgrades to
            bathrooms in fire stairs resulting from a Citation from the
            Office of Compliance.
      --Repair Clean Convector Units.--Study methods to clean existing
            convector units to increase indoor air quality.
      --Provide Electrical Upgrade, Madison Building.--Study alternatives
            to increasing available power throughout the Madison Building.
      --Conservation of Murals.--Ongoing study and conservation of historic
            artwork in LOC facilities.
      --Design, Replace Windows.--Design and install prototype windows for
            evaluation in accordance with the Capitol Police Blast-Cad
            Study.
      --Condition Assessment.--Comprehensive condition assessment of all
            facilities and equipment to facilitate a capitol improvement
            plan & preventative maintenance plans.

    Installation of Distributed Control System--$6,500,000
        This project will replace the existing pneumatic controls in the
    Capitol Power Plant Boiler Plant with digital controls. Existing
    obsolete controls utilize mercury, which is an environmental hazard. A
    ``fieldbus'' protocol will be used in the new control system, which
    will allow accurate and remote monitoring of the plant. The controls to
    a boiler must be fully functional and accurate to ensure safe plant
    operation and compliance with environmental restrictions. Due to the
    age, inaccuracy, and unavailability of replacement parts, the system
    must be replaced. If not funded, the Capitol Power Plant will continue
    to use unreliable controls. The plant will not operate as safely or as
    efficiently as it should. Also, this installation will support future
    potentially more restrictive permit limits for environmental
    compliance.

    Replace Steam Humidifiers, Hart Building--$4,715,000
        This project will fund the removal of the existing humidification
    systems in 25 major air handling units and retrofit them with new
    ``Clean Steam'' chemical-free humidification equipment in the Hart
    Building. To enhance steam quality and reduce maintenance by in-house
    personnel, a water softening system will be incorporated to work in
    conjunction with the steam generators. The remaining air handlers will
    be supplied with cabinet-style humidifiers (located adjacent to air
    handlers) that will enable ``clean steam'' humidification. If not
    funded, a ``clean steam'' chemical-free humidification system, intended
    to improve indoor air quality, will not be installed.

    Bartholdi Park Fountain Restoration and Park Renovations--$4,280,000
        This project will provide funding to restore the Bartholdi fountain
    which was purchased from the 1876 International Centennial Exhibition
    in Philadelphia, and was moved to Washington, DC in 1877. The
    restoration of the fountain to its cast iron metal base in 1986, was
    expected to last approximately 10 years. The four top coatings have
    disintegrated and the cast iron is exposed in areas. Although the
    fountain is functional, both the top and lower basins leak and many of
    the water sprays function sporadically. This project will renovate and
    restore the existing fountain and basin. This includes providing and
    applying a coating treatment to the deteriorating metal finish;
    upgrading and replacing all plumbing; upgrading the electrical
    components; installing a new utility vault, basin, light fixtures, and
    19th century replicas of the original light fixtures and basin
    standards. All irrigation to the fountain and Bartholdi Park will be
    replaced. Most of the park does not have an irrigation system and
    requires high maintenance and manpower during the summer months.
    Additionally, the deteriorating sidewalk will be removed and replaced.
    If not funded, the Bartholdi sculpture will continue to deteriorate and
    the fountain will become inoperable.

    Capitol Complex Master Plan--$4,200,000
        This project provides funding to prepare a Capitol Complex Master
    Plan. The existing master plan is 22 years old and does not address
    facility requirements brought about by the Congressional Accountability
    Act, nor does it relate to the present need for a heightened security
    environment. A comprehensive Facilities Conditions Assessment (FCA) has
    not yet been performed, and there is insufficient global input to fully
    address all necessary decision factors. Therefore, a new master plan
    for the Capitol complex needs to be developed to:
      --Assess the present physical condition of the buildings;
      --Assess the buildings' capacities and functionalities to accommodate
            current and future Congressional occupant requirements;
      --Identify and document current and future Congressional programmatic
            needs;
      --Address code, environmental, and security requirements;
      --Address visitor and traffic circulation (including parking) and;
      --Address new technology opportunities.
        The resulting master plan will serve as a blue print to aid the AOC
    and Congress in determining capital expenditure requirements and
    priorities. Funding for the Facilities Conditions Assessment is being
    provided in fiscal year 2003 for the Capitol, Senate, and House
    facilities. In addition, a workshop was convened by the National
    Academy of Sciences to assist in identifying key issues and factors
    that need to be addressed by a master plan for the Capitol complex.
    Based on the results of the workshop, a Request for Proposal will be
    developed to solicit proposals from firms with demonstrated expertise
    in campus-type master planning. The scope will include identifying and
    documenting all of the critical factors that will affect the planning,
    funding, and implementation of future capital projects on the campus.
    The scope will also call for recommendations on a means of prioritizing
    the factors. Without this comprehensive master plan for the Capitol
    complex, capital projects will not be planned, developed, or
    prioritized within an appropriate comprehensive framework.

    Install Oil Storage Tanks--$4,200,000
        This project will provide funding to install a 400,000-gallon
    underground fuel oil storage tank in the Capitol Power Plant auxiliary
    coal yard. The fuel oil tank will supply oil to the Capitol Power Plant
    boilers through a utility tunnel being installed as part of the Interim
    Coal Handling Project. The current fuel oil storage on the site does
    not provide sufficient capacity in the event of a gas curtailment. This
    additional 400,000 gallons of storage along with the existing 200,000
    gallons of storage will give a total of seven days storage at full load
    operation. Environmental restrictions have effectively limited the
    flexibility of burning coal, thus making the plant more dependent on
    fuel oil to stay within limits. If not funded, the Capitol Power Plant
    will be forced to continue to pay higher costs for natural gas. The
    plant would continue to operate on limited fuel storage capacity.

    Water Tank, Ft. Meade--$4,103,000
        To meet fire code requirements of the Book Storage Module 2 Project
    at Fort Meade, a water tank is necessary as a second reliable water
    source for this and future projects. This project will include a
    500,000 gallon on-grade water tank, pumps and an associated
    distribution network. This is a code-required installation and Book
    Storage Module 2 cannot be occupied until the water tank and associated
    pumps and distribution network are provided.

                                EMPLOYEE SAFETY

        Not only are we working to complete our projects on time and within
    budget, we also want to complete them safely. I am pleased to report
    that, according to the most recent figures from the Occupational Safety
    and Health Administration, we have cut our total injury/illness rate by
    53 percent and our lost time injury/illness rate by 36 percent in the
    last two years. Our lost time rate for fiscal year 2002 was only
    slightly higher than the Federal agency average--a substantial
    achievement for a predominantly shop-oriented, blue collar work force.
    These significant injury reductions are a result of the priority I have
    placed on safety, the attention and commitment of the AOC management
    team, the hard work and dedication of AOC employees, and the ongoing
    support of this Committee.
        With the generous support of Congress, since 2000 we have increased
    our safety professional staff, modified work practices and procedures,
    and provided protective equipment and safety training to our employees.
    We also have greatly improved our ability to anticipate and prevent
    injuries and illnesses from occurring. While this is a substantial
    achievement, I believe our total injury rate remains high. I am
    committed to continue reducing this rate and achieving my ultimate goal
    of eliminating all injuries and work-related illnesses.
        Another achievement of note: There were no citations issued by the
    Office of Compliance (OOC) to the AOC in 2002. In fact, in its 2002
    Biannual Report, the OOC noted the ``improved workplace safety'' it
    witnessed during its inspections.

                      SENATE OFFICE BUILDINGS IMPROVEMENTS

        Over the past two years, we have made significant improvements to
    the three Senate Office Buildings. We have been systematically
    modernizing the passenger and freight elevators to improve their
    performance and reliability. As part of the overall security plan, we
    expeditiously installed blast resistant film on all the office windows.
    The Dirksen Building has undergone a major renovation to modernize the
    building systems in the areas of fire protection, life safety,
    electrical power, telecommunications, heating, ventilation, and air
    conditioning. Major improvements include new telecommunications systems
    infrastructure to support the upgrade of equipment and technologies;
    expansion of the existing sprinkler system to provide 100-percent
    building sprinkler protection for increased life safety and property
    protection; and energy-efficient lighting. Many of the restrooms in the
    Dirksen and Hart buildings are now fully ADA compliant, and the modular
    furniture replacement program was recently rolled out in the Hart
    Building.
        The AOC has made significant improvements to the Senate Office
    recycling program by implementing a combined paper program recommended
    as a best practice by an industry consultant. The combined paper
    program allows mixing of different types of paper which simplifies
    separation and collection, thereby increasing participation and
    reducing contamination. As a result, contaminated waste has been
    reduced from a high of 75 percent in fiscal year 2000 to nine percent
    in the first half of fiscal year 2003. There has been a 21 percent
    increase in the amount of combined paper products collected; a 200
    percent increase in the number of bottles and cans recycled; a 1,300
    percent increase in newspapers recycled; and a 66 percent increase in
    the amount of scrap metal recycled.
        In June 2002, we asked our Legislative customers to provide us with
    feedback regarding their satisfaction with the level of building
    services we provide. This will be an on-going process with the second
    survey scheduled for June 2003. In response to the feedback we
    received, we have modified and improved our cleaning procedures.
    Specific inspection procedures have been implemented to identify
    consistency and quality of cleaning operations, specific cleaning goals
    are set, and we are recognizing outstanding employee performance. As a
    result of the process changes, from July 2002 to January 2003, the
    Senate Office Buildings night cleaning division reached a performance
    score of 96.8 percent. (The performance score is the percentage of
    satisfactorily cleaned items over total inspected items based on stated
    objective criteria.)

                    CAPITOL AND CAPITOL GROUNDS IMPROVEMENTS

        In the Capitol Building, we have orchestrated hundreds of projects
    from painting rooms, to the first phase of the Dome rehabilitation, and
    the preparation of construction documents for the major work yet
    remaining. One of the larger projects we have undertaken is the
    modernization of all elevators. Work has been completed on nine
    elevators, three are currently under construction, and the remaining
    one is scheduled for modernization in fiscal year 2004. In addition, we
    will complete the stairwell extension from the third floor to the
    fourth floor on the Senate side on time and within budget.
        We have achieved full compliance with ADA requirements at all the
    main building entrances and in the public restrooms. Smoke detectors,
    strobe signaling devices, emergency lighting, and other fire safety
    devices are continually being installed throughout the building. We are
    busily cleaning, restoring, and preserving the artwork, statues, and
    architectural features inside the Capitol Building. Outside the
    building, we have been tending to the grounds to assure that pathways
    were cleared of ice and snow during the many snow storms we endured
    this winter and planting bulbs so that we would be graced with a
    beautiful array of flowers now that spring has finally arrived.
        This is only a short list of our many accomplishments. I expect an
    even more significant list of successes through the implementation of
    our Strategic Plan which will help unify the Agency's priorities and
    provide the business management tools needed to accomplish our
    organizational goals.

