[Senate Hearing 108-543]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 108-543
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005
=======================================================================
HEARINGS
before a
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
on
H.R. 4755/S. 2666
AN ACT MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH FOR THE FISCAL
YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2005, 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
92-158 WASHINGTON : 2004
_________________________________________________________________
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866)512-1800:
DC area (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 4, 2004
Page
General Accounting Office........................................ 1
Government Printing Office....................................... 31
Congressional Budget Office...................................... 41
Thursday, March 11, 2004
Library of Congress.............................................. 47
Wednesday, March 31, 2004
U.S. Senate: Office of the Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper....... 81
Capitol Police Board............................................. 113
Thursday, April 8, 2004
U.S. Senate: Office of the Secretary............................. 135
Architect of the Capitol......................................... 207
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005
----------
THURSDAY, MARCH 4, 2004
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 10:58 a.m., in room SD-116, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Ben Nighthorse Campbell (chairman)
presiding.
Present: Senators Campbell, Stevens, and Durbin.
GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE
STATEMENT OF DAVID M. WALKER, COMPTROLLER GENERAL
ACCOMPANIED BY:
GENE L. DODARO, CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER
SALLYANNE HARPER, CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
STANLEY J. CZERWINSKI, CONTROLLER
opening statement of senator ben nighthorse campbell
Senator Campbell. The subcommittee will come to order.
Senator Durbin is running a little late and will be here in
just a few minutes.
Today's hearing is the first of four hearings we plan to
have to review the fiscal year 2005 legislative branch budget
request which totals roughly $4 billion.
Overall, legislative branch agencies have requested a 12
percent increase over the current fiscal year level. Clearly
this total level of spending will be very difficult, if not
impossible, to accommodate in view of the overall budget
constraints we face. We will be asking all agencies to have
another look at their budgets to ensure that there have been no
items requested which are not truly needed next year, and we
will also be exploring the impact of cutting budgets back to
current levels, if that is necessary, which it appears to be at
this point.
This morning 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 will be accompanied by Deputy Chief Gene
Dodaro. Welcome, Gene. And Mr. Stan Czerwinski, GAO's budget
officer. GAO's budget request of $486 million is a steady-state
budget, with the exception of the request for a permanent new
technology assessment capability.
The GAO will be followed by the Government Printing Office:
Mr. Bruce James, the Public Printer; accompanied by Mr. William
Turri, the Deputy Printer; and Steve Shedd, the Chief Financial
Officer. The GPO has many initiatives underway at this time to
restructure their agency, including the possible relocation of
their facility from its present North Capitol Street location.
The budget request of $151 million includes $25 million for
transformation efforts, but we do not have a delineation of
what those transformation efforts involve. It might be very
difficult to provide the funds without a detailed spending
plan.
And finally, we will hear from Mr. Douglas Holtz-Eakin, the
Director of the Congressional Budget Office, accompanied by Dr.
Elizabeth Robinson, CBO's new Deputy Director. CBO's budget
request of $35 million is a 5.5 percent increase over the
current fiscal year and would support the current staffing
level of 235 FTE.
So we welcome everyone this morning. Mr. Walker, if you
would like to proceed. If you would like to abbreviate your
comments, we will put your complete testimony in the record.
opening remarks of david walker
Mr. Walker. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is a pleasure to be
here again. On my far right is Stan Czerwinski, who is our
Controller. To my immediate right is Sallyanne Harper, who is
our Chief Administrative Officer and Chief Financial Officer,
and on my immediate left is Gene Dodaro, who is our Chief
Operating Officer.
Mr. Chairman, we believe that our fiscal year 2005 budget
request is both reasonable and responsible. We have asked for a
4.9 percent increase, primarily to cover automatic pay
increases and related costs, as well as price level increases.
This requested level will allow us to maintain our base
authorized FTEs, maintain operational support at fiscal year
2004 levels, and continue to meet the needs of the Congress at
present service levels.
Our requested budget reflects an offset of almost $5
million from nonrecurring fiscal year 2004 estimates, and it
represents a baseline review approach.
In times of tight budgets and fiscal pressures, I believe
it is especially important for GAO to lead by example in
connection with our budget request. We have done so as noted by
the fact that we are requesting the smallest percentage
increase of any legislative branch agency. In addition, we have
helped this subcommittee in your initial efforts to assure that
other legislative branch agencies ultimately employ a baseline
review approach in their budget submissions.
In the years ahead, our support to the Congress will likely
prove even more critical because of pressures created on our
Nation caused by large and growing fiscal imbalances. I believe
that GAO's help will prove to be invaluable as the Congress
seeks to review, reprioritize, and re-engineer existing
mandatory and discretionary spending programs and tax policies.
Maintaining a strong and adequately resourced GAO will also
help ensure that we can continue to provide an excellent return
on investment to the Congress and the country. Last year we
returned $78 for every dollar invested in GAO, number one in
the world. Nobody is even close.
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I
respectfully request that you consider the modest nature of our
request and the unparalleled return on investment the Congress
and the country receives from your investment in GAO's work. I
would also respectfully request you consider the fact that many
independent sources have noted that we at GAO are leading in
the transformation of how the Government does business, and in
order to continue to do that, we will need your help and
reasonable resource levels.
prepared statement
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Durbin. I would be happy
to answer any questions you might have.
[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, having recently completed my
fifth year as the Comptroller General of the United States and head of
the U.S. General Accounting Office. GAO exists to support the Congress
in meeting its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the
performance and ensure the accountability of the federal government for
the benefit of the American people. In the years ahead, our support to
the Congress will likely prove even more critical because of the
pressures created by our nation's large and growing long-term fiscal
imbalance, which is driven primarily by known demographic and rising
health care trends. These pressures will require the Congress to make
tough choices regarding what the government does, how it does business,
and who will do the government's business in the future. GAO's work
covers virtually every area in which the federal government is or may
become involved, anywhere in the world. Perhaps just as importantly,
our work sometimes leads us to sound the alarm over problems looming
just beyond the horizon--such as our nation's enormous long-term fiscal
challenges--and help policymakers address these challenges in a timely
and informed manner.
My testimony today will focus on GAO's progress during my first
five years as Comptroller General. I will highlight our (1) fiscal year
2003 performance and results; (2) efforts to maximize our
effectiveness, responsiveness, and value; and (3) budget request for
fiscal year 2005 to support the Congress and serve the American people.
Following is a summary:
--The funding we received in fiscal year 2003 allowed us to conduct
work that addressed many of the difficult issues confronting
the nation, including diverse and diffuse security threats,
selected government transformation challenges, and the nation's
long-term fiscal imbalance. Perhaps the foremost challenge
facing government decision makers this year was ensuring the
security of the American people. By providing professional,
objective, and nonpartisan information and analyses, we helped
inform the Congress and the executive branch agencies on key
security issues, such as the nature and scope of threats
confronting the nation's nuclear weapons facilities, its
information systems, and all areas of its transportation
infrastructure, as well as the challenges involved in creating
the Department of Homeland Security. Our work was also driven
by changing demographic trends, which led us to focus on such
areas as the quality of care in the nation's nursing homes and
the risks to the government's single-employer pension insurance
program. Our work in these and other areas covered programs
that involve billions of dollars and touch millions of lives.
Importantly, in fiscal year 2003, GAO generated a $78 return
for each $1 appropriated to our agency.
--With the Congress's support, we have demonstrated that becoming
world class does not require a substantial increase in the
number of staff authorized, but rather maximizing the efficient
and effective use of the resources available to us. We have
worked with you to obtain targeted funding for areas critical
to GAO such as information technology, security, and human
capital management. We are grateful to the Congress for
supporting our efforts through pending legislation that, if
passed, would give us additional human capital flexibilities.
During tight budget times, these flexibilities would allow us,
among other things, more options to deal with mandatory pay and
related costs.
--In keeping with my belief that the federal government needs to
exercise a greater degree of fiscal discipline, we have kept
our request to $486 million, an increase of only 4.9 percent
over fiscal year 2004. I also applaud the Congress's request
that all legislative branch agencies examine how they could
work toward a more transparent budget presentation. In keeping
with the Congress's intent, we are continuing our efforts to
revamp our budget presentation to make the linkages between
funding and program areas more clear. I hope that in the future
the Congress will be able to use such performance information
to make tough choices on funding, thereby enabling it to avoid
across-the-board reductions that penalize agencies that
exercise fiscal discipline and generate high returns on
investment and real results.
fiscal year 2003 performance and results
GAO is a key source of professional and objective information and
analysis and, as such, plays a crucial role in supporting congressional
decision making. For example, in fiscal year 2003, as in other years,
the challenges that most urgently engaged the attention of the Congress
helped define our priorities. Our work on issues such as the nation's
ongoing battle against terrorism, Social Security and Medicare reform,
the implementation of major education legislation, human capital
transformations at selected federal agencies, and the security of key
government information systems all helped congressional members and
their staffs to develop new federal policies and programs and oversee
ongoing ones. Moreover, the Congress and the executive agencies took a
wide range of actions in fiscal year 2003 to improve government
operations, reduce costs, or better target budget authority based on
GAO's analyses and recommendations. In fiscal year 2003, GAO served the
Congress and the American people by helping to identify steps to reduce
improper payments and credit card fraud in government programs;
restructure government and improve its processes and systems to
maximize homeland security; prepare the financial markets to continue
operations if terrorism recurs; update and strengthen government
auditing standards; improve the administration of Medicare as it
undergoes reform; encourage and help guide federal agency
transformations; contribute to congressional oversight of the federal
income tax system; identify human capital reforms needed at the
Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security, and other
federal agencies; raise the visibility of long-term financial
commitments and imbalances in the federal budget; reduce security risks
to information systems supporting the nation's critical
infrastructures; oversee programs to protect the health and safety of
today's workers; ensure the accountability of federal agencies through
audits and performance evaluations; and serve as a model for other
federal agencies by modernizing our approaches to managing and
compensating our people.
To ensure that we are well positioned to meet the Congress's future
needs, we update our 6-year strategic plan every 2 years, consulting
extensively during the update with our clients in the Congress and with
other experts (see app. I for our strategic plan framework).
The following table summarizes selected performance measures and
targets for fiscal years 1999 through 2005. Highlights of our fiscal
year 2003 accomplishments and their impact on the American public are
shown in the following sections.
TABLE 1.--SELECTED ANNUAL MEASURES AND TARGETS FOR FISCAL YEARS 1999-2005
[Dollars in billions]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Performance measure 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2003 2004 2005
Actual Actual Actual Actual Target Actual Target Target
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Financial benefits...................... $20.1 $23.2 $26.4 \1\ $37 $32.5 $35.4 $35.0 $36.0
.7
Other benefits.......................... 607 788 799 906 800 1,043 \2\ 900 900
Past recommendations implemented 70 78 79 79 77 82 \2\ 79 79
(percent)..............................
New recommendations made................ 940 1,224 1,563 1,950 1,250 2,175 \2\ 1,5 1,500
00
Testimonies............................. 229 263 151 216 180 189 \2\ 190 180
Timeliness (percent).................... 96 96 95 96 98 97 98 98
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Changes GAO made to its methodology for tabulating financial benefits in part caused our results to increase
beginning with the fiscal year 2002 results.
\2\ On the basis of past performance and expected future work, we revised these targets after we issued our
fiscal year 2004 performance plan. The original targets were 820 for other benefits, 77 percent for past
recommendations implemented, 1,250 for new recommendations made, and 200 for testimonies.
Source: GAO.
Benefits Reported
Many of the benefits produced by our work can be quantified as
dollar savings for the federal government (financial benefits), while
others cannot (other benefits). Both types of benefits resulted from
our efforts to provide information to the Congress that helped (1)
improve services to the public, (2) provide information that resulted
in statutory or regulatory changes, and (3) improve core business
processes and advance governmentwide management reforms.
In fiscal year 2003, our work generated $35.4 billion in financial
benefits--a $78 return on every dollar appropriated to GAO. The funds
made available in response to our work may be used to reduce government
expenditures or reallocated by the Congress to other priority areas.
Nine accomplishments accounted for nearly $27.4 billion, or 77 percent,
of our total financial benefits for fiscal year 2003. Six of these
accomplishments totaled $25.1 billion. Table 2 lists selected major
financial benefits in fiscal year 2003 and describes the work
contributing to financial benefits over $500 million.
TABLE 2.--GAO'S SELECTED MAJOR FINANCIAL BENEFITS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003
[In millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Financial benefits exceeding $1 billion:
Updated the Consumer Price Index (CPI): Recommended 9,200
that the Bureau of Labor Statistics periodically
update the expenditure weights of its market basket of
goods and services used to calculate the CPI to make
it more timely and representative of consumer
expenditures. The Bureau agreed to do this every 2
years, and the CPI for January 2002 reflected the new
weights. The adjustments have resulted in, among other
things, lower federal expenditures on programs like
Social Security that use the CPI to calculate benefits
Eliminated Medicaid's upper payment limit loophole: 5,900
Identified a weakness in Medicaid's upper payment
limit methodology that allowed states to make
excessive payments to local, government-owned nursing
facilities and then have the facilities return the
payments to the states, creating the illusion that
they made large Medicaid payments in order to generate
federal matching payments. Closing the loophole
prevented the federal government from making
significant federal matching payments to states above
those intended by Medicaid............................
