[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