                               STRATEGIC PLANNING

        When I testified before this Committee last year, I discussed the
    AOC's continuing improvements in planning and managing its projects and
    resources more effectively. Over the past year, the AOC has undergone a
    management review by the General Accounting Office (GAO). In January
    2003, GAO issued its final report that validates the initiatives that
    we had underway, such as structuring and implementing a Strategic Plan
    and a Performance Management Plan, and makes additional recommendations
    that we are incorporating into our operations. These plans will assure
    that the Agency better achieves its mission; improves its performance;
    reaches its goals; and employs best practices to achieve results. We
    are in the process of obtaining stakeholder feedback on drafts of both
    plans and we will finalize them shortly. In unifying the Agency's
    priorities, the Strategic Plan will concentrate the AOC's efforts on
    planning and excellence in the most critical areas of our work: state-
    of-the-art facilities management and project management; business
    processes; and human capital planning and allocation.
        The foundation of our Strategic Plan is a commitment to our
    stakeholders to provide exceptional client service and to preserve and
    protect the national treasures entrusted to our care. It is our pledge
    to respond quickly to requests; to find the most efficient way to solve
    problems; to provide the services necessary for Members of Congress and
    their staffs to perform their jobs; and to appropriately accommodate
    the many visitors to the Capitol complex each year.

                                 HUMAN CAPITAL

        We employ a diverse workforce consisting of individuals with a
    variety of skills and institutional knowledge. Because we are a
    service-based organization, these individuals comprise AOC's most
    valuable assets and are most critical to its success. AOC's focus on
    the strategic management of human capital covers all aspects of our
    staff assets, from recruitment to skill development to job motivation
    and satisfaction. We believe this strategic focus on human capital will
    ensure AOC's ability to deliver on our promises now and in the future.
        As part of our strategic planning initiatives, we have published a
    number of new or revised human capital policies and will continue to
    review and identify others that may need to be updated or developed. We
    are also focusing on further improvement in areas of recruitment and
    employee development, and on significantly increasing the quantity and
    quality of data collection to enable us to develop better projections
    of our workforce needs--in terms of succession planning, recruitment,
    and development--based on our strategic goals.
        Fiscal year 2003 marked the beginning of the third annual cycle of
    our individual performance management program for employees. The
    Performance Communication Evaluation System (PCES) has enabled AOC to
    complete non-executive employee performance plans and evaluations
    regularly and systematically.
        We developed and implemented a Performance Review Process that
    provides for performance plans and evaluations for our executives. We
    now plan to align our executive performance plans with our Strategic
    Plan to enable a top-down approach to cascading strategic goals
    throughout AOC.
        Establishing formal processes to gather and respond to employee
    feedback is extremely important. As we implement new programs and
    processes as part of our transition to a performance-based
    organization, there will likely be many changes. An established
    feedback process will ensure that AOC leaders and employees both
    understand and respond to each other's concerns. This form of
    communication will assist the AOC in achieving its mission in the
    fairest and most efficient way. We have formed a team to develop a
    comprehensive employee feedback program that will utilize focus groups,
    surveys, and other feedback mechanisms.
        In addition to these communications efforts, we continue to provide
    outreach and support to employees through the omsbudsperson, and our
    EEO/CP and Human Resources Offices.

                             INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

        We are committed to adopting an agency-wide approach to managing
    Information Technology (IT) to provide the consistent direction needed
    to enhance mission performance across the agency. As such, we are
    implementing a portfolio-based approach to IT investment decision
    making; developing an Enterprise Architecture (EA) that will help drive
    the agency-wide approach to IT management while aligning business
    processes with IT; revising our structured system life cycle to include
    processes for IT system acquisition and development with quality
    standards built in during each phase of the process; monitoring the
    performance of AOC's information technology programs and activities;
    and building a comprehensive information security program.

                              FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

        One key IT investment has been the implementation of the Financial
    Management System (FMS). The GAO noted in its management review report
    that the financial team has made great strides in improving the flow of
    financial data. The fiscal year 2004 budget continues to support this
    effort with funds to build policies and procedures and move us toward
    auditable financial statements. Our budget reflects the structure
    implemented under FMS with program groups and provides the recommended
    budget schedules and analysis of change formats from the Legislative
    Branch Financial Managers Council that details the individual
    appropriation budget requests.

                              FACILITY MANAGEMENT

        The ability to measure performance related to strategic goals will
    be improved by the continuing implementation of the Computer-Assisted
    Facilities Management (CAFM) system. In 2004, the application will be
    upgraded to a web-enabled environment, preventative maintenance will be
    rolled out for electrical and plumbing systems, handheld scanners will
    help employees in the field maintain more up-to-date work order
    information, and we are planning to interface the facility management
    system to the financial management system to help insure accurate
    material, labor, and asset costs associated with maintenance work.

                             CAPITOL VISITOR CENTER

        The most significant and most challenging project that began
    construction since I last appeared before this Committee is the Capitol
    Visitor Center (CVC). This is a much-needed project of momentous and
    historic importance. As the ninth increment of growth of the ``People's
    House,'' it will offer free and open access to all people in a safe and
    secure atmosphere so that they may witness the workings of democracy
    and the legislative process.
        This is a brief status report on the very significant progress we
    have made. The work is proceeding in several overlapping phases. In the
    winter of 2001-02, project bids were sought and the first major
    construction contract was awarded in spring 2002. This contract, called
    ``Sequence 1--Foundation/Structure'' and worth $99 million, was awarded
    to a Northern Virginia contractor. The contract involves site
    demolition, slurry wall construction, excavation, installation of site
    utilities, construction of the concrete and steel structure,
    waterproofing, and construction of a new truck service tunnel.
        The contractor has nearly completed the installation of the
    perimeter foundation walls and has begun major excavation activities
    that will continue through the summer of 2003. The outer perimeter wall
    is essentially complete and full excavation of the site is beginning as
    some 300-400 truckloads of soil are being removed daily in a manner
    least invasive to our Capitol Hill neighbors. Excavation will continue
    into the summer and the contractor will begin erecting steel columns
    and begin pouring portions of the roof slab later this summer.
        With Sequence 1 moving at full throttle, we have just recently
    awarded the contract for Sequence 2, which includes installation of
    electrical, mechanical, and plumbing services, and all stone and
    architectural build-out and finishes of the CVC. A Source Selection
    Evaluation Board, headed by the General Services Administration (GSA),
    evaluated the bid proposals for this contract and I made the award with
    the approval of an obligation plan for Sequence II.
        While the contract award is approximately 10 percent above the
    government estimate, a range that is considered to be within an
    acceptable and reasonable range per GSA and Department of Defense
    governmental standards, I am currently reviewing the entire project
    scope and the total cost-to-complete with the assistance of an outside
    independent contractor and oversight by the General Accounting Office.
    CVC Budget
        With regard to the overall budget, the original CVC project budget
    of $265 million was established in 1999. At that time, the budget
    provided for the core CVC facilities, including the Great Hall,
    orientation theaters, exhibition gallery, cafeteria, gift shops,
    mechanical rooms, unfinished shell space for the future needs of the
    House and Senate, and the truck service tunnel. After September 11,
    2001, new security requirements, pedestrian tunnels, et cetera,
    prompted the appropriation of $38.5 million in additional funds, which
    were provided in the Emergency Supplemental Appropriation. In November
    2001, the CVC team was then tasked to design and build-out the House
    and Senate shell space, requiring an additional $70 million, which was
    provided in the Legislative Branch Appropriations bill. These
    additional requirements to the original scope bring the total amount of
    the project to date to $373.5 million. I would like to emphasize this
    point--despite how these figures may have been reported in the papers--
    additional new requirements to the original scope have resulted in the
    appropriation of additional funds.
    Project Complexities
        As I mentioned, this project is arguably our most challenging. For
    example, many utility lines crisscrossing beneath the East Front Plaza
    had to be rerouted out of the project footprint before excavation could
    begin. During the past 100-plus years, water, sewer, electrical, and
    communication lines have been installed, and many of these lines were
    poorly or inaccurately documented on the existing building drawings--
    some of them dating back to the early 1900s. As a result, we
    encountered many unforeseen site conditions related to this effort,
    including an incorrect elevation for the top of the Amtrak tunnel as it
    crosses beneath First Street, N.E. This necessitated a costly rerouting
    of a 30-inch water main that needed to cross above it. As it became
    increasingly apparent that existing drawings were unreliable, much of
    the utility work was completed at night or on weekends. To some extent,
    we also worked around the legislative calendar in an effort to minimize
    disruption to the business being conducted in the Capitol.
        There were many other tasks that we needed to accomplish before we
    put the first shovel in the ground. We are committed to preserving and
    protecting the trees on the East Capitol Grounds, and therefore hired a
    full-time tree preservation contractor; erected fencing and installed
    canopy misting systems to keep the trees free from dust; installed a
    new irrigation system; and relocated many significant, affected trees
    to safe locations. We removed and stored all of the original Frederick
    Law Olmsted features, including the fountains, lanterns and retaining
    walls. All of these historic features will be restored and reinstalled
    in their original locations on the Plaza. New visitor screening
    facilities were constructed on both the north and south sides of the
    Capitol and ramps were installed along the West Front to provide a
    respectful and ADA accessible visitor path into the building.
        To assure as little disruption as possible to the day-to-day
    activities in and around the Capitol, we continued to work closely with
    the Leadership, the Sergeants-at-Arms, the Capitol Police, and other
    key offices to address the following:
      --Alternate parking and pedestrian zones for the Senate and House.--
            The CVC team successfully offset every parking space that has
            been impacted by construction activities.
      --Noise reduction.--Noise reduction window units were installed over
            every window on the East Front. These windows have cut the
            construction noise down significantly to the extent that
            Senate-side occupants have not voiced a single noise complaint
            since construction began.
      --Relocated staff.--A number of offices located in the East Front
            Extension have been temporarily closed or relocated due to the
            construction, with staff moves coordinated to assure smooth
            transitions into alternate space.
      --Media Sites.--New media sites off the Plaza were established to
            allow press operations to continue.
      --Security.--All of our pre-construction activities were accomplished
            in an atmosphere of extremely tight security following the
            terrorist events of September 11, 2001. Increased screening
            requirements and more secure site logistics procedures
            presented additional challenges. However, the Capitol Police
            have been very accommodating in assisting us in maintaining a
            secure site without impacting the work schedule.