Made funds available for lighter-weight weapons 3,900
systems: Identified the Crusader artillery system as a
duplicative weapons system that was inconsistent with
the Department of the Army's plans to transform itself
into a lightweight combat force. The Department of
Defense (DOD) terminated the Crusader program,
resulting in costs avoided............................
Reduced the cost of federal housing programs: Improved 3,400
management of the Department of Housing and Urban
Development's unexpended balances resulting in the
recapture of unobligated funds........................
Reduced the cost of DOD's services acquisition process: 1,700
Examined the acquisition practices of leading
commercial companies and recommended a more strategic
approach for acquiring services at DOD, which was
implemented...........................................
Avoided costs associated with an increase in the 1,000
skilled nursing facilities rate: Determined that the
Congress's increase in the nursing component of
Medicare's daily rate for skilled nursing facilities
had little effect on increasing the ratios of nursing
staff to patients in these facilities. The nursing
component increase expired on October 1, 2002, and
despite arguments from the nursing facility industry,
the nursing component increase has not been reinstated
Selected financial benefits between $500 million and $1
billion:
Recovered Supplemental Security Income (SSI) 990
overpayments: Identified weaknesses in the Social
Security Administration's (SSA) efforts to recover SSI
overpayments that led to the development of SSA's
automated reconciliation process......................
Reduced DOD's implementation risks and purchase costs 780
for the Navy-Marine Corps intranet: Highlighted the
need for various management controls related to the
acquisition and implementation of the Navy-Marine
Corps intranet. As a result, DOD modified the Navy-
Marine Corps intranet contract and reduced contract
amounts in fiscal year 2002 and fiscal year 2003,
reduced program risks, and increased the likelihood
that the program will be acquired and implemented
successfully..........................................
Ensured Defense Emergency Response funds are better 517
targeted: Identified millions of dollars in
unobligated DOD Emergency Response funding, a portion
of which the Congress rescinded or directed DOD to
reallocate for other fund purposes....................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: GAO.
Many of the benefits that flow to the American people from our work
cannot be measured in dollar terms. During fiscal year 2003, we
recorded a total of 1,043 other benefits--up from 607 in fiscal year
1999. As shown in appendix II, we documented instances where
information we provided to the Congress resulted in statutory or
regulatory changes, where federal agencies improved services to the
public and where agencies improved core business processes or
governmentwide reforms were advanced.
These actions spanned the full spectrum of national issues, from
securing information technology systems to improving the performance of
state child welfare agencies. We helped improve services to the public
by
--Strengthening the U.S. visa process as an antiterrorism tool.--Our
analysis of the U.S. visa-issuing process showed that the
Department of State's visa operations were more focused on
preventing illegal immigrants from obtaining nonimmigrant visas
than on detecting potential terrorists. We recommended that
State reassess its policies, consular staffing procedures, and
training program. State has taken steps to adjust its policies
and regulations concerning the screening of visa applicants and
its staffing and training for consular officers.
--Enhancing quality of care in nursing homes.--In a series of reports
and testimonies since 1998, we found that, too often, residents
of nursing homes were being harmed and that programs to oversee
nursing home quality of care at the Centers for Medicare and
Medicaid Services were not fully effective in identifying and
reducing such problems. In 2003, we found a decline in the
proportion of nursing homes that harmed residents but made
additional recommendations to further improve care.
--Making key contributions to homeland security.--Drawing on an
extensive body of completed and ongoing work, we identified
specific vulnerabilities and areas for improvement to protect
aviation and surface transportation, chemical facilities, sea
and land ports, financial markets, and radioactive sealed
sources. In response to our recommendations, the Congress and
cognizant agencies have undertaken specific steps to improve
infrastructure security and improve the assessment of
vulnerabilities.
--Improving compliance with seafood safety regulations.--We reported
that when Food and Drug Administration (FDA) inspectors
identified serious violations at seafood processing firms, it
took FDA 73 days on average, well above its 15-day target.
Based on our recommendations, FDA now issues warning letters in
about 20 days.
We helped to change laws in the following ways:
--We highlighted the National Smallpox Vaccination program
volunteers' concerns about losing income if they sustained
injuries from an inoculation. As a result, the Smallpox
Emergency Personnel Protection Act of 2003 (Public Law No. 108-
20) provides benefits and other compensation to covered
individuals injured in this way.
--We performed analyses that culminated in the enactment of the
Postal Civil Service Retirement System Funding Reform Act of
2003 (Public Law No. 108-18), which reduced USPS's pension
costs by an average of $3 billion per year over the next 5
years. The Congress directed that the first 3 years of savings
be used to reduce USPS's debt and hold postage rates steady
until fiscal 2006.
We also helped to promote sound agency and governmentwide
management by
--Encouraging and helping guide agency transformations.--We
highlighted federal entities whose missions and ways of doing
business require modernized approaches, including the Postal
Service and the Coast Guard. Among congressional actions taken
to deal with modernization issues, the House Committee on
Government Reform established a special panel on postal reform
and oversight to work with the President's Commission on the
Postal Service on recommendations for comprehensive postal
reform. Our recommendations to the Coast Guard led to better
reporting by the Coast Guard and laid the foundation for key
revisions the agency intended to make to its strategic plan.
--Helping to advance major information technology modernizations.--
Our work has helped to strengthen the management of the complex
multibillion-dollar information technology modernization
program at the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to improve
operations, promote better service, and reduce costs. For
example, IRS implemented several of our recommendations to
improve software acquisition, enterprise architecture
definition and implementation, and risk management and to
better balance the pace and scope of the program with IRS's
capacity to effectively manage it.
--Supporting controls over DOD's credit cards.--In a series of
reports and testimonies beginning in 2001, we highlighted
pervasive weaknesses in DOD's overall credit card control
environment, including the proliferation of credit cards and
the lack of specific controls over its multibillion-dollar
purchase and travel card programs. DOD has taken many actions
to reduce its vulnerabilities in this area.
Benefits to State and Local Governments
While our primary focus is on improving government operations at
the federal level, sometimes our work has an impact at the state and
local levels. To the extent feasible, in conducting our audits and
evaluations, we cooperate with state and local officials. At times, our
work results will have local applications, and local officials will
take advantage of our efforts. We are conducting a pilot to determine
the feasibility of measuring the impact of our work on state and local
governments. The following are examples we have collected during our
pilot where our work is relevant for state and local government
operations:
--Identity theft.--Effective October 30, 1998, the Congress enacted
the ``Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act of 1998''
prohibiting the unlawful use of personal identifying
information, such as names, Social Security numbers, and credit
card numbers. GAO report GGD-98-100BR is mentioned prominently
in the act's legislative history. Subsequently, a majority of
states have enacted identity theft laws. Sponsors of some of
these state enactments--Alaska, Florida, Illinois, Michigan,
Pennsylvania, and Texas--mentioned the federal law and/or our
report. For example, in 1999, Texas enacted SB 46, which is
modeled after the federal law. Justice officials said that
enactment of state identity theft laws has multijurisdictional
benefits to all levels of law enforcement--federal, state, and
local.
--Pipeline safety.--Our report GAO-RCED-00-128, Pipeline Safety: The
Office of Pipeline Safety Is Changing How It Oversees the
Pipeline Industry, found that the Department of
Transportation's Office of Pipeline Safety was reducing its
reliance on states to help oversee the safety of interstate
pipelines. The report stated that allowing states to
participate in this oversight could improve pipeline safety. As
a result, the Office of Pipeline Safety modified its Interstate
Pipeline Oversight Program for 2001-2002 to allow greater
opportunities for state participation.
--Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Grant Program.--We reported
on key national and state labor market statistics and changes
in the levels of cash assistance and employment activities in
five selected states. We also highlighted the fact that the
five states had faced severe fiscal challenges and had used
reserve funds to augment their spending above the amount of
their annual Temporary Assistance for Needy Families block
grant from the federal government.
GAO's High-Risk Program
Issued to coincide with the start of each new Congress, our high-
risk update lists government programs and functions in need of special
attention or transformation to ensure that the federal government
functions in the most economical, efficient, and effective manner
possible. This is especially important in light of the nation's large
and growing long-term fiscal imbalance. Our latest report, released in
January 2003, spotlights more than 20 troubled areas across
government.\1\ Many of these areas involve essential government
services, such as Medicare, housing programs, and postal service
operations that directly affect the lives and well-being of the
American people.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ U.S. General Accounting Office, High Risk Series: An Update,
GAO-03-119 (Washington, D.C.: January 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our high-risk program, which we began in 1990, includes five high-
risk areas added in 2003: implementing and transforming the new
Department of Homeland Security; modernizing federal disability
programs; federal real property, Medicaid program; and Pension Benefit
Guaranty Corporation's (PBGC) single-employer pension insurance
program.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ We added this issue in July 2003 after we published the January
2003 update.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In fiscal year 2003, we also removed the high-risk designation from
two programs: the Social Security Administration's Supplemental
Security Income program, and Asset Forfeiture programs administered by
the U.S. Departments of Justice and the Treasury.
In fiscal 2003, we issued 208 reports and delivered 112 testimonies
related to high-risk areas, and our related work resulted in financial
benefits totaling almost $21 billion. Our sustained focus on high-risk
problems also has helped the Congress enact a series of governmentwide
reforms to strengthen financial management, improve information
technology, and create a more results-oriented and accountable federal
government. The President's Management Agenda for reforming the federal
government mirrors many of the management challenges and program risks
that we have reported on in our performance and accountability series
and high-risk updates, including a governmentwide initiative to focus
on strategic management of human capital.
Following GAO's designation of federal real property as a high-risk
issue, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has indicated its
plans to add federal real property as a new program initiative under
the President's Management Agenda. OMB recently issued an executive
order on federal real property that addresses many of GAO's concerns,
including the need to better emphasize the importance of government
property to effective management. We have an ongoing dialog with OMB
regarding the high-risk areas, and OMB is working with agency officials
to address many of our high-risk areas. Some of these high-risk areas
may require additional authorizing legislation as one element of
addressing the problems.
Our fiscal year 2003 high-risk list is shown in table 3.
TABLE 3.--GAO'S 2003 HIGH-RISK LIST
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year
High-risk area designated
high-risk
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Addressing challenges in broad-based transformations:
Strategic human capital management \1\.............. 2001
U.S. Postal Service transformation efforts and long- 2001
term outlook \1\...................................
Protecting information systems supporting the 1997
federal government and the nation's critical
infrastructures....................................
Implementing and transforming the new Department of 2003
Homeland Security..................................
Modernizing federal disability programs \1\......... 2003
Federal real property \1\........................... 2003
Ensuring major technology investments improve services:
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) air traffic 1995
control modernization..............................
IRS business systems modernization.................. 1995
DOD systems modernization........................... 1995
Providing basic financial accountability:
DOD financial management............................ 1995
Forest Service financial management................. 1999
FAA financial management............................ 1999
IRS financial management............................ 1995
Reducing inordinate program management risks:
Medicare program \1\................................ 1990
Medicaid program \1\................................ 2003
Earned income credit noncompliance.................. 1995
Collection of unpaid taxes.......................... 1990
DOD support infrastructure management............... 1997
DOD inventory management............................ 1990
HUD single-family mortgage insurance and rental 1994
assistance programs................................
Student financial aid programs...................... 1990
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation's (PBGC) single- 2003
employer pension insurance program.................
Managing large procurement operations more efficiently:
DOD weapon systems acquisition...................... 1990
DOD contract management............................. 1992
Department of Energy contract management............ 1990
NASA contract management............................ 1990
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Additional authorizing legislation is likely to be required as one
element of addressing this high-risk area.
Source: GAO.
Testimonies
During fiscal year 2003 GAO executives testified at 189
congressional hearings--sometimes with very short notice--covering a
wide range of complex issues. Testimony is one of our most important
forms of communication with the Congress; the number of hearings at
which we testify reflects, in part, the importance and value of our
expertise and experience in various program areas and our assistance
with congressional decision making. The following figure highlights, by
GAO's three external strategic goals for serving the Congress, examples
of issues on which we testified during fiscal year 2003.