    Schedule
        Despite these many challenges--including the fact this was one of
    the wettest winters on record--with the timely award of Sequence 2, we
    are on schedule to complete the project in 2005 and to support the
    Inaugural in January 2005. We are in meetings now with the Rules
    Committee to determine what level of support is required. We will
    partner with the Sequence 2 contractor to examine what is needed for
    the Inaugural and determine the associated costs, if any.
        Regarding the schedule for substantial completion of the CVC in the
    fourth quarter of 2005, the Sequence 2 contract documents clearly
    stipulate that the facility will be--and I quote--``substantially
    complete and capable of being occupied and used by the Government for
    the intended purpose.''

                                  MASTER PLAN

        In recent years the number and magnitude of our projects has
    greatly increased. Therefore, we are improving our ability to
    coordinate and efficiently complete our many projects by taking steps
    to implement a series of project management plans. These initiatives
    will help the AOC to baseline and compare building conditions; plan and
    evaluate funding requirements; set goals; and track progress. To
    formulate the shorter term plan for project prioritization and
    implementation, a five-year Capital Improvements Plan is under
    development. This effort began with the development of a process for
    project prioritization and will ultimately incorporate the findings of
    the facility condition assessments which will begin later this year.
        To provide consistent management and oversight of these efforts, a
    new Director of Planning and Programming has recently been hired. He
    has direct responsibility for both the Capitol Complex Master Plan and
    the Capital Improvements Plan as well as coordination of all planning
    and programming efforts.
        Additionally, a new Project Management Director has been hired to
    support and manage a myriad of on-going projects. For example,
    following an expansive ``best practices'' analysis of AOC project
    delivery processes, we have published several manuals to improve the
    consistency of design and project delivery processes including: the AOC
    Design Standards Handbook to assure consistency in our project designs;
    an A/E Design Manual to assist our architects and engineers with
    project design and delivery processes; and an AOC Project Manager's
    Manual to help institutionalize the project management process. We are
    also conducting ``lessons learned'' studies on several of our projects
    and are incorporating the results into these manuals to assure they
    remain current and practicable.

                        U.S. CAPITOL POLICE MASTER PLAN

        In 1999, the AOC and the United States Capitol Police (USCP)
    published the United States Capitol Police Master Plan. Since that
    time, other events have necessitated a comprehensive update of that
    plan as well as a clear implementation strategy that reflected the new
    demands on the Capitol Police.
        This implementation strategy focuses on two issues: changes to the
    USCP operational scenario and the need for a new Police Headquarters
    facility that responds to those changes. A specific site for this new
    structure has been identified and approved by the Capitol Police Board.
        Other ongoing Police projects include the construction of new
    chemical explosives handling and K-9 structures at D.C. Village; a new
    vehicle maintenance facility at 67 K Street, S.W.; reconfiguration of
    existing areas within the Capitol, Senate and House Office buildings
    and existing Police Headquarters; and the site selection for an Off-
    Site Delivery Screening Center to replace the current P Street
    Warehouse.
        We have contracted with the Naval Facilities Engineering Command to
    assist us in project management and delivery for these projects to
    assure that this additional workload is addressed in a responsive and
    timely manner.

                               SENATE RESTAURANTS

        The Senate Restaurants have made strides in reducing economic
    dependency over the last five years through cost reductions and the
    marketing of its services. The effects of September 11, 2001, on the
    number of visitors to the Capitol complex have delayed our ability to
    reach the objective of a self-sufficient operation. The Senate
    Restaurants are committed to continuing its efforts to improve the
    quality of service, reduce costs, and market services.
        In the past year, the cash register stations in the Dirksen
    cafeteria have been redesigned to allow greater customer flow. We began
    offering new services designed to provide Senate offices with new menu
    options when planning small, in-office functions that are less
    expensive than fully catered events. We have also introduced a ``heart
    healthy'' menu in the Senate Dining Room. Senate staffers can log on to
    our expanded web site and check out the daily specials in each
    restaurant and look for special events. The site is registering more
    than 5,000 hits per month. We've also made available to the public our
    famous Senate Bean Soup mug. They have sold well and have appeared in
    stories in the Wall Street Journal and on NBC's ``Today'' show.
        In addition, we have installed the Food Trak inventory and cost
    control software package to enhance our operating systems. This
    program, together with the upgraded point-of-sale system, gives us the
    capability of interfacing our various systems to match items sold with
    up-to-date cost data and provides nutritional content information from
    the U.S. Department of Agriculture's data base.
        Finally, I am especially pleased to inform you that for the fifth
    straight year, independent auditors have found no reportable conditions
    or material weaknesses in financial controls.

                                   CONCLUSION

        Mr. Chairman, the AOC has undertaken significant new projects and
    responsibilities, while at the same time improving the safety and
    efficiency of our employees. Our request for funds are in direct
    response to customer requests and the level of cleanliness,
    preservation, safety and security expected on the Capitol Complex. We
    have met challenges, developed a Strategic Plan, and hired skilled
    managers and employees to help us achieve our immediate and future
    goals. We have completed thousands of work orders, become more
    responsive to our clients, and are adjusting to the heightened security
    demands of a post-September 11th world.
        I am dedicated to providing a safe, secure, and productive
    environment for all who work in the Capitol complex and for all those
    who visit each year. We would not have made the progress we have
    without the dedication of all of our AOC employees. I am very
    privileged to lead a hard-working and professional team committed to
    exceeding the expectations of Congress and the American people.
        The Committee's support in helping us achieve these goals is
    greatly appreciated. Once again, thank you for this opportunity to
    testify today. I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.

        Senator Campbell. Thanks. I will also submit some questions
    in writing for you too. But we will go as far as we can before
    the bell rings.

                             GAO MANAGEMENT REVIEW

        Senator Campbell. The GAO issued a general management
    review of your operation in January and they made a number of
    recommendations to improve management. I believe one of them
    had to do with hiring a chief operating officer. Are you making
    progress on that?
        Mr. Hantman. We absolutely are, Mr. Chairman. I have gone
    through many dozens of resumes. In fact, we are starting the
    interview process next week. We have some good candidates from
    a variety of backgrounds in Government and in the private
    sector as well.
        Senator Campbell. They also found some problems with
    facilities management, day-to-day activities such as cleaning,
    moving offices, maintenance and preservation of buildings,
    things of that nature. What do you consider the biggest
    challenges in facilities management, and have you started a
    plan for improving those areas that they noted?
        Mr. Hantman. We basically accepted all of GAO's
    recommendations, Mr. Chairman, and our plan is to complete the
    vast majority of them by the end of this year. Some of them are
    going to go into the following year's annual performance plan,
    and the most major of them, of course, is the completion of a
    strategic plan. We are currently reviewing our draft with
    stakeholders on both the Senate and the House side, and we
    clearly plan to incorporate the changes and the input from
    those stakeholders into the strategic plan before we finalize
    it.
        Also, as we select the COO, we plan to review this
    strategic plan with the COO and look at what potential
    organizational changes need to flow from that, so that person
    can buy into it and play a key role in the agency as we go
    forward.

                             CAPITOL VISITOR CENTER

        Senator Campbell. Looking through my notes, it says that
    you have over 200 projects underway at this time, the biggest
    one, obviously, being the visitor center. One of them proposes
    $26 million for the initial design of overhauling the Capitol
    Building to address life-safety and other deficiencies. Some of
    these large items like this--do we need to move them at the
    same time as the visitor center?
        Mr. Hantman. If we never did a visitor center, Mr.
    Chairman, we would still need to make these changes. It is
    really a question of the fact that over 200 years our Capitol
    has grown in eight different increments of growth, and we
    actually need additional stairways, additional means of egress,
    things to make the building safe on a primary level, including
    sprinkler systems in that building. So whether or not, again,
    we did the CVC, this work would have to be done.
        Our problem, of course--and we have talked to stakeholders
    on both the Senate and the House side--is how much discomfort,
    how much dislocation can the Members take while we are still
    completing the visitor center and doing the perimeter security
    and other things on the Capitol grounds. So what we have done
    is we have redirected the plan to take a look at the low-
    hanging fruit, if you will, that really would not require major
    dislocations to how the Capitol Building works so that the
    business of the Capitol can be done on a day-to-day basis. So
    that is what we are looking at.
        Senator Campbell. Was the last kind of major overhaul of
    the rotunda a few years ago?
        Mr. Hantman. There certainly was scaffolding going from the
    floor of the rotunda up to the Apotheosis of Washington at the
    top and that was cleaned, conserved and repainted.
        In fact, we had a project, Mr. Chairman, several years ago
    where we did the first phase of restoration of the Capitol
    dome. The second phase actually would require doing major
    patches of existing cracks and things of that nature,
    repainting the exterior of the Capitol dome once we stripped it
    down to its base metal, all those kind of things. That major
    piece of work we put on hold also just because of the level of
    dislocation we have currently with the CVC.
        What we are really concerned with in the Capitol Building
    itself is safety, and we plan to look at some projects with the
    funding we are requesting in 2004 to be able to make it safer,
    again without dislocating the Senate and the House and allowing
    them to continue their business.

                          CAPITOL POLICE HEADQUARTERS

        Senator Campbell. You have also been working with the
    Capitol Police to develop a master facilities plan, including a
    new headquarters building. The Capitol Police testified last
    week about it. We have already appropriated roughly $60 million
    for that project. What is the status? Have you found a place
    yet that you expect to build on?
        Mr. Hantman. The Capitol Police Board has accepted a
    recommendation from the Capitol Police for square 695 at the
    corner of New Jersey Avenue and I Street, Southeast. We believe
    it meets the best requirements for the new headquarters
    facility.
        There was a potential conflict, Mr. Chairman, with the use
    of square 695, though. There was a Department of Energy study
    that recommended that same site for construction of a new
    replacement power plant. Now, in separate----
        Senator Campbell. What is there now? Is it just bare
    ground?
        Mr. Hantman. Basically it is low-use industrial works, some
    vacant land, truck storage area, things like that. It is a
    privately owned lot at this point in time, a couple of lots
    adjacent to our coal storage yard for the Capitol power plant.
    We agree that this is the right location for the Capitol Police
    headquarters.
        The recommendations coming out of this DOE study had talked
    about putting a replacement power plant potentially and a
    cogeneration plant on that site. We believe that the hundreds
    of millions of dollars that would be required by this project
    is really not necessary, that we continue to use our tri-fuel
    approach to running our power plant for using coal as a primary
    fuel, also oil and gas so that we can meet the EPA criteria for
    the site. But we think we can retrofit our existing buildings,
    use the existing site we have our Capitol power plant on, and
    release the site for the use of the Capitol Police
    headquarters.
        Senator Campbell. Well, when you are working with them,
    safety and security have got to be paramount in your plans and
    theirs too, and also some of the things that they are talking
    about but have not implemented but probably will be at a later
    time. They are expanding, as you know, very quickly. When
    taking their testimony the other day, it looks to me like
    anything we put in place now is going to be too small 5 years
    from now at the rate they are growing. So we will consider that
    too.
        Mr. Hantman. One of the things we do have to do, Mr.
    Chairman, is take a look at the program size of that building
    itself. The House has indicated that they prefer that the
    Capitol Police move out of the Capitol area and the House
    office buildings, and if we need to take those components of
    the police into the headquarters, the police are currently
    looking at that criteria right now so we can take a look at the
    magnitude of the size, just in response to what you are saying.

                         ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

        Senator Campbell. Thank you.
        The rest of the questions I will submit. If you could
    answer them in writing at your earliest convenience, I would
    appreciate that.
        [The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
    were submitted to the Architect for response subsequent to the
    hearing:]
             Questions Submitted by Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell

                         STATUS OF GAO RECOMMENDATIONS

        Question. Mr. Hantman, GAO issued a general management review of
    your operation in January and made a number of recommendations to
    improve management. Can you provide an update on the implementation of
    GAO's recommendations and the progress you have made in the last year?
    How will you ensure that there is accountability for implementing the
    strategic plan you are developing?
        Answer. Our work with the GAO on the Management Review resulted in
    a number of recommendations which we have integrated into our Strategic
    Plan and Annual Performance Plan. We accepted all of GAO's
    recommendations. Our plan is to complete the vast majority of the
    recommendations by the end of this year; some carry over into the
    following year's Annual performance plan. The GAO recommendations
    include:
      --Completion of an AOC Strategic Plan;
      --Continuing to strengthen Human Capital policies and procedures;
      --Continuing to improve Financial Management processes and systems;
      --Developing and implementing a strategic approach to IT management;
      --Continuing initiatives to achieve a safer workplace;
      --Institutionalization of best practices in Project Management;
      --Continue to improve the Recycling Program.
        We are in the final phase of implementing a performance management
    approach that includes strategic planning, annual planning and
    reporting, and assessment of our performance based on meeting specific
    milestones and measures. The Strategic Plan serves as the cornerstone
    of this process.
        We are currently soliciting stakeholder feedback on drafts of our
    first Strategic Plan and Annual Performance Plan. Our goal is to
    finalize the Strategic Plan and Performance Management Plan shortly.
        The Strategic Plan and Annual Performance Plan will concentrate the
    Agency's focus to continue to improve productivity and service
    excellence. To ensure accountability and results we are: establishing
    specific goals and milestones for each of the strategic objectives;
    linking our senior managers' performance standards to the milestones of
    the performance plan; identifying and developing specific business
    process improvements based on client feedback (i.e. office cleanliness,
    timeliness of response to requests, and quality of work); identifying
    and developing new workplace programs/policies based on employee
    feedback; integrating best practices into our operational strategies
    (i.e. facilities management, project management; and IT systems
    development and implementation).
        A significant challenge, once we reach agreement with our
    stakeholders on our Strategic and Annual Performance Plans, will be to
    address the unexpected construction, renovation, or other mission
    impacting requests from our customers. In order to be responsive to the
    high priority needs of our customers and to be able to initiate and
    complete projects on time, we will need to use the strategic and
    performance plan as a basis to shift already agreed to projects to meet
    new or unexpected demands.

                             FACILITIES MANAGEMENT

        Question. GAO found problems with facilities management. What are
    your biggest challenges in facilities management and what is your plan
    for improvement?
        Answer. The Architect of the Capitol (AOC) is entrusted with
    preserving, maintaining, and enhancing the national treasures that make
    up the Capitol complex. The Capitol complex is comprised of more than
    two dozen buildings, nearly 14 million square feet of space, and more
    than 270 acres of grounds. AOC is responsible for the maintenance,
    renovation, and new construction in and around the Capitol Building,
    the House and Senate office buildings, the Library of Congress, and the
    Supreme Court. The historic nature and high-profile use of these
    buildings creates a complex environment in which to carry out AOC's
    work. AOC must also perform its duties in an environment that requires
    balancing the needs of multiple stakeholders, including congressional
    leadership, committees, individual members of Congress, congressional
    staff, other clients, and the visiting public.
        Facilities Management is one of four focus areas that embody our
    Mission and Vision. Aligned with the facilities management area is a
    strategic goal that emphasizes core services and critical processes to
    deliver effective and efficient support and services.
        There are several focus areas in facilities management that were
    identified as areas of concern. Three major objectives were identified
    to facilitate improvements in facilities management: (1) Develop a
    comprehensive understanding of the condition of facilities under AOC's
    jurisdiction; (2) Address maintenance and care needs proactively; and
    (3) Preserve significant and historic heritage assets.
        In our effort to develop a comprehensive understanding of the
    condition of these facilities we are developing a scope of work and
    requirements document to procure consultant services to conduct a full
    conditions analysis and document current conditions of the facilities
    in the Capitol Complex. The assessment will be conducted in two phases.
    The first phase will include the Capitol Building, House Office
    Buildings, and Senate Office Buildings. The second phase will
    incorporate the remaining buildings in the AOC's jurisdiction.
        To address maintenance and care needs proactively, we have resolved
    several of the issues raised through procedural controls. Instituting
    these controls established a more consistent process for generating
    work schedules and providing feedback to the client as to when work
    will be accomplished. We also follow up with the client upon completion
    of work to ensure their requirements have been met and we ask them to
    complete a customer survey form to evaluate the work performed.
        To address general maintenance concerns, we are instituting a
    preventive maintenance tracking and scheduling program. The Architect
    of the Capitol's Office of Facilities Management is working with the
    Office of the Superintendent to begin loading assets into the
    preventive maintenance system program. The first phase for loading
    assets is scheduled for completion in fiscal year 2003. Full
    implementation of this system will be directly dependent upon funding
    availability. The program implementation will provide a systematic and
    consistent approach for performing routine recurring maintenance. The
    system will enable maintenance work to be effectively and efficiently
    planned and performed. In addition, the system will provide information
    for performance measures that can be used as a management tool to
    evaluate and effectively manage work performance.
        In addition, the following are the areas and the actions taken to
    address other concerns:
        Cleanliness.--Quality inspections are being performed regularly and
    the results of the inspections are forwarded to the Quality Manager for
    analysis and recommended actions. Also, monthly management meetings
    have been established to review inspection results and to discuss
    actions instituted to correct any noted patterns of concern.
        Wayfinding Signs.--A project is scheduled for award in fiscal year
    2003 to address the wayfinding signage concerns. The project will
    include the installation of interior and exterior signage for building
    directions, building exits, elevator locations, ADA access, etc.
    Completion of this effort is scheduled for fiscal year 2005.
        Elevators.--A project to modernize all the elevators in the Capitol
    is underway. The effort commenced in fiscal year 2002, and to date, 19
    of 27 elevators have been modernized and 3 are currently under
    construction. The remaining 5 will be completely modernized by fiscal
    year 2004.
        Heating, Cooling, Air Quality.--Air quality studies have been
    performed and continue to be performed on a case-by-case basis whenever
    there is a concern raised regarding air quality. Air monitoring/
    sampling is performed and actions are recommended and implemented to
    address any negative air quality results.
        Preserve significant and historic heritage assets.--This effort is
    underway and will include defining the standards, verifying assets,
    establishing and facilitating a Congressional Working Group to define
    responsibilities for subcollections in question, and developing a
    memorandum of understanding. This effort was begun in January 2003 and
    is scheduled for completion in the third quarter of fiscal year 2004.
        Senate Office Buildings.--For the Senate Office Buildings there are
    many challenges in the daily management of these facilities. Cleaning
    and policing of public areas is challenging due to the heavy
    intermittent loading of our buildings. As waves of visitors move
    through the Senate Office Buildings, at various times of the day the
    need for immediate cleaning and policing becomes necessary, often after
    area cleaning cycles have been completed and at the expense of normal
    operations. Other challenges that face our cleaning operations include
    intensive contractor oversight and contractual administrative
    requirements to facilitate and manage contractor performance.
    Additionally, this type of work has a high personnel turnover rate
    resulting in reduced productivity and/or quality. To help resolve these
    conditions, additional staffing has been added to the day policing
    contract to increase the level and frequency of cleaning of public
    areas such as restroom facilities, entry ways and stairwells. The
    Senate Superintendent's Office has also increased its inspection
    efforts of public spaces in and around the Senate Office Buildings and
    implemented processes to facilitate quick remedies to identified
    deficiencies as part of a comprehensive Quality & Assurance Program.