While the vast majority of our products--97 percent--were completed
on time for our congressional clients and customers in fiscal year
2003, we slightly missed our target of providing 98 percent of them on
the promised day. We track the percentage of our products that are
delivered on the day we agreed to with our clients because it is
critical that our work be done on time for it to be used by
policymakers. Though our 97 percent timeliness rate was a percentage
point improvement over our fiscal year 2002 result, it was still a
percentage point below our goal. As a result, we are taking steps to
improve our performance in the future by encouraging matrix management
practices among the teams supporting various strategic goals and
identifying early those teams that need additional resources to ensure
the timely delivery of their products to our clients.
maximizing gao's effectiveness, responsiveness, and value
The results of our work were possible, in part, because of the
changes we have made to maximize the value of GAO. With the Congress's
support, we have demonstrated that becoming world class does not
require substantial staffing increases, but rather maximizing the
efficient and effective use of the resources available to us. Since I
came to GAO, we have developed a strategic plan, realigned our
organizational structure and resources, and increased our outreach and
service to our congressional clients. We have developed and revised a
set of congressional protocols, developed agency and international
protocols, and better refined our strategic and annual planning and
reporting processes. We have worked with you to make changes in areas
where we were facing longer-term challenges when I came to GAO, such as
in the critical human capital, information technology, and physical
security areas. We are grateful to the Congress for supporting our
efforts through pending legislation that, if passed, would give us
additional human capital flexibilities that will allow us, among other
things, to move to an even more performance-based compensation system
and help to better position GAO for the future. As part of our ongoing
effort to ensure the quality of our work, this year a team of
international auditors will perform a peer review of GAO's performance
audit work issued in calendar year 2004.
Making GAO's Work Accessible to the American People
We continued our policy of proactive outreach to our congressional
clients, the press, and the public to enhance the visibility of our
products. On a daily basis we compile and publish a list of our current
reports. This feature has more than 18,000 subscribers, up 3,000 from
last year. We also produced an update of our video on GAO, ``Impact
2003.'' Our external Web site continues to grow in popularity, having
increased the number of hits in fiscal year 2003 to an average of 3.4
million per month, 1 million more per month than in fiscal year 2002.
In addition, visitors to the site are downloading an average of 1.1
million files per month. As a result, demand for printed copies of our
reports has dramatically declined, allowing us to phase out our
internal printing capability.
Promoting Sound Financial Management and Improving Strategic Management
For the 17th consecutive year, GAO's financial statements have
received an unqualified opinion from our independent auditors. We
prepared our financial statements for fiscal year 2003 and the audit
was completed a month earlier than last year and a year ahead of the
accelerated schedule mandated by OMB. For a second year in a row, the
Association of Government Accountants awarded us a certificate of
excellence; this year the award was for the fiscal year 2002 annual
performance and accountability report.
Aligning GAO's Workforce and Mission Needs
Given our 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. Because we spend about 80 percent of our resources on our
people, we need excellent human capital management to meet the
expectations of the Congress and the nation. Accordingly, in the past
few years, we have expanded our college recruiting and hiring program
and focused our overall hiring efforts on selected skill needs
identified during our workforce planning effort and to meet succession
planning needs. For example, we identified and reached prospective
graduates with the required skill sets and focused our intern program
on attracting those students with the skill sets needed for our analyst
positions. Our efforts in this area were recognized by Washingtonian
magazine, which listed GAO as one of the ``Great Places to Work'' in
its November 2003 issue. Continuing our efforts to promote the
retention of staff with critical skills, we offered qualifying
employees in their early years at GAO student loan repayments in
exchange for their signed agreements to continue working at GAO for 3
years.
We also have begun to better link compensation, performance, and
results. In fiscal year 2002 and 2003, we implemented a new performance
appraisal system for our analyst, attorney, and specialist staff that
links performance to established competencies and results. We evaluated
this system in fiscal year 2003 and identified and implemented several
improvements, including conducting mandatory training for staff and
managers on how to better understand and apply the performance
standards, and determining appropriate compensation. We will implement
a new competency based appraisal system, pay banding and a pay for
performance system for our administrative professional and support
services staff this fiscal year.
To train our staff to meet the new competencies, we developed an
outline for a new competency-based and role- and task-driven learning
and development curriculum that identified needed core and elective
courses and other learning resources. We also completed several key
steps to improve the structure of our learning organization, including
hiring a Chief Learning Officer and establishing a GAO Learning Board
to guide our learning policy, to set specific learning priorities, and
to oversee the implementation of a new training and development
curriculum.
We also drafted our first formal and comprehensive strategic plan
for human capital to communicate both internally and externally our
strategy for enhancing our standing as a model professional services
organization, including how we plan to attract, retain, motivate, and
reward a high-performing and top-quality workforce. We expect to
publish the final plan this fiscal year. Our Employee Advisory Council
is now a fully democratically elected body that advises GAO's senior
executives on matters of interest to our staff. We also established a
Human Capital Partnership Board to gather opinions of a cross section
of our employees about upcoming initiatives and ongoing programs. The
15-member board will assist our Human Capital Office in hearing and
understanding the perspectives of its customers--our staff.
In addition, we will continue efforts to be ready to implement the
new human capital authorities included in legislation currently pending
before the Senate. This legislation, if passed, would give us more
flexibility to deal with mandatory pay and related costs during tight
budgetary times.
Managing Our Information Technology Resources
Our resourceful management of information technology was recognized
when we were named one of the ``CIO (Chief Information Officer) 100''
by CIO Magazine, recognizing excellence in managing our information
technology (IT) resources through ``creativity combined with a
commitment to wring the most value from every IT dollar.'' We were one
of three federal agencies named, selected from over 400 applicants,
largely representing private sector firms. In particular, we were cited
for excellence in asset management, staffing and sourcing, and building
partnerships, and for implementing a ``best practice''--staffing new
projects through internal ``help wanted'' ads.
We have expanded and enhanced the IT Enterprise Architecture
program we began in fiscal year 2002. We formally established an
Enterprise Architecture oversight group and steering committee to
prioritize our IT business needs, provide strategic direction, and
ensure linkage between our IT Enterprise Architecture and our capital
investment process. We implemented a number of user friendly Web-based
systems to improve our ability to obtain feedback from our
congressional clients, facilitate access to our information for the
external customer, and enhance productivity for the internal customer.
Among the new and enhanced Web-based systems were an application to
track and access General Counsel work by goal, team, and attorney; a
Web site on emerging trends and issues to provide information for our
teams and offices as they consult with the Congress; and an automated
tracking application for our staff to monitor the status of products to
be published.
In addition, we developed and released a system to automate an
existing data collection and analysis process, greatly expanding our
annual capacity to review DOD weapons systems programs. As a result, we
were able to increase staff productivity and efficiency and enhance the
information and services provided to the Congress. In the past, we were
able to complete a review annually of eight DOD weapons systems
programs. In fiscal year 2003 we reviewed 30 programs and reported on
26. Within the next year, that number will grow to 80 per year.
Increasing Information Security
We recognize the ongoing, ever present threat to our shared IT
systems and information assets and continue to promote awareness of
this threat, maintain vigilance, and develop practices that protect
information assets, systems, and services. As part of our continuing
emergency preparedness plan, we upgraded the level of
telecommunications services between our disaster recovery site and
headquarters, expanded our remote connectivity capability, and improved
our response time and transmission speed. To further protect our data
and resources, we drafted an update to our information systems security
policy, issued network user policy statements, hardened our internal
network security, expanded our intrusion detection capability, and
addressed concerns raised during the most recent network vulnerability
assessment.
We plan to continue initiatives to ensure a secure environment,
detect intruders in our systems, and recover in the event of a
disaster. We are also continuing to make the investments necessary to
enhance the safety and security of our staff, facilities, and other
assets for the mutual benefit of GAO and the Congress. In addition, we
plan to continue initiatives designed to further increase employees'
productivity, facilitate knowledge sharing, and maximize the use of
technology through tools available at the desktop and by reengineering
the systems that support our business processes.
Providing a Safe and Secure Workplace
On the basis of recommendations resulting from our physical
security evaluation and threat assessment, we continue to implement
initiatives to improve the security and safety of our building and
personnel. In terms of the physical plant improvements, we upgraded the
headquarters fire alarm system and installed a parallel emergency
notification system. We completed a study of personal protective
equipment, and based on the resulting decision paper, we have
distributed escape hoods to GAO staff. We have also made a concerted
effort to secure the perimeter and access to our building. Several
security enhancements will be installed in fiscal year 2004, such as
vehicle restraints at the garage ramps; ballistic-rated security guard
booths; vehicle surveillance equipment at the garage entrances; and
state-of-the-art electronic security comprising intrusion detection,
access control, and closed-circuit surveillance systems.
Preparing for Peer Review
A team of international auditors, led by the Office of the Auditor
General of Canada, will conduct a peer review for calendar year 2004 of
our performance audit work. This entails reviewing our policies and
internal controls to assess the compliance of GAO's work with
government audit standards. The review team will provide GAO with
management suggestions to improve our quality control systems and
procedures. Peer reviews will be conducted every 3 years.
gao's fiscal year 2005 request to support the congress
GAO is requesting budget authority of $486 million for fiscal year
2005. The requested funding level will allow us to maintain our base
authorized level of 3,269 full-time equivalent (FTE) staff to serve the
Congress, maintain operational support at fiscal year 2004 levels, and
continue efforts to enhance our business processes and systems. This
fiscal year 2005 budget request represents a modest increase of 4.9
percent over our fiscal year 2004 projected operating level, primarily
to fund mandatory pay and related costs and estimated inflationary
increases. The requested increase reflects an offset of almost $5
million from nonrecurring fiscal year 2004 initiatives, including
closure of our internal print plant, and $1 million in anticipated
reimbursements from a planned audit of the Securities and Exchange
Commission's (SEC) financial statements. Our requested fiscal year 2005
budget authority includes about $480 million in direct appropriations
and authority to use $6 million in estimated revenue from reimbursable
audit work and rental income.
To achieve our strategic goals and objectives for serving the
Congress, we must ensure that we have the appropriate human capital,
fiscal, and other resources to carry out our responsibilities. Our
fiscal year 2005 request would enable us to sustain needed investments
to maximize the productivity of our workforce and to continue
addressing key management challenges: human capital, and information
and physical security. We will continue to take steps to ``lead by
example'' within the federal government in these and other critical
management areas.
If the Congress wishes for GAO to conduct technology assessments,
we are also requesting $545,000 to obtain four additional FTEs and
contract assistance and expertise to establish a baseline technology
assessment capability. This funding level would allow us to conduct one
assessment annually and avoid an adverse impact on other high priority
congressional work.
A summary of the requested changes between our fiscal year 2004 and
2005 budget is reflected in table 4:
TABLE 4.--SUMMARY OF REQUESTED CHANGES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005 BUDGET
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cumulative
Budget category FTEs Amount percentage
change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2004 resources: \1\
Appropriation.............................................. .............. $457,606 ..............
Estimated revenue (offsetting collections)................. .............. $5,971 ..............
------------------------------------------------
Total fiscal year 2004 resources......................... 3,269 $463,577 ..............
================================================
Fiscal year 2005 requested changes:
Mandatory pay and related costs............................ .............. $21,821 4.7
Costs to maintain current operating levels................. .............. $4,007 5.5
Nonrecurring fiscal year 2004 costs........................ .............. ($4,499) ..............
New financial audit responsibility for SEC................. .............. ($1,000) ..............
Continuing improvements/new initiatives.................... .............. $2,203 ..............
------------------------------------------------
Subtotal increased funding required to support GAO .............. $22,532 4.9
operations..............................................
================================================
Fiscal year 2005 budget authority required to support GAO opera- 3,269 $486,109 ..............
tions.......................................................
Less: Estimated revenue (offsetting collections)............... 3,269 ($6,119) ..............
------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................... .............. $479,990 ..............
Establish a baseline technology assessment capability.......... 4 $545 ..............
------------------------------------------------
Total fiscal year 2005 appropriation..................... 3,273 $480,535 ..............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes rescission of 0.59 percent ($2,751).
Source: GAO.
concluding remarks
We are grateful to the Congress for providing support and resources
that have helped us in our quest to be a world class professional
services organization. The funding we received in fiscal year 2004 is
allowing us to conduct work that addressed many difficult issues
confronting the nation. By providing professional, objective, and
nonpartisan information and analyses, we help inform the Congress and
executive branch agencies on key issues, and covered programs that
continue to involve billions of dollars and touch millions of lives.
I am proud of the outstanding contributions made by GAO employees
as they work to serve the Congress and the American people. In keeping
with my strong belief that the federal government needs to exercise
fiscal discipline, our budget request for fiscal year 2005 is modest,
but would maintain our ability to provide first class, effective, and
efficient support to the Congress and the nation to meet 21st century
challenges in these critical times.
This concludes my statement. I would be pleased to answer any
questions the Members of the Subcommittee may have.
Appendix I: Serving the Congress--GAO's Strategic Plan Framework
Appendix II: GAO Accomplishments That Helped Change Laws, Improve
Services, or Promote Sound Management
GAO Efforts That Helped to Change Laws and/or Regulations
Consolidated Appropriations Resolution, 2003, Public Law 108-7.--
The law includes GAO's recommended language that the administration's
competitive sourcing targets be based on considered research and sound
analysis.
Smallpox Emergency Personnel Protection Act of 2003, Public Law
108-20.--GAO's report on the National Smallpox Vaccination program
highlighted volunteers' concerns about losing income if they sustained
injuries from an inoculation. This statute provides benefits and other
compensation to covered individuals injured in this way.