                  MAJOR PROJECTS--MASTER PLAN CAPITOL BUILDING

        Question. The Architect's office has over 200 major projects under
    way at this time--the most visible one being the Capitol Visitor
    Center. Your budget proposes $26 million for the initial design for
    overhauling the Capitol building to address various deficiencies. Why
    do we need to proceed with this very large undertaking at this time?
    Can you give me an idea of the magnitude of this proposed project, what
    would be involved, and a rough estimate of the cost to implement the
    master plan for the Capitol after you complete the design?
        Answer. The U.S. Capitol Building Master Plan Study proposes to
    coordinate five projects into one that would consist of (1) Capitol
    Infrastructure Master Plan, (2) Sprinkler System installation
    throughout the building, (3) House Chamber Study, (4) Senate Chamber
    Study, and (5) Security Work. As a once-in-a-lifetime project,
    coordination of these five projects ensures that the disruption of
    these spaces occurs only once.
        Public Law 104-1 passed on January 23, 1995, established the
    ``Congressional Accountability Act (CAA) of 1995.'' Since Congress
    enacted this Act, the Office of Compliance (OOC) has conducted periodic
    inspections of the facilities under the AOC's jurisdiction. Those
    inspections identified a series of fire and life safety code
    deficiencies requiring corrective action. Most of these deficiencies
    have been corrected, but there are some that would require in-depth
    analysis and study to determine how best to integrate the solutions
    with the Capitol's unique architectural configuration and historical
    features. Since it is the AOC's responsibility to take necessary
    corrective actions to abate violations identified by the OOC and/or
    those identified through self-inspection and analysis, it became
    necessary to undertake a study to review the existing building
    conditions against the applicable building, life safety, and fire
    codes.
        The main purpose of this study (Capitol Building Master Plan) is to
    review code deficiencies and develop a series of recommendations on the
    corrective actions necessary to comply with the codes in a prescriptive
    manner or through alternate means called ``equivalencies,'' while
    upgrading the Capitol Building's support systems and infrastructure.
        The Capitol Building Master Plan Study is significantly complete
    pending identification of final security requirements and funding. The
    Master Plan addresses the provision of: adequate means of egress to
    safely evacuate building occupants during emergency situations; a
    building-wide sprinkler system; smoke control at vertical openings such
    as the Grand Stairs; security controls at all outside fresh air intakes
    entering the building's ventilation systems; ducted air return; and
    infrastructure improvements such as: electrical power and lighting
    upgrades, emergency power needs, elevator upgrades, smoke detectors,
    evacuation alarms, telecommunications & cable TV upgrades, plumbing
    renovations, and modernization to the heating, ventilation, and air
    conditioning systems to meet energy standards and security related
    requirements.
        The Capitol Building Master Plan Study, as proposed conceptually
    will take at least seven years to implement based on a phased approach
    and will require emptying sections of the building for periods of time
    to allow for full implementation of the recommended upgrades. This
    approach will require that swing space outside the Capitol Building be
    provided to house persons and functions displaced during a given phase
    of the project. The Master Plan Study's conceptual schedule recommends
    six construction phases.
        To achieve the proposed construction phasing suggested by the
    Capitol Building Master Plan Study, design development and the
    preparation of construction documents need to commence in fiscal year
    2004 and continue through fiscal year 2006 in the order reflected by
    the construction phases. Prior to beginning the design development and
    preparation of construction documents, extensive graphic documentation
    of the existing systems of the building's infrastructure and
    development of schematic designs are necessary to form the basis of the
    construction documents. Currently, the fiscal year 2003 budget includes
    funding necessary to begin the graphic documentation of existing
    building systems. The fiscal year 2004 budget submission included a
    request for $26.5 million to initiate design development and
    construction documents preparation for a phased approach.
        Prior to and during a March 21, 2003, briefing to House and Senate
    leadership staff, we sought feedback on the Capitol Building Master
    Plan Study recommendations and the proposed construction phases. The
    main concern of leadership staff is the physical impact of this project
    in addition to disruptions as a result of CVC construction. They noted
    the need to accomplish those recommendations while having a minimum
    impact on the building's occupants and operations. With these concerns
    in mind, the AOC was asked to explore options for the incremental
    implementation of Capitol Building Master Plan Study recommendations.
        Based on the recommendations from leadership staff, and upon
    approval to utilize available fiscal year 2003 funding we will initiate
    a Constructability and Phasing Analysis that emphasizes those life-
    safety, fire protection, and security recommendations and initiatives
    that could be accomplished with minimum disruptions to the building
    occupants and business operations. Emphasis also will be placed on
    accelerating similar work for the House and Senate Chambers.

                       MAJOR PROJECTS--POSSIBLE DEFERRALS

        Question. Are there any areas in your budget request that could be
    deferred in order to allow you to complete the CVC and other major
    projects currently underway?
        Answer. There are several projects which could be deferred or
    phased in to reduce the workload during fiscal year 2004 and subsequent
    years. The projects listed below, by appropriation, could be eligible
    for deferral or phased approaches, if agreed to in consultation with
    our clients:

    General Administration

                Conduct Energy Survey of Capitol Complex, $1,600,000
        The Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, Public Law 105-275,
    Section 310 requires the Architect to perform an energy survey of the
    Capitol complex. A total of $1.6 million is requested to perform the
    energy survey.
        The survey could be phased by jurisdiction, if so directed. The
    Architect could develop a phasing plan to accomplish the energy survey
    over a two or three year period based on the Committee's direction.

                Replace High Voltage Switchgear in Nine Buildings,
                        $18,672,000
        Replacement of the high voltage switchgear is a critical project
    due to its advanced age. Failure of any of the switchgear units would
    result in power failure in the building. Additionally, the poor
    condition of the equipment creates a hazard to the employees who must
    perform routine maintenance. However, the funding stream could be
    phased over three years. The project ideally would be bid as a base
    option for the first year, with two succeeding option years. This would
    allow for a single procurement for construction to occur. A single
    contract will streamline the procurement process, project management,
    construction management, and contract administration functions. It will
    also increase the likelihood that equipment manufacturers remain
    consistent throughout the AOC, saving future training costs and
    replacement parts.
        Due to the age of the switchgear, and in some cases, its
    dilapidated condition, the period of phasing should not exceed three
    years. A potential funding stream is fiscal year 2004--$7.5 million,
    fiscal year 2005--$6.8 million, and fiscal year 2006--$4.3 million. The
    work would be based on a prioritization of age and condition of the
    buildings.

                Alternate Computer Facility, $61,000,000
        The request to purchase was presented because the initial lease
    purchase analysis indicates that purchasing the facility sooner rather
    than continuing to lease it will save the government money. Also
    because of the critical and sensitive nature of the facility and the
    operations it houses, the security of the building, and the grounds
    surrounding it would be further enhanced if it is for legislative
    branch or government use only. As such, the $61 million could be
    executed in fiscal year 2004. However, deferring the purchase will
    allow time to resolve due diligence issues which will take about six
    months. We also need to work the landlord/tenant authority legislation
    and better understand the costs of being the landlord.

    Senate Office Buildings--Replace Steam Humidifiers, HSOB, $4,717,000
        While all projects this office requests are important and
    necessary, our project request Replace Steam Humidifiers, in the Hart
    SOB, could be deferred with moderate impact. We plan to install local
    steam generators to provide necessary capacity for building
    humidification following industry best practices. Currently, the Hart
    Building is humidified via plant steam which is not an industry best
    practice. This current system is capable of humidifying to acceptable
    guidelines, however it does not have the capacity to humidify to
    desired levels which can cause indoor air quality complaints during
    colder days of the winter.

    Capitol Building--Capitol Building's Master Plan, $26,500,000
        A phased approach to this project could be taken based on feedback
    from key leadership staff. Based on this approach, the original fiscal
    year 2004 request of $26.5 million would be reduced to $10.7 million.
    This will provide for the design of short-term incremental work;
    perform a space utilization study for the House and Senate sides of the
    Capitol; construct the means of egress by the West Brumidi corridor;
    develop to 100 percent completion construction documents for the House
    and Senate Chamber restorations; perform additional plaster
    assessments; and construct a back-up fire pump.

                MAJOR PROJECTS--PERFORMANCE BY NON AOC ENTITIES

        Question. What percent of your major projects are not being handled
    ``in-house'', through the Corps of Engineers or other outside entities?
        Answer. There are currently 24 projects of which a major portion of
    the project management or construction management efforts are being
    performed by those other than AOC permanent staff. They include: the
    Capitol Visitor Center; the West Refrigeration Plant Expansion; the
    various Perimeter Security projects; several projects for the Library
    of Congress at Fort Meade; several projects for the USCP located at
    D.C. Village and elsewhere; and security-related projects at the
    Library of Congress. While these projects represent approximately 11
    percent of the current AOC projects, they represent the majority of the
    project funding and include over $700 million of total project costs.
    They are being managed, partially or fully, by temporary employees
    assigned to the specific project, construction management firms hired
    for the specific project, firms which are providing project and
    construction management to the AOC on an IDIQ basis, the Army Corp of
    Engineers, NAVFAC and other external entities. The AOC continues to
    evaluate the services which can be provided by these entities and will
    utilize them where we believe they can provide the best project
    delivery support.