Postal Civil Service Retirement System Funding Reform Act of 2003,
Public Law 108-18.--Analyses performed by GAO and OPM culminated in the
enactment of this law that reduces USPS's pension costs by an average
of $3 billion per year over the next 5 years. The Congress directed
that the first 3 years of savings be used to reduce USPS's debt and
hold postage rates steady until fiscal 2006.
Accountability of Tax Dollars Act of 2002, Public Law 107-289.--A
GAO survey of selected non-CFO Act agencies demonstrated the
significance of audited financial statements in that community. GAO
provided legislative language that requires 70 additional executive
branch agencies to prepare and submit audited annual financial
statements.
Emergency Wartime Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2003, Public Law
108-11.--GAO assisted congressional staff with drafting a provision
that made available up to $64 million to the Corporation for National
and Community Service to liquidate previously incurred obligations,
provided that the Corporation reports overobligations in accordance
with the requirements of the Antideficiency Act.
Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003, Public Law
107-306.--GAO recommended that the Director of Central Intelligence
report annually on foreign entities that may be using U.S. capital
markets to finance the proliferation of weapons, including weapons of
mass destruction, and this statute instituted a requirement to produce
the report.
GAO Efforts That Helped to Improve Services to the Public
Strengthening the U.S. Visa Process as an Antiterrorism Tool.--Our
analysis of the U.S. visa-issuing process showed that the Department of
State's visa operations were more focused on preventing illegal
immigrants from obtaining nonimmigrant visas than on detecting
potential terrorists. We recommended that State reassess its policies,
consular staffing procedures, and training program. State has taken
steps to adjust its policies and regulations concerning the screening
of visa applicants and its staffing and training for consular officers.
Enhancing Quality of Care in Nursing Homes.--In a series of reports
and testimonies since 1998, we found that, too often, residents of
nursing homes were being harmed and that programs to oversee nursing
home quality of care at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
were not fully effective in identifying and reducing such problems. In
2003, we found a decline in the proportion of nursing homes that harmed
residents but made additional recommendations to further improve care.
Making Key Contributions to Homeland Security.--Drawing upon an
extensive body of completed and ongoing work, we identified specific
vulnerabilities and areas for improvement to protect aviation and
surface transportation, chemical facilities, sea and land ports,
financial markets, and radioactive sealed sources. In response to our
recommendations, the Congress and cognizant agencies have undertaken
specific steps to improve infrastructure security and improve the
assessment of vulnerabilities.
Improving Compliance with Seafood Safety Regulations.--We reported
that when Food and Drug Administration (FDA) inspectors identified
serious violations at seafood processing firms, it took FDA 73 days on
average, well above its 15-day target. Based on our recommendations,
FDA now issues warning letters in about 20 days.
Strengthening Labor's Management of the Special Minimum Wage
Program.--Our review of this program resulted in more accurate
measurement of program participation and noncompliance by employees and
prevented inappropriate payment of wages below the minimum wage to
workers with disabilities.
Reducing National Security Risks Related to Sales of Excess DOD
Property.--We reported that DOD did not have systems and procedures in
place to maintain visibility and control over 1.2 million chemical and
biological protective suits and certain equipment that could be used to
produce crude forms of anthrax. Unused suits (some of which were
defective) and equipment were declared excess and sold over the
Internet. DOD has taken steps to notify state and local responders who
may have purchased defective suits. Also, DOD has taken action to
restrict chemical-biological suits to DOD use only--an action that
should eliminate the national security risk associated with sales of
these sensitive military items. Lastly, DOD has suspended sales of the
equipment in question pending the results of a risk assessment.
Protecting the Retirement Security of Workers.--We alerted the
Congress to potential dangers threatening the pensions of millions of
American workers and retirees. The pension insurance program's ability
to protect workers' benefits is increasingly being threatened by long-
term, structural weaknesses in the private-defined, pension benefit
system. A comprehensive approach is needed to mitigate or eliminate the
risks.
Improving Mutual Fund Disclosures.--To improve investor awareness
of mutual fund fees and to increase price competition among funds, we
identified alternatives for regulators to increase the usefulness of
fee information disclosed to investors. Early in fiscal year 2003, the
Securities and Exchange Commission issued proposed rules to enhance
mutual fund fee disclosures using one of our recommended alternatives.
GAO Efforts That Helped to Promote Sound Agency and Governmentwide
Management
Encouraging and Helping Guide Agency Transformations.--We
highlighted federal entities whose missions and ways of doing business
require modernized approaches, including the Postal Service, and the
Coast Guard. Among congressional actions taken to deal with
modernization issues, the House Committee on Government Reform
established a special panel on postal reform and oversight to work with
the President's Commission on the Postal Service on recommendations for
comprehensive postal reform. We also reported this year on the Coast
Guard's ability to effectively carry out critical elements of its
mission, including its homeland security responsibilities. We
recommended that the Coast Guard develop a blueprint for targeting its
resources to its various mission responsibilities and a better
reporting mechanism for informing the Congress on its effectiveness.
Our recommendations led to better reporting by the Coast Guard and laid
the foundation for key revisions the agency intended to make to its
strategic plan.
Helping DOD Recognize and Address Business Modernization
Challenges.--Several times we have reported and testified on the
challenges DOD faces in trying to successfully modernize about 2,300
business systems, and we made a series of recommendations aimed at
establishing the modernization management capabilities needed to be
successful in transforming the department. DOD has implemented some key
architecture management capabilities, such as assigning a chief
architect and creating a program office, as well as issuing the first
version of its business enterprise architecture in May 2003. In
addition, DOD has revised its system acquisition guidance. By
implementing our recommendations, DOD is increasing the likelihood that
its systems investments will support effective and efficient business
operations and provide for timely and reliable information for decision
making.
Helping to Advance Major Information Technology Modernizations.--
Our work has helped to strengthen the management of the complex,
multibillion-dollar information technology modernization program at the
Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to improve operations, promote better
service, and reduce costs. For example, IRS implemented several of our
recommendations to improve software acquisition, enterprise
architecture definition and implementation, and risk management and to
better balance the pace and scope of the program with its capacity to
effectively manage it.
Improving Internal Controls and Accountability over Agency
Purchases.--Our work examining purchasing and property management
practices at FAA identified several weaknesses in the specific controls
and overall control environment that allowed millions of dollars of
improper and wasteful purchases to occur. Such weaknesses also
contributed to many instances of property items not being recorded in
FAA's property management system, which allowed hundreds of lost or
missing property items to go undetected. Acting on our findings, FAA
established key positions to improve management oversight of certain
purchasing and monitoring functions, revised its guidance to strengthen
areas of weakness and to limit the allowability of certain
expenditures, and recorded assets into its property management system
that we identified as unrecorded.
Strengthening Government Auditing Standards.--Our publication of
the Government Auditing Standards in June 2003 provides a framework for
audits of federal programs and monies. This comes at a time of urgent
need for integrity in the auditing profession and for transparency and
accountability in the management of scarce resources in the government
sector. The new revision of the standards strengthens audit
requirements for identifying fraud, illegal acts, and noncompliance,
and gives clear guidance to auditors as they contribute to a government
that is efficient, effective, and accountable to the people.
Supporting Controls over DOD's Credit Cards.--In a series of
reports and testimonies beginning in 2001, we highlighted pervasive
weaknesses in DOD's overall credit card control environment, including
the proliferation of credit cards and the lack of specific controls
over its multibillion dollar purchase and travel card programs. We
identified numerous cases of fraud, waste, and abuse and made 174
recommendations to improve DOD's credit card operations. DOD has taken
many actions to reduce its vulnerabilities in this area.
Senator Campbell. Do any of your colleagues have any
comments or they are just resources?
Mr. Walker. They are here to answer questions.
Senator Campbell. Senator Durbin, do you have an opening
statement?
Senator Durbin. Yes, I do. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Senator Richard J. Durbin
Mr. Chairman, thank you for scheduling today's hearing, the
first of four budget oversight hearings to be held by the
Legislative Branch Subcommittee this year. I'm glad we're all
here and ready to begin working on this year's budget. Based on
the events of last week, this is obviously going to be a very
challenging year. I'm very happy to see that we are moving
ahead with the hearing over on this side of the Capitol.
Mr. Chairman, I am happy to be working with you on this
important bill again this year. I think we did a good job
working together last year and finishing the bill in a timely
manner. With any luck, we can do so again this year.
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.
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, I know I don't have to tell you that this is
going to be a very challenging year for this Committee. The
budget constraints under which we are expected to work seem
unrealistic to say the least.
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 budget requests have holes
in them which could negatively impact your performance during
fiscal year 2005, I hope you will share those concerns with us.
First, Mr. Walker, I want you to know how much I appreciate
everything you do for us here in the Senate. I particularly
appreciate the guidance I have received from you and your staff
on matters relating to the Capitol Visitor Center. I know this
has been a tremendous task, but I think it is extremely
important for Members to have access to your external oversight
of this project as we make decisions about how to move forward
on the CVC. I hope you will spend several minutes today
discussing the GAO Human Capital Reform Act, which was approved
in the House last week and will now be voted on in the Senate.
This legislation will certainly give you broader flexibility in
constructing your workforce. I look forward to hearing how this
works for you and if you think it is worth pursuing in other
federal agencies.
Mr. James, you are doing a tremendous job as Public
Printer. I am looking forward to hearing your testimony about
your plans to relocate the Government Printing Office. You
certainly have a vision for the future of the GPO and I hope
you will walk us through it. I would also like to hear a little
about your voluntary separation incentive program. The 10
percent staff reduction and savings of $21.7 million was very
impressive, and I understand that you are about to undergo
another voluntary separation incentive program in April.
Mr. Holtz-Eakin, I see you have a relatively flat budget,
consisting mainly of increases in salaries and benefits. The
Congressional Budget Office does great work in providing
important information to the Congress. Over the years I have
had concerns about your experiment with the dynamic
scorekeeping initiative and I would appreciate it if you would
provide the subcommittee with an update on where this
experiment stands.
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.
STRATEGIC HUMAN CAPITAL MANAGEMENT
Senator Campbell. We will go to a couple of questions.
In looking at your testimony, Mr. Walker, the GAO listed
strategic human capital management as among its top high risk
issues for the Federal Government. Can you tell me what that
involves in laymen's terms?
Mr. Walker. What it involves is making sure that we have
the right number of people with the right skills and knowledge
in the right agencies doing the right things. It also means
modernizing Federal management practices for how we treat
people. It also means civil service reforms in order to provide
management with reasonable flexibility to make decisions while
incorporating adequate safeguards to prevent abuse of employees
and also making sure that we have certain principles that are
timeless in nature that apply across Government so we do not
have the balkanization of the civil service, among other
things, Mr. Chairman.
PAY-FOR-PERFORMANCE
Senator Campbell. That sounds commendable.
Under your current pay-for-performance system, how do you
determine how many people will be given pay raises, and who
makes that decision? Are the increases all tied to performance?
Mr. Walker. Well, first, we have several categories of
employees at GAO.
Senator Campbell. How many employees are there at GAO?
Mr. Walker. About 3,260. With regard to our categories, we
have our auditors, analysts, and investigators. That is one
category. That comprises over 70 percent of our employees. We
have attorneys, which is another category, and then we have our
administrative, professional and support staff. The auditors,
investigators, and analysts have been involved in pay-for-
performance since the late 1980's. The attorneys have also been
involved in pay-for-performance since the late 1980's. The
administrative, professional and support staff are moving to a
pay-for-performance (PFP) system. Right now they are under the
current GS system, which provides for periodic and optional
quality step increases. We have designed a new competency-based
performance appraisal system for them as well as a pay-for-
performance system. So, for next fiscal year, almost all of our
employees will be under a pay-for-performance system. Those not
in PFP are our wage grade individuals.
We have a modern, effective, and credible competency-based
performance appraisal system, which provides for a meaningful
distinction in performance among all individuals, and is tied
to our strategic plan. It is focused on the results that we
want to deliver for the Congress and the country.
RATING PERFORMANCE
Senator Campbell. Does the immediate supervisor do the
rating of the performance?
Mr. Walker. Yes, Mr. Chairman. There is a designated
performance manager. That designated performance manager will
come up with a proposed rating, but then there are a number of
review processes that take place in order to provide reasonable
assurance that there is consistency, equity and
nondiscrimination in how we go about completing the process.
There is reporting all the way up to the Executive Committee,
which involves myself, my two colleagues on my immediate right
and left, as well as our general counsel. There is also
transparency with regard to results. We post the results,
maintaining privacy, but the overall results, so that all of
our employees can see what the results are.
We are clearly leading the Government in this regard, Mr.
Chairman. There is no doubt about it.
GAO HUMAN CAPITAL FLEXIBILITIES
Now, the last thing I would mention is we do have
legislation that has already passed the House. It has passed
the Senate once. It is coming back to the Senate because the
House version was slightly different. That bill would give us
the ability to improve our pay-for-performance system. It has
broad-based bipartisan and bicameral support. We are hoping
that the Senate will pass it via unanimous consent in the near
future.
TRAINING GAO EMPLOYEES
Senator Campbell. Tell the committee a little bit about the
training for fiscal year 2005, which is about a 4 percent
increase over 2004. What does that training include? What kind
of training is it and do you have a strategic plan for the
training? And how much of that is directly related to
maintaining technical skills? Just give us a little information
about it.
Mr. Walker. Well, as you know, Mr. Chairman, we are a
professional services and knowledge-based organization. We are
only as good as our people, and therefore, we have to do
everything that we can to attract, retain, and train our
people.
During this past year, we hired Carol Willett, who is our
Chief Learning Officer and who formerly was a top training
official at the CIA. She has been working with the Executive
Committee and all of our employees and others to modernize our
training and learning curriculum.
Four percent is, I think, a modest increase, but it is only
the hard dollars. In other words, that is only the dollars that
we actually spend on consultants or outside activities. We
obviously invest a lot more in the way of time in helping to
execute our training program.
We are basically training on professional standards. We are
training on technical matters, including subject matter
expertise. We are training on leadership skills. We are
training on changed management experience. So it is a very
comprehensive curriculum. Our objective is to be world-class in
this regard, and I think we are headed there.
Mr. Dodaro. Senator, one additional comment on the training
at GAO. One-third of our employees right now have been with GAO
less than 5 years because of changing demographics and bringing
in new people. So training this next generation of people is
very important to build our institutional knowledge for the
Congress. It is very important to keep that up.
EFFECT OF FUNDING FREEZE
Senator Campbell. We understand about fast turnovers. We
have them here too.
Well, let me ask you, as I am going to ask all three
panels. You heard me say we are going to have some limited
funds and we might not be able to increase the amount that you
need. What happens if we cannot? How is this going to impact
your budget if we have to have a freeze in spending at the
current level?
Mr. Walker. Well, Mr. Chairman, to a great extent it
depends upon what other actions Congress takes. For example, if
you look at our proposed increase, which is the smallest of any
legislative branch entity, 4.9 percent, most of that is
mandatory increases. For example, we were told to include in
our request a 3.5 percent increase in compensation for all of
our employees. So if Congress ends up mandating that we have to
give an automatic pay increase to all of our employees and
since 81 percent of our costs represent payroll costs, then it
is going to be extremely difficult for us to deal with a flat-
line budget.
There are things that we have started to look at as to what
we might be able to defer or cancel, but the fact of the matter
is that when 81 percent of our costs represent people costs, we
do not have a whole lot of flexibility. We have to start
talking about how many people we can have.
Senator Campbell. So if we have a freeze in the budget, you
are going to have to reduce your manpower.
Mr. Walker. We may have to reduce our manpower. We would
obviously only do that as a last resort, but I think it could
be possible. If Congress mandates pay increases and does not
fund those pay increases, it is going to make it that much
worse.
But I will also reinforce that our human capital
legislation that is pending before the Senate at the present
point in time is of critical importance not only to keep us in
the lead in human capital reform, but to give us additional
flexibility to deal with the difficult budget situation next
year. It is critically important.
GAO TRAVEL PATTERNS
Senator Campbell. Okay, thank you. That was my last
question, but I would like you to provide for the record
something about your travel which, as I understand, seems to be
relatively high for the number of people that are employed. If
you would send it over to us. I would like to know the number
of people who traveled, the average cost of the trip, the
average duration of the trip, and the number of people that
went on each trip, and how much travel was spent on training,
the number of trips that were made overseas and why they went
overseas, and a number of other things.
Mr. Walker. I will be happy to provide it, Mr. Chairman. I
would note for the record on a preliminary basis it is my
understanding that our per capita travel costs are actually
down compared with where they were 10 years ago, but I will be
happy to provide all that information and any explanations.
[The information follows:]
Question. It seems as though GAO's travel budget is very
high considering the number of people employed by the agency.
Your request for fiscal 2005 looks like it would average over
$3,500 per person. Why is travel so high?
Answer. Our congressional mandates and requests require us
to follow the federal dollar no matter where it goes--across
our expansive country or across the globe. As a world-class
professional services organization, we rely on travel to (1)
meet our professional standards, including generally accepted
governmental auditing standards; (2) conduct our work in
supporting the Congress; and (3) provide staff technical
training needed to comply with minimum annual continuing
professional education requirements. We collect original
information, directly observe program activities first hand,
and have high standards in the conduct of our work that require
adequate standards of evidence. Travel provides the means to
conduct first-hand research that contributes to effective
oversight of federal programs. We conduct our work in an
unbiased manner that usually means we take responsibility for
gathering the relevant data, rather than relying on material
provided by others. Our credibility is enhanced by what we
learn on travel. The ability to ``be on the ground'' increases
the value and credibility of our work. Also, we are often able
to obtain various types of evidence, e.g., access to internal
agency databases that would not be available at a distance.
First-hand observation and data gathering also helps us make
decisions about data reliability when we observe or talk to
those persons who are responsible for entering the data. Also,
travel provides developmental opportunities for inexperienced
analysts that can only be gained from on-site work.
GAO is committed to gaining as much as possible from
travel. We weigh many factors before approving engagement
travel. We strive to be as knowledgeable as possible on the
issues before conducting fieldwork. We assess the overall cost
of each trip, including staff time, as well as travel dollars.
We also judiciously prioritize the use of funds and assess
possible alternatives to travel. We actively focus on reducing
costs by limiting the number of travelers; minimizing time
spent on per diem; using alternative, more cost-effective
airports and indirect flights to reduce transportation costs;
and consolidating purposes to avoid multiple trips.
GAO drastically reduced travel spending in the mid-1990s
due to budget constraints. Travel spending, as a percentage of
our total budget, has remained relatively flat since then at
less than 3 percent. In fiscal year 1995, our travel per capita
cost averaged $3,632 in 2004 dollars--slightly higher than our
estimated fiscal year 2004 travel per capita cost of $3,482.
Recently, we convened a task force of senior managers to
further review our travel practices and identify ways to
improve our effectiveness and efficiency. The task force will
be making recommendations to the Comptroller General and the
Executive Committee later this year.
Question. For the record, can you give the committee a
detailed analysis showing the following? The number of people
who traveled in fiscal year 2003.
Answer. In fiscal year 2003, 2,324 staff traveled--over 70
percent of our staff on board at the end of the fiscal year.
Staff that conduct fieldwork and gather data conduct the
majority of our travel. Typically, they are recurring
travelers.
Question. What was the average duration of each trip?
Answer. The average duration per trip in fiscal year 2003
was 4 days.
Question. What was the average number of people that went
on each trip?
Answer. In fiscal year 2002, the average number of staff
per trip was 2. Generally, most engagement related trips
require a minimum of 2 staff to ensure data integrity and the
reliability of interview write-ups. Other travel may only
involve 1 GAO employee.
Question. What was the average cost per trip?
Answer. The average cost per trip was $1,014 in fiscal year
2003.
Question. How much travel was spent to attend conferences
not directly associated with a specific job? How much travel
was spent for training?
Answer. In fiscal year 2003, we spent 7 percent of our
travel funds to support training and development activities,
including conferences and speeches, many of which were related
to specific jobs. Presently, we do not segregate the cost for
each of these activities, but plan to do so in the future.
These trips allow staff to attend training and professional
conferences to gain and share information, as well as to
represent GAO in their professional capacity.
Question. What was the number of trips that were made
overseas and why?
Answer. In fiscal year 2003, 380 trips were made outside
the contiguous United States to areas such as Afghanistan and
Iraq. Our International Affairs and Trade team conducted travel
to assess peacekeeping transitions, review the U.S. public
diplomacy, monitor sensitive exports, review refugee
protections, assess embassy conditions, review ocean container
security, and assess the global health fund. Travel by other
teams and offices included issues related to joint strike
fighter allies, foreign military sales shipments, foreign
schools, port security, force protection, contractors on the
battlefield, plutonium production reactors and radioactive
sources, international aviation consumer benefits, postal work-
sharing, border security, and collaboration with the other
Supreme Audit Institutions.
Question. What has been the average increase over the past
five years in per diem and transportation costs?
Answer. Per diem costs represent about sixty-two percent of
our total travel costs. Between fiscal years 2001 and 2003, in
the 20 major cities that we travel to most often, per diem
costs increased an average of 4 percent, while domestic
airfares increased an average of almost 7 percent from
Washington, D.C., and international airfares increased an
average of 10 percent. Between fiscal years 2001 and 2003, per
diem costs increased 18 percent in Atlanta, 16 percent in
Chicago, 23 percent in Denver, 25 percent in Seattle, and 21
percent in Washington, D.C. Since fiscal year 1999,
transportation costs have increased almost 40 percent.
TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT
Senator Campbell. Thank you.
Would you mind if I yield to the chairman?
Senator Durbin. No, of course, not.
Senator Campbell. Before we turn to our ranking member, I
would like to yield to the chairman of the full committee.
Senator Stevens, do you have any comments or questions?
Senator Stevens. Well, first to express my regret for your
decision yesterday, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Campbell. My granddaughter, 4 years old, is very
happy with it.
Senator Stevens. I was just going to say you would like to
get to know your grandchildren before they enter college, which
is what my experience has been.
Mr. Walker, I note that you are going to have four
additional staff devoted to establishing a technology
assessment capability. Now, I am one of the few survivors of
the Office of Technology Assessment Board. It was one of the
most controversial boards that we ever had, and it brought in
the private sector, it brought in Government, it brought in
academia, and the oversight of Members of the House and the
Senate.
Being what you are, an office that serves the Congress,
both the House and the Senate, and knowing the propensity for
these issues to involve horrendous political controversies, why
are you doing this?
Mr. Walker. Well, Senator, first, it was not our idea. The
fact of the matter is there are a number of parties in Congress
and individuals on both ends of the Hill and both sides of the
aisle who are interested in some limited technology assessment
capability. They specifically asked us to include a proposal
for consideration by the Congress as to whether or not if there
was some limited technology assessment capability, what we
thought would make sense.
Our view, Senator, is this is a decision for the Congress
to make. I think there was a general view that it does not
necessarily make sense to create a new entity, and to the
extent that there was an existing entity within the legislative
branch that could meet this need, that GAO was the logical
entity to do it.
The additional FTE's and the $545,000 would be for
additional skills that we think we would need in order to be
able to properly address this.
But it is really up to the Congress as to whether or not
you want to expand our mission for us to do this.
Senator Stevens. We have two shared staffs, the GAO and the
Congressional Research Service. We had a meeting yesterday of
the Joint Committee of the Library, which I am honored to be
chairman of, and we discovered yesterday that CRS has hired
four technology assessment scientists.
Now, I would respectfully suggest that you should take this
issue to the Government Affairs Committee and let both Houses
review this. Obviously, with the loss of the Technology
Assessment Board concept, we do need in Congress some
substantial advice on technology assessment. Actually the old
Board came out of the SST controversy, and we decided we did
not have the capability. We reviewed that and created a Board
that assisted us for some time.
I personally favor restoring the Board and having some
Members of Congress in constant oversight of what is going on
on a bipartisan basis and a bicameral basis. But I do not think
that either entity of the Congress should proceed to fill this
gap without some direction from the Congress itself. Enough
said on that.
On your pay-for-performance concept, did you generate that
or was that pursuant to an act of Congress?
SOURCE OF PAY-FOR-PERFORMANCE
Mr. Walker. No. This is at our generation, Senator. We have
been a leader in the Federal Government for years in pay-for-
performance, and we are looking to provide additional
flexibility for pay-for-performance. We have also been a leader
in the Federal Government in the so-called broad-banding
concept which is moving away from the 15 General Schedule (GS)
levels and to have flatter and more flexible classification
systems and pay systems. So we have been in this business for a
while, Senator.
Senator Stevens. Again, I remember when I was chairman of
the Government Affairs Committee, we had China Lake and San
Diego experiments on the whole concept of unit management
rather than directed management by law. But we had some
parameters from the Congress in setting it up. You do not have
any parameters. Right?
Mr. Walker. Well, Senator, we actually do. And the other
thing is----
Senator Stevens. Where do you have it from?
Mr. Walker. Well, we had legislation in 1980 that gave us
the authority to go to broad-banding and additional pay-for-
performance. We had legislation in the year 2000, and now we
have legislation pending before the Senate, the GAO Human
Capital Reform Act of 2003. It has actually already passed the
Senate once, but the House passed a bill that was slightly
different, and so now we have for consideration by the Senate
that legislation, which is of critical importance to, number
one, help us to continue to make progress on pay-for-
performance, and second, to give us additional flexibility if
we have a tight budget year next year.
Senator Stevens. All right. My memory is that the past
performances ended up with the chiefs being able to divide the
money for performances and the Indians sitting there at the
desks and not having annual increases. I would be very
interested to see how you are going to balance the rights of
those who are permanent employees from the temporary super
stars you have got.
Mr. Walker. Senator, I would be happy to provide you some
information. We have, I think, successfully addressed that
issue. There is no such thing, as you know, as a perfect
performance appraisal system, but I clearly believe, Senator,
that we are in the lead in the Federal Government in this
regard. I would be happy to provide you some additional data
and statistics with regard to this.
FEDERAL DEFICIT
Senator Stevens. My staff tells me that you have expressed
some rather strong views on the deficit. Is that right?