                             CAPITOL VISITOR CENTER

        Question. You have indicated that the CVC will cost more than has
    been appropriated to date. Can you explain why this is?
        Answer. Before discussing the need for additional funds, it is
    important to understand that the original project budget of $265
    million, which included the core CVC facilities, the service tunnel,
    and only the shell space for the House and Senate, was established four
    years ago. That estimate was made based on the best information
    available at that time, but I must stress that the estimate was made
    before the construction drawings were finished, before the first shovel
    was put in the ground, and before we had the chance to really look long
    and hard at what it would take to keep the Capitol fully operational
    while the CVC was constructed. No one could have anticipated or
    predicted the myriad of challenges we faced, in particular,
    encountering unforeseen site conditions, adapting to changes in scope,
    mitigating project impacts, maintaining Capitol operations, and
    accommodating increased security requirements following the events of
    9/11.
        The first challenge we encountered during pre-construction
    activities, neither my team, nor our construction manager, Gilbane
    Building Co., nor two independent estimators, could have anticipated.
    The level of work that was required went above and beyond our original
    pre-construction expectations. We've had additional requirements
    related to our tree preservation effort, our historic preservation
    effort, our visitor screening, parking accommodations for Members and
    staff, noise reduction, and requirements related to alternate House and
    Senate media sites. But by far, our greatest challenge has been in the
    area of utility relocation.
        Utility lines within the project footprint needed to be relocated
    prior to excavation of the project site. Many of these lines have been
    installed at various times during the last 100 years as technology
    changed and new utility systems were installed. Relocation of these
    lines, while keeping the Capitol itself fully functional, has proved to
    be a delicate and, complex pre-construction task. Part of the
    difficulty is due to the fact that many of the utility lines were
    poorly or inaccurately documented on the building drawings that were
    available to us, some of which date to the early 1900s. As it became
    increasingly apparent that existing drawings were unreliable, we
    attempted to do much of the utility work at nights or on weekends, and
    to some extent, we worked around the legislative calendar, all in an
    effort to minimize disruption to the Capitol and its occupants. Those
    restrictions, however, do have a cost associated with them. Yet,
    despite all these challenges, it is a credit to our team that we were
    able to avoid any significant disruption to the Capitol building
    operations during this process. Last summer, the project footprint was
    successfully cleared of utilities.
      --A specific example: on First Street NE, we had intended on
            rerouting a large water line across the road at a location we
            believed suitable to accommodate the necessary excavation. City
            drawings showed an existing Amtrak tunnel to be approximately
            18 feet below ground at this location, more than enough
            clearance to reroute our water line. Upon excavation, we found
            the Amtrak tunnel wall to begin, in fact, less than 2 feet
            below the surface. We were forced to back away, reroute the
            line again, adding a few hundred feet to the overall length to
            the utility line and a few extra weeks of work, and nearly
            $400,000 in extra costs. Though not as dramatic as this, we
            have had many other occurrences of utility lines not being
            where they were expected, or being where they weren't expected
            at all. But I must emphasize, all the costs associated with
            this work were valid and reasonable, they just weren't
            predictable.
        There also were challenges as a result of 9/11. First, the tragic
    events of that day prompted a reassessment of the projects' security
    elements. As a credit to the original design by our architectural firm,
    RTKL, the team recommended no significant changes to the overall
    design. However, additional requirements, which necessitated more
    robust mechanical systems, were imposed. Structural changes were needed
    to accommodate these new systems and these changes came at a very late
    stage in the design process. In fact, Sequence 1 design documents were
    already complete and Sequence 2 documents were about one month from
    completion. Despite these changes, our completion milestones did not
    change.
        There has also been an increase in site logistics security. New
    security screening measures imposed on all vehicles coming to the
    construction site, while necessary, add time to every trip made. When
    we reach the peak of excavation, we will have approximately 50 dump
    trucks working at the same time, each attempting to make six to eight
    trips a day to and from the site each day. Additional time to make
    these trips translates to an extension of the excavation period.
    Further, we were required to build a new screening station. That meant
    adding telecommunications conduits, additional paving, additional
    fencing and installation of security elements. Design and construction
    of the new screening facility required significant planning and
    coordination with the Capitol Police, but again, our completion
    milestone did not change.
        Finally, we are all aware that we had one of the wettest winters on
    record. Rain and snow have the potential to wreak havoc on a
    construction site, especially one involving excavation and very large
    equipment, which tends to get bogged down in the mud. Nevertheless, our
    construction crews have tried to offset any time lost due to weather by
    working, at times, 24 hours a day, 7 days week, the Sequence 1 project
    has been impacted by approximately 48 days due to unforeseen challenges
    and other conditions I noted. However, to date, our major completion
    schedule milestones still have not changed. One thing to note,
    subsequent to the 48-day delay impact, last month, we hit a 200-year
    old stone well situated directly in the path of our perimeter wall and
    just a few feet away from the Capitol. The demolition of the stone and
    attempts to reestablish a solid foundation for the perimeter wall has
    proved extremely difficult. In short, what was scheduled to last four
    days, for the routine construction of three wall panels, required weeks
    instead. Our construction manager is currently gathering facts and is
    in the process of assessing the impact to the project's milestones, if
    any. We will report the results to Leadership after we have completed
    this assessment.
        If four years ago we knew, what we know today, we would have had
    the information necessary to budget for the project more accurately.
    However, the project has received two clean audit opinions from the
    General Accounting Office, and we have put additional controls in place
    on the budgeting process for the project.
        Question. As you know, we are looking to mark up the fiscal year
    2004 appropriations bill shortly and we need your best estimate for
    completing the project as soon as possible. When will you have the
    cost-to-complete? When will you need the additional funds?
        Answer. We have been working with the General Accounting Office
    (GAO) and an independent consultant to thoroughly analyze the CVC
    project's budget, expenditures, future requirements, and contingencies
    to provide a firm cost-to-complete analysis. The GAO is planning to
    have the results in early June 2003.
        The funding timeline for the project is being updated to reflect
    the obligation plan authority we received for Sequence 2. The project
    team, including our construction manager who maintains our overall
    project schedule, has identified the next immediate need for additional
    funding in June 2003. This request includes funding for the East Front
    interface portion of the CVC project and to keep Sequence 1 moving
    forward. The East Front work includes a number of tasks and is not
    currently part of the Sequence 1 or 2 contracts. With the award of the
    Sequence 2 contract we are proceeding with maintaining our milestone
    schedule. However, we still have a critical portion of the project,
    within the East Front interface, that needs to be funded, or funds
    reprogrammed, to allow us to keep on schedule. The East Front portion
    of the CVC project is work that was always part of the base project,
    and includes complex structural and mechanical/electrical elements to
    support the vertical transportation (elevators and stairways) and air
    shafts that connect the CVC to the Capitol building. This work was not
    included in the contracts for Sequences 1 or 2 since the requirement to
    extend the existing east front elevators was given to the CVC at the
    time the Sequence 1 design was being finalized, thus it was too late to
    include in the Sequence 1 bid documents. During design development of
    the East Front (which was originally planned to be part of Sequence 2)
    the engineers realized how extremely complex the structural work was to
    extend the existing elevators. An acceptable engineering solution could
    not be found which would mitigate the risk to the existing Capitol
    building, thus I made a decision to reduce the depth of these elevators
    and the new air shafts. The engineers revised their design which
    reduced the risk. We have finalized the design and have obtained three
    independent estimates for this work. We plan to negotiate this work
    with one of the contractors on-site and will incorporate it into their
    contract.
        The next need for funds is anticipated to be in October/November
    2003 to meet the other elements of the project. We are currently
    reviewing the updated schedule, which includes the Sequence 2
    contractor, to obtain a more precise spending plan for October 2003 and
    beyond. We plan to have this completed by the end of the month also.
        Question. What major challenges might you encounter as you continue
    the project, and the biggest risk areas that could lead to budget
    pressures?
        Answer. Unforeseen site conditions remain our biggest risk.
    Whenever you dig a 50-foot hole over an area covering five acres
    immediately adjacent to our nation's most historic building, it is
    difficult to predict exactly what we will find. As an example is the
    underground well I mentioned in a prior response.
        Additional security requirements also present another risk to
    budget and schedule. Increased security requirements or work stoppages
    prompted by external events can certainly have a significant impact on
    the project.
        Other potential risks are those associated with additional changes
    in scope and requirements. We can only change so much while executing
    day-to-day management of the project before changes have real impacts
    to budget and schedule. Providing additional funds for additional work
    doesn't necessarily mean we can maintain our original schedule. So many
    elements of this project are tied together where a new requirement, for
    example, could have a ripple effect on several other elements.
        Also, based on our recent experience with the demolition of the
    well, we are concerned that work along and within the East Front can be
    disruptive to the point that we must perform much of the work during
    off hours. Obviously, such restrictions reduce the opportunity to keep
    on schedule.
        Question. What procedures have you put in place to ensure that you
    keep a tight reign on the budget?
        Answer. The biggest areas of budget pressures are directly related
    to the challenges I previously enumerated. However, there is also a
    risk to the schedule if additional funds are not made available or
    reprogrammed to start the East Front construction this summer. If
    additional unforeseen conditions arise during construction that require
    contingency funds, that too can prevent the project from moving
    forward. We will work with the Committees to provide detailed budget
    information. We also will work closely with House and Senate Leadership
    to reconcile the budget based on the conditions I discussed in a cost-
    to-complete estimate with an independent consultant. We meet every
    Monday with the Capitol Preservation Commission (CPC) to provide a
    current update on the project, discuss issues of concern, and resolve
    problems. Let me take this opportunity to thank them for their
    steadfast support and consistent leadership as we have moved from
    design and into construction.
        We are currently working on revising the monthly financial report
    to follow the format and funding of the approved obligation plans to
    clearly show where the funds have been used. Also, I have put in place
    budget monitoring procedures that include reviewing potential
    construction change orders (PCOs) on a daily basis within my CVC
    project office. Our CVC project team reviews these changes daily, to
    determine if they are within the scope of the project and to code them
    by funding source and to be noted as client requested, unforeseen
    condition, or design change due to existing conditions (or other
    categories as yet to be defined). Then with support from my AOC budget
    office, who will ensure that the changes are in line with the
    obligation plans, the CVC team will assess the impact to the future
    budget and determine if there is a cause for concern. I will review
    this with the CVC project team on a weekly basis (or sooner if the need
    is great) and will brief the CPC leadership staff on the potential
    changes and their impact to the project.
        Through the monthly reports and controls, cost-to-complete estimate
    and GAO oversight, our construction management staff has placed the
    highest priority to ensure the successful completion of the project in
    a fiscally responsible and timely manner.
        Question. What is being done to prepare for the operations of the
    CVC when it opens in 2005?
        Answer. A consultant is developing options and suggestions for a
    CVC operations plan which will provide the following information:
      --Three-year estimate of operating expenses;
      --Facility management plan;
      --Food service plan;
      --Visitor experience plan, including wayfinding, visitor flow and
            Guide Service recommendations;
      --Space allocation recommendations;
      --Recommendations for in-house staffing vs. contracting out for
            certain services; and
      --Training schedules and pre-opening recommendations.
        The operations plan is scheduled to be completed this summer and
    will be referred to the CPC for review.

                         CAPITOL POLICE FACILITY NEEDS

        Question. You have been working with the Capitol Police for some
    time to develop a master facilities plan, including a new headquarters
    facility. As I understand it, a site has been identified. This
    Committee has already appropriated roughly $60 million for the project.
    What is the status of the project and how much in additional funding
    will be needed? Will that be part of your fiscal year 2005 request?
    When can we expect the facility will be complete? What is the status of
    the off-site delivery facility which has been fully funded ($22
    million)?
        Answer. The Capitol Police Board has recommended a specific site,
    to best meet the needs of a new Capitol Police headquarters facility,
    based on current requirements identified in the facilities master plan.
    Our plan is to use existing funds to pursue due diligence and purchase
    real property, with appropriate oversight committee approvals, and
    design the facility. We will then program the remaining funds in our
    normal budget cycle. We anticipate the earliest request for funds to
    complete the project will be in fiscal year 2006. The total funding
    will construct and fit-out the new headquarters facility and the
    command center. We will initially need to hire two temporary full-time
    equivalents (FTE) exceeding our FTE ceiling to assist with this
    project. The conference report accompanying Public Law 108-11 directs
    us to use the Naval Facilities Command to execute this project.
        It is important to bring to your attention two issues that could
    affect the remaining cost of the new Capitol Police headquarters,
    currently estimated at $113 million, as well as the identification of
    the preferred site. The current estimate is based on the Capitol Police
    operational model used for the recently completed facilities master
    plan. This operational model recommended retaining a significant
    portion of existing police spaces in the Capitol, House and Senate
    Office Buildings. The Capitol Police are currently assessing the
    operational impacts of reducing their footprint within existing
    facilities, as well as substantially reducing their surface parking
    requirements within the jurisdictions. Once this assessment is
    complete, we will then analyze the impact to the overall facilities
    master plan. If relocating functions to the new Police headquarters
    requires additional space and ancillary facilities, the cost of the
    project will increase accordingly. Offsetting costs for release of
    existing space are minor in comparison. The second issue that could
    affect the new headquarters' cost is the recently completed Capitol
    Police Comprehensive Staffing Analysis for Sworn and Civilian
    Personnel. This analysis recommends significant increases in the number
    of sworn and civilian personnel and, if approved, some of these people
    would be located in the new Police headquarters building along with
    their additional parking requirements. We will work with the Capitol
    Police and our oversight committees to resolve these issues.
        Given the early stages of this project, it is too early to
    establish an estimated completion date. Once requirements are finalized
    and property acquired, we will work with the Navy to establish a
    realistic completion date.
        The Offsite Delivery/Screening Facility is now fully funded.
    Unfortunately however, the Capitol Police Board recommended site was
    sold by the owner to another entity before we received approval to make
    an offer. We are working with the Capitol Police to identify and
    evaluate options for an alternative location. Once our evaluation is
    complete, we will work with our oversight committees to move forward.

                          ALTERNATE COMPUTER FACILITY

        Question. The single largest project request in your budget is $61
    million to purchase the alternate computer facility, currently being
    leased. Could you explain why it makes sense to buy this facility
    rather than continue to lease it? If a decision is made to buy the
    building, we will have double the space at that location than is
    currently available (2 connected buildings rather than one). What is
    the status of plans for using the additional space? Who is leading the
    effort to develop those plans?
        Answer. Project background: Following the attacks of September 11,
    2001, for continuity of operations, the Architect of the Capitol
    received authorization and funding to acquire an alternate computer
    facility in case primary data centers became inoperative. The AOC
    entered into a ten-year lease agreement for a facility within a 50 mile
    radius of the Capitol in November 2002. We also have a single option
    for a second ten years within the lease. The building under lease is
    one-half of a twin building complex with the other building available
    for lease to other tenants by the owner. The AOC has the right to a
    security suitability review of any potential tenants in the other
    building. The primary tenants within the Alternate Computer Facility
    are the House of Representatives, Senate, Library of Congress, and
    Architect of the Capitol. The building owner was given five months from
    November 2002 to design and construct modifications to the facility to
    meet tenant requirements for individual data centers. The target
    completion date for these modifications was April 19, 2003.
        Why should we purchase the facility? In short, the need is
    permanent. The building is sound and very desirable as determined by
    the ACF task force. Security is enhanced and, by purchasing it, we save
    the federal government money.
        There are several advantages to buying the building:
        First, the need for a backup data center is perpetual.
        Second, the very same reasons the building is attractive to
    purchase are the same reasons the particular building was attractive to
    lease.
      --Remote, but convenient location (within 50 miles of the Capitol);
      --Strength and redundancies in infrastructure and utilities;
      --On-site land around the building and excellent setback from public
            roads;
      --Building in overall good condition;
      --Building contained millions of dollars of prior-tenant build-out
            that we re-used without much additional expense;
      --Secure facility type of building layout, i.e., no room has an
            exterior wall;
      --Excellent Aesthetics;
      --Available for quick occupancy;
      --Floor load capacity of the building (1st floor) is 300 psf (which
            is very high);
      --Electrical feeders from 2 separate power substations, for
            redundancy;
      --30 Mega Volt-Amperes (MVA) of electrical capacity per transformer;
            building electrical capacity of 50 watts psf; and
      --Diversity of fiber optic providers available.
        Third, purchase would increase security by allowing the legislative
    branch to control both halves of the building, and the land around it.
    It would also prevent the landlord from developing the large tract of
    land around the building (which if we do not exercise the purchase
    option he can develop intensely up to 200 feet from our leased space).
    Purchase would allow us to control the common heating, ventilation and
    air conditioning, power, and water utility systems of the building,
    which are located in the side of the building that we do not lease.
        Fourth, based on a simple cost/benefit analysis, ten years of rent,
    taxes and security premium equates to about $55 million. This, coupled
    with our more than $10 million investment in fitting out the facility
    to accommodate our specific requirements means that we will have
    invested approximately $65 million in the facility over the 10 year
    lease and not own anything. If we purchase the facility at the maximum
    price of $61 million, we double our building space and gain control of
    91 acres of undeveloped land around the facility. We also save the
    second ten-year lease costs, which will exceed $58 million over the
    term of the lease. To leverage our purchase, it would be ideal to use
    the other half for other legislative branch requirements, for the
    Senate, House, Library, AOC, GPO or GAO for data center expansion,
    backup data centers, or other legislative branch requirements, such as
    continuity of operations. Of course, if other legislative branch
    requirements are not sufficient to fill the other building, then we
    could lease the remaining space to other government agencies, or
    commercial tenants. If the other half of the building is leased to
    other tenants, we would desire a statutory provision allowing us,
    rather than Treasury, to retain the rent to offset operating costs.
    Based on market rental rates, we could conservatively expect to lease
    the other building for approximately $20-$30 per square foot per year.
    For 167,831 square feet, this equates to over $3 million per year in
    revenue. There is no lead agency for developing plans for the other
    half of the building as no firm decision has been made to acquire it.
    Should that decision be finalized, the AOC will be happy to take the
    lead in developing plans for its use if so directed. We are, however,
    working with another legislative branch agency to determine the
    feasibility of developing part of the surrounding 91 acres, or an
    adjacent 25-acre parcel under the same owner.
        Another issue centers around existing and future development of the
    other building. The building owner has the right, and intends to
    exercise it, for leasing available space within the facility. While we
    have the right, and pay a premium for that right, to review potential
    tenants for security suitability, we do not have authority to prevent
    the landlord from leasing available space. As the landlord acquires new
    tenants, purchase of the facility becomes more complicated and
    potentially more costly as lease terminations may be required, with
    appropriate compensation. This potentially increases our financial
    liability as new leases are granted and space is encumbered.

                            WEST REFRIGERATION PLANT

        Question. Your budget includes $40.8 million for the final
    increment for the West Refrigeration Plant Expansion. Is this project
    on time and on budget? When will it be completed? What are your plans
    for the East Refrigeration Plant, which will be decommissioned, and
    what cost requirements can we expect?
        Answer. The coal handling relocation project, which was phase I of
    the West Refrigeration Plant Expansion project is approximately 90
    percent complete, within budget and on schedule for a June 15th
    completion date.
        Phase II of this critical project, construction of the actual
    refrigeration plant expansion, was competitively bid and subsequently
    awarded to HITT Construction who is subcontracting the mechanical work
    out to Poole & Kent Inc, mechanical contractor who has worked with HITT
    on other projects. Notice to proceed (NTP) with construction was issued
    on March 26, 2003. Subsequent to contract award and prior to NTP, two
    of the unsuccessful offerors, Bell Construction and Fru-Con
    construction filed bid protests with the General Accounting Office
    (GAO). GAO declined to hear the cases on an expedited basis and Bell
    Construction filed in Federal Claims Court to stop construction and
    revisit the procurement and bid selection process. On May 9th, the
    court declined to issue a restraining order against the project and
    commented in the order that, ``It is clear from the arguments this
    morning (court, 5/9), that plaintiff does not have a likelihood of
    prevailing on the merits''.
        Construction is proceeding with demolition of existing structures
    and site civil work. The general contractor has obligated approximately
    75 percent of the awarded fiscal year 2003 funding, the project is
    within budget and on schedule to be completed in May 2005.
        The fiscal year 2004 budget submission has requested appropriated
    funds to conduct a comprehensive utilization study for the East
    Refrigeration Plant which will generate a report with the best
    available options to utilize the building after decommissioning.
    Options under consideration include addition of limited on-site power
    generation or relocation of existing industrial and repair shops from
    the Capitol Hill complex.

                               PERIMETER SECURITY

        Question. What is the status of the second phase of perimeter
    security work on the Senate side of the Capitol, funded in the fiscal
    year 2002 emergency response fund? When is construction scheduled to
    complete? Are funds on-hand sufficient to complete the project as
    planned?
        Answer. Approval of the conceptual plan for the second phase of the
    perimeter security project for the Senate Office Buildings was recently
    received and final designs and schedules are currently being developed.
    It is anticipated that work will begin this summer and will take 2 to 3
    years to complete. Without the final design it is not possible to be
    certain that there is adequate funding for this project, however, based
    on similar projects, it is anticipated that the current funding will be
    adequate. When final designs are developed and cost estimates are
    completed, they will be fully coordinated with the Senate.

                             CONCLUSION OF HEARINGS

        Senator Campbell. Since we will be getting our second beep
    to vote in just a minute, if there are no further things before
    the committee, the subcommittee will be called recessed. Thank
    you.
        [Whereupon, at 1:50 p.m., Thursday, May 8, the hearings
    were concluded, and the subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene
    subject to the call of the Chair.]