Mr. Walker. Well, Senator, let me tell you what I have
done. As you know, I am the audit partner on the consolidated
financial statements of the U.S. Government. My comments really
are twofold. One, that if you look at how we keep score, both
as it relates to financial reporting, the financial statements
of the U.S. Government, which were just released, I might add,
last Friday for fiscal year 2003, that it does not provide a
full and complete picture of our true financial condition. For
example, it does not adequately consider the difference between
promised Social Security benefits and promised Medicare
benefits and the resources that are there, the payroll taxes,
et cetera. So we actually have huge unfunded commitments that
are not given enough transparency.
I have also noted concern about the fact that given known
demographic trends, the retirement of the baby boom generation
and rising health care costs, that we are likely to face a
structural deficit in future years that is going to require the
Congress to take a look at entitlement programs, discretionary
spending, and tax policy in the way that you deem appropriate
to try to address that gap.
Senator Stevens. Have you addressed the lack of a capital
budget for the United States?
Mr. Walker. I have touched on that somewhat, Senator. One
of the problems we have is the way that we keep score is
problematic, and one of the challenges that we have, as you
know, Senator, is we treat capital transactions the same way
that we do operating expenses.
There are different ways that one could approach that. You
would not necessarily have to have a capital budget, but as you
yourself have noted, in the case of trying to make major
capital purchases, we need to figure out how we can go about
doing that in a way to recognize that we need to modernize our
platforms, we need to modernize our infrastructure, and those
are investments that end up inuring benefits over a number of
years rather than just in the year that you appropriate the
money.
Senator Stevens. I do not want to prolong this, but I
showed to a group of Senators yesterday a chart that I had of
the infrastructure investment by China per year and the
increase in infrastructure investment of the United States per
year, and it has declined. We are supposed to be involved in a
world economy, competing globally. If we continue to take the
position that the Federal Government should not spend for the
infrastructure that is necessary for growth, then by definition
we will not have any growth. And I think we face a challenge
internationally in terms of our place in the global marketplace
that cannot be handled unless we address the subject of a
capital budget and, if necessary, the concept of bonding some
of that expansion. So I would welcome your review of that.
Again, I am still on the Government Affairs Committee. I
hope to raise this before the Government Affairs Committee so
that we might consider it after the election. It is not
something we address in an election year. But clearly, we
cannot deal with this situation, and I mentioned it this
morning in another committee. When we have energy development
in Alaska, we have to take our roads allowances for our
highways and build the roads to that energy development. In any
other place in the world, the government provides
infrastructure. As a matter of fact, if you want to build a
building in China, you go to one entity and get one permit and
you outline the necessity for your infrastructure and it is
there within literally weeks. You could not build a building in
this town in less than 4 years. So I do think we either get on
to the capital budget concept and infrastructure renewal--the
bridges we have and interstate highways were built in
Eisenhower's day, and many of them are decaying and are really
seriously in need of replacement or modernization.
So I would welcome your comments on these things. I do not
think we should become deficit blind, and if we do not wake up,
we are going to be a third class power, not only militarily but
economically.
Mr. Walker. Senator, I would love to meet with you sometime
on this, and we have done work on this in the past, as you
know. So I would welcome the opportunity.
Senator Stevens. I would welcome the opportunity to work
with you on the technology assessment activity, but I would
urge you to go to Government Affairs and get some outline so
later we do not have a political squabble over who you have
hired and what they have done.
Mr. Walker. We will do it.
Senator Stevens. Mr. Dodaro?
Mr. Dodaro. Senator, that is a good idea and we will pursue
that, but I just want to note for the record that we were
required to do a pilot in the technology assessment area 2
years ago. We did one, and we were required to have an
evaluation of it by outside parties.
Senator Stevens. Who required it?
Mr. Dodaro. It was required by the Congress in our
appropriation bill. We did it on biometrics.
Senator Stevens. I do remember that.
Mr. Dodaro. Yes, and we were deemed to have done it
successfully, but it required some additional changes. And we
were kind of viewed as an interim gap for the Congress, with
CRS providing quick turnaround using secondary research, and
the National Academy of Sciences doing long-term studies. GAO
was looked at as a potential option to meet an intermediary
need.
Senator Stevens. If we are not careful, though, we are
going to have different arms of the Congress giving us
different advice on the same technology.
Mr. Dodaro. Yes, exactly, Senator. We do not dispute your
concerns about this. I think it is important to work it
through.
Senator Stevens. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank
you, Senator Durbin.
Senator Campbell. We will now turn to Senator Durbin.
RETURN ON INVESTMENT
Senator Durbin. I just wanted to make one observation. I
want to thank Mr. Walker and all those in the GAO. I note that
you have, in your testimony, acknowledged that the GAO has had
a $78 return on every dollar appropriated. Have you considered
taking over the thrift savings plan?
Mr. Walker. It is not in our line of business.
Senator Durbin. If we had a G fund and it was a GAO fund,
that return?
Mr. Walker. Some have suggested we ought to do an IPO, but
I do not think that is appropriate.
Senator Durbin. Two questions I would like to ask you. One
is related to technology. It is my impression that the
technology of the United States Senate is two steps behind the
world and three steps behind the House. I happen to live with
House Members and I hear what they are doing. It just amazes me
that there is such a dichotomy and divergence here between the
technology that is being used on the other side of the Hill and
what we are using in the Senate. We seem to be late to the
party time and again. I will not dwell on that other than to
say I am going to send you a note and ask you to please look
into this because I think that there are things that, for some
reason, we are very slow to come to in changes here.
Let me ask you one specific question. I feel very strongly
about the human capital issue and the fact that to attract the
best and brightest of the new young men and women who are
available requires some attentiveness to the issue of student
loans. I have found that time and again that some of the very
best people cannot afford to make the Government service choice
because of their student loan indebtedness.
Now, I created this idea a few years ago. I have to tell
you candidly that I do not think it got off to a strong start
in the Senate because, frankly, no one wanted to take on the
responsibility of deciding how to establish standards. Have you
used this program in GAO and can you tell me whether or not you
think it has value to you in terms of human capital?
STUDENT LOAN REPAYMENTS
Mr. Walker. Senator, I believe we were the first agency in
the Federal Government to adopt the student loan repayment
program. We are the second largest user of student loan
repayments in the entire Federal Government as far as the
number of student loan repayments and the amount of dollars
involved. Number one is the State Department. Needless to say,
we are a lot smaller than the State Department.
To give you just some statistics off the top, last year we
gave about $1.2 million--pardon me--last year, fiscal year
2003, $945,000 in student loan repayments, that averaged about
$4,000 each.
We have criteria that we set up where we look at the nature
of the position, what the skills and knowledge are for the
position. As you know, there are statutory limits as to how
much you can do in a given year and how much you can do over a
period of time.
One of the things that we have done is, in addition to
trying to attract and retain critical skills, we have really
structured our student loan repayment program to try to help us
maximize the chance that we can keep top new talent for at
least 3 years. And the reason I say that is that our statistics
show over time that if we can keep people for 3 years, then
many times we can keep them for many years because they
understand what public service is all about. They understand
the difference they can make at GAO. They understand that we
are a very unique place where you will be challenged your
entire career and you can work in different areas and yet still
work for the same entity. And it has been extremely successful.
It is a very popular program. It is very successful, and we are
using it strategically to help us attract, retain, and motivate
top talent.
TAX FORGIVENESS OF STUDENT LOANS
Senator Durbin. The second thing I will be asking the GAO
is to take a look at the student loan redemption or forgiveness
programs across the board, which I have some pride of
authorship. But I also want to be candid. I do not think they
are being applied fairly and evenly in all agencies. I think we
ought to try to establish some common standards and what you
have just described sounds like a good start. So that will be
my second request of you.
Mr. Walker. Thanks, Senator. One thing I would mention that
would be helpful and it would involve an amendment to the
Internal Revenue Code, which obviously raises a jurisdictional
issue, but as you know, right now the student loan repayment is
on a taxable basis. We could really leverage these dollars
quite a bit if these were nontaxable because actually what we
have right now is a situation where if somebody gets a student
loan repayment, they have to include it in their income. If
they end up leaving within a period of time, they have to pay
back the full gross amount, in other words, including the
taxes. It is a way that you could end up potentially further
leveraging the dollars without appropriating additional money,
but it would involve an amendment to the tax code.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
Senator Durbin. Thanks very much. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Campbell. Thank you and we thank this panel for
appearing.
[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. You are requesting about $4 million for training in
fiscal year 2005. Does this include both the cost of training provided
by GAO's internal staff or is it only training provided by contractors?
Answer. The requested amount includes (1) contractor costs to
develop and/or provide training, (2) tuition costs to enable GAO-
sponsored groups or individuals to participate in job-related courses
offered by private and public vendors, and (3) costs for training
manuals and online tutorials. It does not include the time cost of
training provided to or received by GAO staff.
Question. What kind of training is provided by contractors and what
is done by GAO's internal staff?
Answer. Training that addresses development of core analytic
skills, GAO policies, standards, and culture, and quality assurance
procedures and practices are developed in-house using GAO subject
matter experts and adjunct faculty. Professional development topics
that are more general in nature, such as coaching, teambuilding, or
project management, are outsourced. We seek to provide a blend of face-
to-face classroom interaction, online learning and web-based
performance support tools. Learning programs delivered in each of these
ways have been developed in-house, developed jointly with outside
contractors or consultants, and purchased from outside vendors.
Question. How many people has GAO dedicated to its internal
training function, and what is the cost of this effort?
Answer. GAO has about 15 staff, at an estimated cost of $1.9
million, assigned to its internal training function. These staff are
responsible for overseeing contractor training development and
delivery; developing training materials; coordinating training delivery
to GAO staff; providing subject matter expertise, conducting training
courses, and assessing course development and content; and working with
GAO managers and staff to identify options for maintaining and
enhancing course offerings.
Question. How much of that is directly related to maintaining or
enhancing technical skills? How much is directly related to supervisory
and management training?
Answer. GAO's total investment in training approximates that spent
by comparable professional services organizations. Our request provides
funding for development and delivery of courses in our newly revised
curriculum not only to maintain individual professional competence, but
also to enhance it, thus promoting a work force that continually
improves its skills and knowledge. To this end, we require analyst and
specialist employees complete 80 hours of continuing professional
education credits every 2 years. The proposed new mandatory curriculum
for analyst staff includes 256 hours to maintain or enhance technical
skills through orientation to GAO processes and customers, core
analytic skills training, and professional development at an estimated
cost of about $2 million. This training is critically important because
about 38 percent of our analyst staff have 5 years or less with GAO.
Also, about 172 hours of training in the new mandatory curriculum will
focus on leadership development for senior and management-level analyst
staff at an estimated cost of $687,000. Teams and offices provide
training on substantive professional development and subject matter
expertise at an estimated cost of $1.6 million.
We plan to develop a mandatory curriculum for our administrative,
professional, and support staff which will include components for
technical skills, as well as supervisory and management training.
Question. Do you have a strategic plan for training in GAO? If so,
could you supply it for the record?
Answer. Human capital elements, such as training, have always been
broadly reflected in our agency strategic plan. However, we felt the
need to have a separate human capital plan due to the importance of
human capital management as the cornerstone of GAO's management
framework and the high interest in such a plan. During fiscal year
2003, we made substantial progress towards finalizing our first formal
and separate strategic plan planning document for human capital that
communicates our strategy for becoming a model, professional
organization, including how we plan to attract, retain, train,
motivate, and reward a high-performing and top quality workforce.
Management has reviewed the draft human capital strategic plan and we
are following it in practice. We are waiting for enactment of our
pending human capital legislation. Thereafter, we will finalize the
plan and provide copies to the committee.
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
STATEMENT OF BRUCE R. JAMES, PUBLIC PRINTER
ACCOMPANIED BY:
BILL TURRI, DEPUTY PUBLIC PRINTER AND CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER
STEVE SHEDD, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
MARC NICHOLS, INSPECTOR GENERAL
SUMMARY STATEMENT OF BRUCE R. JAMES
Senator Campbell. We will now hear from the Government
Printing Office, Bruce James, the Public Printer; Marc Nichols,
Inspector General; William Turri, the Deputy Printer; and Steve
Shedd, the Chief Financial Officer.
Mr. James, why do you not go ahead and proceed. If you
would like to abbreviate your comments, your complete testimony
will be in the record.
Mr. James. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am pleased to be with
you here today to offer testimony in support of the Government
Printing Office's appropriations request and to answer any
questions you may have. At the table with me is Bill Turri, the
Deputy Public Printer of the United States and the Chief
Operating Officer, and to my immediate right is Steve Shedd,
our Chief Financial Officer, and to my far right is Marc
Nichols, our Inspector General.
Last year at this hearing, I discussed the importance of
developing a strategic plan for the GPO that is aligned with
the changing information requirements of the agencies of
Government, the national library community, and the general
public. I also testified about the importance of stabilizing
GPO's finances by stopping the long string of financial losses.