           LIST OF WITNESSES, COMMUNICATIONS, AND PREPARED STATEMENTS

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page
    American Association of Law Libraries, Prepared Statement of.....    38
    American Library Association, Prepared Statement of..............    38
    Anderson, Barry B., Deputy Director, Congressional Budget Office.    41
    Association of Research Libraries, Prepared Statement of.........    38

    Billington, Dr. James H., Librarian of Congress and Chairman of
      the Board of Trustees for the Center for Russian Leadership
      Development, Library of Congress...............................    55
        Prepared Statement of........................................    58

    Campbell, Senator Ben Nighthorse, U.S. Senator from Colorado:
        Opening Statements of...........................1, 55, 99, 125, 151
        Prepared Statement of........................................   152
        Questions Submitted by........................34, 95, 143, 214, 230
    Cicco, Anthony, Jr., Chief Information Officer and Deputy Chief
      Mission Support Officer, General Accounting Office.............     1
    Czerwinski, Stanley J., Controller, General Accounting Office....     1

    Dodaro, Gene L., Chief Operating Officer, General Accounting
      Office.........................................................     1
    Durbin, Senator Richard J., U.S. Senator from Illinois:
        Prepared Statements of......................................31, 121
        Statement of.................................................   131

    Gainer, Terrance, Chief, U.S. Capitol Police, Capitol Police
      Board..........................................................   125
        Prepared Statement of........................................   129
        Statement of.................................................   125

    Hantman, Alan M., FAIA, Architect of the Capitol and Capitol
      Police Board.................................................125, 217
        Prepared Statement of........................................   218
    Holtz-Eakin, Douglas, Director, Congressional Budget Office......    41
        Prepared Statement of........................................    42

    James, Bruce R., Public Printer, Government Printing Office......    23
        Prepared Statement of........................................    25
    Jones, Mary, Assistant Secretary of the Senate, Office of the
      Secretary, U.S. Senate.........................................   151

    Livingood, Wilson, House Sergeant at Arms, Capitol Police Board..   125
    Lopez, Kenneth E., Director of Security, Library of Congress.....    55

    Mulhollan, Daniel P., Director, Congressional Research Service,
      Prepared Statement of..........................................    77

    Partlow, Frank A., Jr., Chief of Staff, Government Printing
      Office.........................................................    23
    Peters, Marybeth, The Register of Copyrights, Prepared Statement
      of.............................................................    73
    Pickle, William H., Sergeant at Arms, Office of the Sergeant at
      Arms and Doorkeeper, U.S. Senate and Chairman, Capitol Police
      Board.........................................................99, 125
        Prepared Statements of.....................................102, 128
        Statement of.................................................   125

    Reynolds, Emily J., Secretary of the Senate, Office of the
      Secretary, U.S. Senate.........................................   151
        Prepared Statement of........................................   155
    Russell, Judith C., Superintendent of Documents, Government
      Printing Office................................................    23

    Scott, General Donald L., Deputy Librarian, Library of Congress..    55
    Skvarla, Diane, Senate Curator, Office of the Secretary, U.S.
      Senate.........................................................   151

    Taylor, George A., Deputy Public Printer, Government Printing
      Office.........................................................    23

    Walker, David Comptroller General, General Accounting Office.....     1
        Prepared Statement of........................................     2
    Wineman, Timothy S., Financial Clerk of the Senate, Office of the
      Secretary, U.S. Senate.........................................   151
        Prepared Statement of........................................   211

                                 SUBJECT INDEX

                                  ----------

                            ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL

                                                                       Page
    Additional Committee Questions...................................   229
    Alternate Computer Facility......................................   238
    Capitol and Capitol Grounds Improvements.........................   222
    Capitol Police:
        Facility Needs...............................................   237
        Headquarters.................................................   229
    Capitol Visitor Center....................................224, 228, 234
    Employee Safety..................................................   222
    Facilities Management............................................   230
    Facility Management..............................................   224
    Financial Management.............................................   224
    GAO Management Review............................................   227
    Human Capital....................................................   223
    Information Technology...........................................   224
    Major Projects:
        Master Plan Capitol Building.................................   232
        Performance by Non AOC Entities..............................   234
        Possible Deferrals...........................................   233
    Master Plan......................................................   226
    Perimeter Security...............................................   239
    Project Descriptions.............................................   218
    Senate Office Buildings Improvements.............................   222
    Senate Restaurants...............................................   226
    Status of GAO Recommendations....................................   230
    Strategic Planning...............................................   223
    U.S. Capitol Police Master Plan..................................   226
    West Refrigeration Plant.........................................   239

                              CAPITOL POLICE BOARD

    Additional Civilian Staff........................................   132
    Additional Committee Questions...................................   143
    Additional Officers..............................................   132
    Applicant Attrition..............................................   136
    Capitol Police Board.............................................   148
    Civilian Staffing................................................   146
    Dignitary Protection.............................................   148
    Diversity of the Work Force......................................   137
    Facilities.......................................................   140
    Facility Needs...................................................   147
    Fiscal Year 2004 Staffing........................................   146
    Lateral Entry Process............................................   141
    LOC Police Merger..............................................135, 139
    Manpower Study...................................................   143
    Mounted Horse Unit...............................................   130
        Support......................................................   139
    Pay Scale Comparison.............................................   138
    Public Access....................................................   134
    Recruiting Officers..............................................   133
    Retention of Employees...........................................   141
    Shining Light of the Nation......................................   142
    Staffing Alternatives............................................   134
    Strategic Plan...................................................   140
    Student Loan Reimbursement.......................................   137
    Training.........................................................   141

                          CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE

    Accomplishments in Fiscal Year 2002..............................    43
    Changes Since Terrorist Attacks..................................    50
    Internal Management Strategy: Progress and Priorities for Fiscal
      Years 2003 and 2004............................................    47
    Overview of CBO's Budget Request for Fiscal Year 2004............    42
    Overview of the Congressional Budget Office's Budget Request.....    41
    Priorities for Fiscal Years 2003 and 2004........................    45
    Resources to Improve Baseline Forecasting........................    51
    Student Loan Repayment Program...................................    52

                           GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE

    Emergency Wartime Supplemental...................................    22
    Field Offices....................................................    21
        Closures.....................................................    21
    Fiscal Year 2002 Performance and Results.........................     3
    GAO's Fiscal Year 2004 Budget Request............................    11
    Human Capital Flexibilities......................................    20
    Maximizing GAO's Effectiveness, Responsiveness and Value.........     8
    Walker v. Cheney.................................................    21

                           GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

    Additional Committee Questions...................................    34
    Challenges at GPO................................................    34
    Contracting Costs................................................    36
    Federal Depository Library Program...............................    37
    GPO:
        Operating at a Loss..........................................    35
        Workforce....................................................    32
    In-plant Capacity................................................    36
    Office of Innovation and Partnerships............................    37
    Privatization....................................................    33
    Revolving Fund...................................................    31
    Technology.......................................................    32

                              LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

    Adding CRS Capacity for Data Base Management Activities..........    80
    Additional Committee Questions...................................    94
    Assisting the Congress in a Changed World Setting................    77
    Automated Hiring System..........................................66, 87
    Books for the Blind and Physically Handicapped...................    97
    Center for Russian Leadership Development........................    67
    Collections Security and Management..............................    63
    Congressional Research Service...................................    64
        Contracting..................................................    96
        Hiring Problems..............................................    95
    Continuity of Business Operations to Serve the Needs of Congress
      at All Times...................................................    79
    Copyright Office.................................................    64
    Digital Future Initiative........................................    83
    Digital Initiatives..............................................    95
    Emergency Supplemental Appropriations............................    56
    Emerging Democracies.............................................    84
    FEDLINK Program..................................................    66
    Fiscal Year 2002 Accomplishments.................................    62
    Fiscal Year 2004 Budget Request Summary..........................    74
    Hiring Problems..................................................    95
    Investing in the Future: Incentives that Encourage Staff
      Retention......................................................    80
    Library Buildings and Grounds....................................    66
    Library of Congress:
        Funding Priorities...........................................    57
        Police Force.................................................    82
    National Digital Information Infrastructure and Preservation
      Program [NDIIPP]...............................................    88
    National Library Service for the Blind and Physically Handicapped    65
    New Website......................................................    58
    Other Core Programs and Mandated Projects........................    64
    Physical Security................................................    62
    Police:
        Merger.......................................................    81
        Request......................................................    95
        Staffing Study...............................................    83
    Remote Access to CRS Material....................................    97
    Retail Sales Activities..........................................    92
    Review of Copyright Office Accomplishments and Future Plans......    74
    Russian Leadership Program--Open World...........................    81
    Security--Capitol Visitor Center.................................    86
    Status of Fiscal 2003 New Capacity Initiative....................    81
    The Copyright Office Mission.....................................    73
    The Library of Congress Today....................................    61
    Upcoming Challenges..............................................    56
    Use of Library Resources.........................................    91
    Veterans History Project.........................................    89

                                  U.S. SENATE

                            Office of the Secretary

    Additional Committee Questions...................................   214
    Administrative Offices...........................................   181
    Budget Overview..................................................   153
    Capitol Visitor Center.........................................158, 213
    Continuity of Operations:
        Planning.....................................................   158
        Plans........................................................   155
    Curator Projects.................................................   154
    Curtis Chair.....................................................   212
    Disbursing Office Information Technology.........................   172
    Education of Pages...............................................   154
    Financial Operations: Disbursing Office..........................   165
    Highlights of Office of Secretary................................   154
    Historian's Office...............................................   154
    Implementing Mandated Systems....................................   156
    Legislative Offices..............................................   159
    Maintaining and Improving Current and Historic Legislative,
      Financial and Administrative Services..........................   159
    Mandated Systems.................................................   153
    Presenting the Fiscal Year 2004 Budget Request...................   155
    Selection of Artists for Portraits...............................   212
    Senate Library...................................................   154

                 Office of the Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper

    Alternate Computing Facility.....................................   120
    Budget Built on Business Model...................................   111
    Budget Priorities................................................   119
    Capitol Police Budget Request....................................    99
    Communication Devices............................................   123
    Emergency Preparedness...........................................   124
    Mail Processing................................................120, 122
    Ongoing Initiatives..............................................   101
    Recording Studio.................................................   101
    Role of Sergeant at Arms.........................................   101
    Security and Emergency Preparedness..............................   103
    Senate Messaging System..........................................   121
    Sergeant at Arms:
        Budget Request...............................................    99
        Staff........................................................   101
        Statement....................................................   100
    Service and Support for the Senate...............................   108
    Staffing Increases...............................................   123
    Warehouse........................................................   120
        Facility.....................................................   100