We have made great strides toward the development of a
strategic plan that can be accepted by Congress, employees of
GPO, the printing and information industries, and the library
community. We are wrapping up the first phase, the fact
finding, and are only waiting for the final reports from GAO's
study of the future information dissemination needs of the
Government. We expect to complete a final plan before the
beginning of next fiscal year.
Meantime, as you know, we have proceeded to make changes to
our organization that will be required regardless of the final
plan. We have taken the steps necessary to stabilize the
financial condition of the GPO by reorganizing and streamlining
our business units, reducing employment, and shutting
unnecessary operations. We conducted a successful early
retirement program last year and have another underway. By the
summer, we will have reduced overall agency employees by 20
percent from the time that I arrived at the GPO a little over 1
year ago. We have changed our capital investment program to
require faster paybacks for taxpayers. If there are no
unanticipated setbacks as the year progresses, we should end
this fiscal year at or near the breakeven point rather than the
$33 million loss I inherited, all while measurably improving
our service levels to agencies, libraries and the public.
Next year we will begin to roll out a series of new
printing and digital information products now being developed
by our New Products and Revenues Group which is supported by
our Office of Innovation and New Technology, both of which
report directly to me.
While I cannot bring before you a finished strategic plan
today, I can tell you that every sign is pointing to the
necessity of maintaining a centralized public source for
Federal Government documents that takes into account the fact
that more than 50 percent of our documents are born digital and
will never be printed by the Government except on demand, as
needed. This calls for a different type of dissemination
system, one that can deal with multiple electronic versions of
the same document, authenticate electronic documents as
official and reliable, and preserve the digital record of the
American Government in perpetuity.
Congress is fortunate to have in place an organization for
providing such services to the American people staffed by more
than 2,000 printing and information professionals who together
have more than 55,000 years of experience in collecting,
processing, and the distribution of United States Government
documents. The men and women of the GPO are here to serve you
and guide our brothers and sisters throughout the Government
into the complex world of 21st century digital information.
PREPARED STATEMENT
We appreciate the trust and confidence that Congress has
placed in us and this subcommittee in particular for your
support of our initiatives. To continue to serve your needs and
those of the courts and the executive branch agencies, we are
asking for a $25 million technology investment. We will use
this to modernize our document handling systems, which will
reduce future costs and lead to lower appropriations for
congressional printing and binding and other Government
documents.
With that, we would be pleased to entertain your questions.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Bruce R. James
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: It is an honor to be
here today to present the appropriations request of the U.S. Government
Printing Office (GPO) for fiscal year 2005.
2003 Results.--I'm pleased to report that 2003 was an
extraordinarily eventful and productive year for the GPO. With funding
from the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act for 2004 and the
approval of the Joint Committee on Printing, we conducted a highly
successful voluntary separation incentive program that allowed us to
reduce our workforce level by more than 300 positions, or 10 percent,
yielding annual savings of $21.7 million. Together with our efforts to
shutter GPO's failing retail bookstores, which will generate savings of
$1.5 million in the first year, and the other steps we have taken to
better manage our operations, our finances are being restored to a
positive basis.
We have undertaken additional measures in recent weeks that will
yield further financial benefits. With the approval of the Joint
Committee on Printing, we are implementing another voluntary separation
incentive program that is targeted at reducing an additional 250
positions, yielding an annual savings of $16.5 million for fiscal year
2005. This program will be financed through our revolving fund during
the April-July period of this year. The Joint Committee has also
approved our plan to end the financial losses at our Denver regional
printing plant by closing it. Barring any unforeseen developments,
these and related actions we are taking to improve efficiency and
economy will allow us to complete fiscal year 2004 at or near the
break-even point, halting a decade-long pattern of year-end losses and
setting the GPO on the road to sustained financial health.
Transforming the GPO.--Apart from restoring our finances, during
2003 we began the transformation of the GPO into a 21st century digital
information processing facility. We carried out a broad reorganization
to redirect the GPO's management, expanded our workforce development
resources, began modernizing the GPO's product lines with new offerings
such as Public Key Infrastructure technology, and initiated planning
for the restructuring of our Federal Depository Library Program. We
also improved emergency preparedness for our employees and for
continuity-of-government operations. Across the board--from our
customers in Congress, Federal agencies, and among the public, from the
printing industry, the library and information communities, and from
our employee representatives--we're getting strong support for the
direction we're heading.
Transforming the GPO for the long term will require much more than
the changes we've already achieved. As you know, in the coming weeks
the General Accounting Office will be concluding its congressionally-
mandated study of Federal printing and information policy. The study
will establish a baseline of current operations on which we can
confidently build a strategic plan for the GPO's future involving
consultations with all of our stakeholders. The plan will include
recommendations for reforming the 19th century statutes comprising
Title 44 of the U.S. Code, the laws that authorize our programs and
operations.
Dealing with the GPO's building needs is a major transformational
issue that we are also addressing. As reports in The Washington Post,
The Washington Times, Roll Call, and The Hill have detailed recently,
we've begun a process that we expect to culminate by 2007 in the
relocation of the GPO from our aging, oversized quarters on North
Capitol Street to modern, efficient facilities--preferably in the
District of Columbia--that are sized and equipped to meet our needs in
the 21st century. Rather than burden the taxpayers with this project,
we want to investigate opportunities to finance it through the
redevelopment of our current structures. In addition to benefiting the
GPO and our customers, this approach will also generate significant
benefits for the District. We have obtained the approval of the Joint
Committee on Printing to proceed with the initial stages of this
project and we will continue to consult closely with Congress as we
proceed. As part of these efforts, we are seeking specific statutory
approval to utilize up to $500,000 in our revolving fund to finance the
services of experts to help us in this process.
Beyond our planning and building efforts, the transformation of the
GPO will require investments in new technology for collecting,
processing, and distributing Government information. This will
establish the GPO's leadership in using the best leading-edge digital
technology in support of Congress, Federal agencies, and the public.
The GPO has a vastly expanded role to play in content management,
authentication of documents, meeting the challenges associated with
versioning of electronic data, on-demand printing, the transfer of
information from one generation of technology to the next, and the
preservation of digital information in perpetuity. The 19th century is
not coming back. These are the baseline services that the GPO must be
prepared to provide if we are to carry out our mission effectively in
the 21st century. In addition to our request for funding for
continuation of services, our appropriations request for fiscal year
2005 reflects this investment requirement, which is essential to the
GPO's future and the future information activities of the customers we
by law support.
Fiscal Year 2005 Request.--Our appropriations request is designed
to provide for the: Continuation of our congressional printing and
binding operations at required levels; continuation of our document
dissemination services at required levels; investment in GPO's future
as a 21st century digital information processing facility; separate
funding for the GPO's Office of the Inspector General; and
modernization of business practices through appropriate legislative
changes
Continuation of Services.--For the Congressional Printing and
Binding Appropriation, which covers printing and related services for
Congress, we are requesting $88.8 million. This is a reduction of $1.8
million, or 2 percent, from the level approved by Congress for fiscal
year 2004.
For the Salaries and Expenses Appropriation of the Superintendent
of Documents, we are requesting $33 million. This is a reduction of
$1.2 million, or about 3.6 percent, from the fiscal year 2004 approved
level. This appropriation provides for the cataloging and indexing of
Government publications, and the distribution of Government
publications to Federal Depository and International Exchange libraries
and other recipients authorized by law.
The reductions in these two appropriations have been made possible
by reduced printing workloads, our continued application of cost-saving
digital information technologies, and increased efficiency in
operations, including savings from the buyout conducted in 2003.
Investment in the GPO's Future.--The most strategic of our fiscal
year 2005 requests is a proposal for $25 million to be appropriated to
our revolving fund, to remain available until expended, which will be
used in carrying out a multi-year plan to transform the information
technology used at the GPO in meeting Federal agency customer
requirements for printed and digital documents as well as the public's
increasing demand for authenticated, official Government information to
be available from the Internet.
Our vision is to move the GPO forward from a predominantly ink-on-
paper distributor of printing requirements to a life-cycle manager of
digital Government information, electronically collecting, organizing,
processing, and protecting the flow of public documents from their
origination in Congress and Federal agencies through their
dissemination, in perpetuity, to depository libraries and the public.
To make this transformation effective, our technology plan has
identified a series of initiatives that will sustain and improve the
GPO's current information technology (IT) baseline; consolidate data
center capabilities; modernize the GPO's IT infrastructure; reengineer
the GPO's business processes to synchronize with IT capabilities;
provide effective enterprise resource management; and ensure continuing
IT security. This vision embraces the GPO's historic role of serving as
the gateway to the Government's public documents while utilizing
technologies that meet the demands of the 21st century. It will
necessarily be modified by our strategic plan, the development of which
will depend on the conclusions reached by the GAO's study.
The funding we are requesting today will be used to generate
efficiency and reduce costs tomorrow. Already, Congress is seeing the
results of investment in the GPO, as last year's appropriation to fund
our buyout is already generating savings that are showing up in our
reduced requests for the Congressional Printing and Binding and
Salaries and Expenses Appropriations for fiscal year 2005. As with all
of our initiatives undertaken since my taking office as Public Printer,
this transformation will be conducted under the oversight and guidance
of the Joint Committee on Printing, the Appropriations Committees, and
our legislative oversight committees in the House of Representatives
and the Senate, and in consultations with our customers throughout
Congress, Federal agencies, and the library and information
communities.
Office of the Inspector General.--Rather than continue to finance
the GPO's IG through our revolving fund, we are requesting that this
function be funded annually by direct appropriations, as IG operations
are throughout much of the Government. For fiscal year 2005, we are
requesting $4.2 million and 25 full-time equivalent (FTE's) positions
for this purpose.
Financing the IG through the revolving fund requires that the fees
for various services be increased to reimburse this cost. A direct
appropriation will alleviate that cost burden on Congress and agency
customers and make our services more competitively priced. It will also
provide greater independence for the IG and his staff to monitor the
GPO's operations.
Legislative Changes.--In addition to our funding request, we are
requesting several authorities to support our transformational efforts
and further our mission:
--Extension of our early retirement and separation incentive
authority, which expires at the end of fiscal year 2004.
Utilized in 2003 and again this year, this authority has been
extremely useful in achieving orderly reductions in staffing
that are providing significant savings to GPO operations.
--Authorization to use up to $500,000 to contract for expert services
to assist us in our effort to relocate the GPO and to finance
this project through redevelopment of our existing structures.
--Authority to accept contributions of property, equipment, and
services to support and enhance the work of the GPO. We have
improved the language we submitted last year by adding
additional reporting requirements to ensure full
accountability.
--Elimination of the current, long-outdated limit of 25 percent on
discounts for our sales publications. This would enable us to
match current sales discount practices in the private sector
and improve our documents sales practices.
--Elimination of the current 5-year retention period for Government
documents in selective depository libraries. This requirement,
which would be replaced with regulations issued by the
Superintendent of Documents in consultation with the library
community, is imposing excessive costs for documents management
on libraries and undermining the efficiency of program
participation.
--Authorization to use up to $10,000 in our Revolving Fund to support
the activities of the Benjamin Franklin Tercentenary
Commission, established by Public Law 107-202. The Commission
is working on ways for the Federal Government to appropriately
observe the tercentenary of Benjamin Franklin's birth in 2006.
The GPO's support for this important work could involve
printing, mailing, travel, or associated expenses. We are
deeply committed to cooperating with the Commission and its
private sector counterpart, the Benjamin Franklin Tercentenary
Consortium.
--An increase in our representation allowance to $15,000 to support
activities promoting the GPO.
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for all the
support you have shown for our efforts to bring transformation to the
GPO, reduce the costs of its operations, and improve the provision of
our services to Congress, Federal agencies, and the public. This past
year has been one of unparalleled accomplishment at the GPO, and with
your support we can continue that record of achievement. 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.
BUSINESS-LIKE OPERATIONS
Senator Campbell. You stated that you would like to run the
GPO like a business, which around here sometimes is a buzzword.
That is what almost candidate for office says about the Federal
Government. You run it like a business and with most
businesses, if they are not making a profit, you have got to
shut it down because it is the profit margin that keeps it
going.
What are you going to do to make it more businesslike?
Explain what that buzzword means.
Mr. James. Well, Senator, I think we have taken a number of
steps. I think we are seeing results from those steps. We have
streamlined the organization to eliminate multiple levels of
reporting. We have begun to build metrics to be able to predict
and measure what it is that we are supposed to be doing. We are
streamlining the ways that we go about dealing with Government
agencies. I think we have taken a number of steps. I think
those steps are paying off.
Senator Campbell. You closed the bookstores, the outlets.
Mr. James. We did.
Senator Campbell. Has that saved a considerable amount?
Mr. James. It will save millions over the years, Senator,
about $1.5 million per year.
Senator Campbell. And if people want a document that they
normally would get in that bookstore, how do they get it now?
Mr. James. Well, they get it online. They can certainly
come online and look at our bookstore online, or they can call
our 800 number and receive help from a real, live human being
who will find that document and Federal Express it to them.
INVESTMENT REQUEST
Senator Campbell. Good.
Your budget includes $25 million for transformation
efforts, and you mentioned that your final strategic plan will
not be done until next fiscal year. Is that correct?
Mr. James. Well, we certainly hope, Mr. Chairman, that we
will complete that plan this summer. We are on track to
complete it and to begin to make the investments we need
beginning in the next fiscal year. I am a little reluctant. I
know your staff has pushed us hard to give solid specifics.
Senator Campbell. Yes. There is some concern about
appropriating the money before the plan is complete.
Mr. James. I think by the time that you would move forward
with this, I think we will be able to give you more facts. I am
just a little concerned about putting the cart in front of the
horse in talking about how we are going to spend the money
before we get the agreement on the plan not only from Congress
but from the various stakeholders that we have.
Senator Campbell. Do you still think you might get the
strategic plan done by the summer, though?
Mr. James. We will have it done.
Senator Campbell. Your budget includes 16 new staff for the
depository library program. Are those needed at this time?
Mr. James. You bet. The depository library program is
changing and it is changing because of the nature of the way
the Government is creating information. For many years we sent
to depositories hard copies, first in paper, then in
microfiche, and we began to send CD-ROM's 15 years ago. It is
now not only a combination of those products but last month, 66
percent of all the documents we sent to our depository
libraries were only digital. And they need a considerable
amount of help in learning how to use digital tools to mine
that data for their clients.
Senator Campbell. Let me ask you the same thing I asked the
former panel, and that is, if we have a flat budget and cannot
increase the amount of money that you are asking for, what is
going to get cut or hurt?
Mr. James. Well, I think we will not come back to you in
tears. We will manage the business. It may cause us to change
the timing on some of the investments we are making in the
future, but we will continue forward.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
Senator Campbell. I have a couple other questions too and I
will submit those in writing, if you would get to those.
Mr. James. Thank you.
Senator Campbell. Thank you for appearing. I appreciate it.
Mr. James. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[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. What would be the benefits of continuing to invest in the
GPO, as we did last year with an appropriation of $10 million to your
revolving fund?
Answer. We are asking Congress to invest in the GPO only where we
can show that savings will result. Using the $10 million appropriation
to our revolving fund for fiscal year 2004, we conducted a retirement
incentive program that resulted in annual savings of $21.7 million. Our
request for $25 million for the revolving fund for fiscal year 2005
will be used to carry out a multi-year plan to transform the
information technology used at the GPO in meeting Federal agency
customer requirements for printed and digital documents as well as the
public's increasing demand for authenticated, official Government
information to be available over the Internet. This plan, to be carried
out in concert with the pending results of the General Accounting
Office's study of the GPO, as requested by this Committee, will
generate new efficiencies and significantly reduce the future costs of
our operations to Congress, Federal agencies, and the public.
Question. Can you tell the subcommittee about your plans for
relocating the GPO? Have you determined GPO's specific new space
requirements?
Answer. The GPO's current facilities are outdated, inefficient, and
too large to support our changing operations, particularly as we
transform those operations to meet the demands of the 21st century. Our
central office complex here in Washington, DC, is composed of 4 aging
multi-story buildings totaling 1.5 million square feet of space,
completed between 1903 and 1940. The buildings have numerous
inefficiencies that have been well-documented. At one time housing over
8,000 employees, they now are too big for our current workforce of less
than 2,500. Multiple stories make it difficult and costly to handle
materials. Deteriorating utilities and elevators require constant
upgrading. Floor loading limitations in the older buildings have long
restricted their use.
The nature and age of the buildings is imposing growing costs just
to maintain the structures in serviceable condition. These costs must
be recovered through the rates charged to the GPO's customers.
Currently, 12 percent of our costs, about $35 million annually, are for
building-related expenses (including utilities, maintenance and repair,
security). The GPO will need to spend between $275 million and $530
million over the next 5-10 years to maintain, repair, and secure our
current facilities. If there is no change in our situation, these costs
will have to be recovered from Congress, Federal agencies, and the
public through our printing rates and sales prices.
Our objective is to secure a modern, inline production facility
that is appropriately sized and equipped to meet the GPO's current and
future needs, which are still in the process of being determined
through our planning process. Optimally, this facility would be located
conveniently in the District of Columbia to enable us to serve
Congress, Federal agencies, and the public efficiently. We envision
entering into an agreement with a private sector concern to redevelop
our current buildings and use the revenue generated from the
redevelopment to acquire, construct, and equip a new GPO facility. The
redevelopment agreement would also be configured to provide a revenue
stream that would be used to underwrite GPO's operations into the
future. This financing approach should obviate the need for
congressional appropriations to accomplish the relocation project,
remove the burden of building-related expenses on GPO's rate and price
structures, and ensure the continuation of the GPO's information
production and dissemination services well into the 21st century.
Question. How many people took the buyout with the funding we
provided you last year? What is the annual savings from this reduction?
Did this reduction affect your request for appropriations for 2005? How
is your current buyout effort proceeding?
Answer. A total of 319 employees took the buyout we conducted last
year, resulting in annual savings of $21.7 million. These savings--more
accurately characterized as a reduction to our costs--have been a
primary factor in eliminating the loss pattern that the GPO sustained
over the past several years. We are currently conducting another buyout
with the target of reducing our current employment level by 250 by July
1, 2004. This buyout, which has been approved by the Joint Committee on
Printing, will be financed through the GPO's revolving fund. It will
generate annual savings of $16.5 million beginning in fiscal year 2005.
It is proceeding well and we expect to meet the targeted goal of
reducing employment by 250 positions.
Question. You've requested authority to accept contributions of
property, equipment, and services to support and enhance the work of
the GPO. How do you see this authority working? How would GPO avoid a
conflict of interest in accepting gifts?
Answer. Last year we requested authority to accept contributions of
property and services on behalf of the GPO and to make donations of
surplus property and equipment to specified Federal, state, local, and
charitable entities. The authority to accept contributions of voluntary
services, such as those provided by interns, and to make donations was
approved in the fiscal year 2004 Legislative Branch Appropriations Act.
For fiscal year 2005 we are renewing our request to accept
contributions of equipment and property, which was approved by this
Committee last year.
Currently, GPO is not authorized by law to accept contributions of
equipment and property. This authority would allow us to accept the
placement of prototype equipment for beta-testing and systems trials
without requiring a Government investment, providing us with the
flexibility we need to evaluate new and emerging technologies onsite in
this period of rapid technological change. It would also permit us 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. Acceptance of contributions of
equipment and property would be solely on behalf of the GPO and subject
to the usual limitations covering donations to the Government. To
assure accountability, our request this year includes additional
language that would require reporting on all contributions to the
Appropriations Committees and the Joint Committee on Printing.
Question. What are the benefits from providing a direct
appropriation for your Inspector General?
Answer. The GPO's Office of the Inspector General, established
under the provisions of 44 U.S.C. 3901 et. seq., is currently funded
through the GPO's revolving fund. The costs of this office are
distributed as overhead to the various revenue-generating operations of
in-plant printing, printing procurement, and documents distribution.
The rates for the GPO's products and services must be adjusted to
recover our overhead costs, including those of the IG. Along with other
actions we are taking to reduce costs and improve efficiency, we are
asking Congress to provide direct appropriated funding to cover this
mandatory expense to help reduce cost pressures on our rates and
prices.
Equally as important, we believe it is necessary to have direct
funding to the GPO's IG to ensure a level of independence for this
operation that is appropriate to its mission. The IG is responsible for
conducting audits and investigations relating to the GPO, yet is
dependent on the Public Printer to provide approval for the necessary
staffing, funding, equipment, and training necessary to carry out this
mission. By law the Public Printer has ``no authority to prevent or
prohibit the Inspector General from initiating, carrying out, or
completing any audit or investigation.'' However, providing the IG with
the capability to execute its mission independent of the GPO's
management would put this office on a par with how most Federal IG
operations are funded today.
Question. What efforts have you undertaken to identify and make use
of new and emerging information technologies?
Answer. The GPO has implemented a variety of strategies over the
past year to identify, evaluate, and incorporate new and emerging
information technologies into our operations. An Office of Innovation
and New Technology (INT) was established to identify new technologies
and practices that will help us move forward. Reporting directly to the
Public Printer, INT also helps create associations with other public
and private sector entities to carry out the GPO's mission. During
2003, we announced a partnership with the National Archives and Records
Administration in support of permanent online public access.
Along with INT, we have expanded our participation in technology
and trade forums and shows to gain greater exposure to new
developments. Through management reorganization and associated
strategic and contingency planning functions, we are also carrying out
broader outreach to the technology community. We have begun modernizing
the GPO's product lines with new planned offerings such as Public Key
Infrastructure technology. We are participating in the ongoing General
Accounting Office long-range study of Federal printing and information
policy, and expect to be able to use the study's results to help guide
technology evaluation and acquisitions programs at the GPO. We have
also revised our capital acquisitions policy to establish a more
rigorous standard for return-on-investment to ensure we gain the
maximum value from taxpayers' technology dollar.
Question. Tell us what you see as the future of the depository
library program. Why are additional staff needed in fiscal year 2004?
What will be the impact if we are unable to provide these additional
staff?
Answer. The ongoing transition to a more electronic Federal
Depository Library Program (FDLP) will continue into fiscal year 2005
and beyond. Approximately 63 percent of the new titles entering the
FDLP in fiscal year 2003 were electronic and this percentage will
continue to grow. Currently, there are more than 262,000 titles in the
FDLP electronic collection and it is expected to increase substantially
over time.
New challenges associated with discovering, acquiring, cataloging,
and preserving digital documents for the FDLP electronic collection,
working through these changes with our depository library partners, and
carrying out our cataloging and indexing responsibilities will require
an increase of sixteen FTEs for the Salaries and Expenses (S&E)
Appropriation in fiscal year 2005. The increase will support the
following activities:
--Fourteen of the additional FTEs would be dedicated to preservation
activities associated with maintaining and providing permanent
public access to materials in the FDLP legacy and electronic
collections and a proactive program that emphasizes
consultation and education and promotes best practices for our
depository partners during this transition.
--Two FTEs would be added to our cataloging and indexing efforts to
ensure that the full range of in-scope electronic information
being published by our Government is brought under
bibliographic control and made publicly available.
While every effort to reallocate resources from traditional
pursuits has and will provide some of the required personnel, not
increasing the FTE level would mean that we would not be completely
able to carry out our program responsibilities in fiscal year 2005.
Question. You completed a management reorganization last year. How
has that helped your transformation efforts at the GPO? Do you
anticipate additional realignments?
Answer. Last year we 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. This has streamlined
decision-making and is designed to keep the overall GPO organization
focused on movement forward while ensuring that the day-to-day tasks of
the agency are fulfilled. The reorganization of the top-level
management structure has been followed by organizational restructurings
at lower levels. There will be further organizational change in the
future as the result of the development and implementation of the GPO's
strategic plan.
Question. Last year you reached an agreement with OMB on executive
printing. Can you tell us how that agreement is working? Where do you
expect this to go in fiscal year 2004 and fiscal year 2005?
Answer. The OMB/GPO Compact on printing (June 6, 2003) successfully
resolved the longstanding controversy over executive printing by
proposing a new system that will enable Federal agencies to choose
their own printers, using technology and support services provided by
the GPO. Our hope is that the volume of printing paid through the GPO
will increase at lower costs while providing all documents for
cataloging and entry into the GPO's Federal Depository Library Program
and related dissemination programs. As called for by the Compact,
during fiscal year 2004 we are operating a demonstration project at an
agency selected by OMB, the Department of Labor. We plan to deploy the
system established by the Compact government-wide in early fiscal year
2005.
Question. How important is employee workforce development to your
transformation efforts at the GPO? What changes have you implemented in
your workforce development program?
Answer. Workforce development is critical to GPO's transformation
process. It is the means by which GPO will move our current workforce
into our future mission. Last year we doubled our workforce development
program and increased our training budget to help us shape the staffing
capabilities we will need for the future. We also revised our training
policy to support mission-related training, not just job-related
training. To guide our workforce development for GPO's future mission,
we will conduct a systematic needs assessment across GPO and a
corresponding skills assessment of the current workforce.
GPO has made a number of changes in order to ensure the success of
the workforce development. A new Director of Workforce Development
position was established and a new Director has been selected. The
Director works under the leadership of the Chief Human Capital Officer.
A Workforce Development Advisory Committee, involving the key leaders
in each major area of GPO, has been working on the critical aspects of
the needs assessment. A working committee involving management and key
labor representatives has also been involved in formulating a process
for ensuring that the needs assessment and the skill assessment is
reflective of the differences that exist in GPO across organizations
and occupations. These efforts have been widely promoted throughout
GPO.
Question. What is the status of emergency planning at the GPO?
Answer. Over the past year, the GPO has completely revised its
Emergency Action Plan. New procedures for emergency evacuations and
``shelter in place'' were developed and published in an Interim Plan.
Both plans were exercised and based on the results, adjustments to the
procedures were made, and the final version of the Plan will be
published this month. We also completed a number of physical security
improvements such as raising the height of outside air intakes to
preclude easy introduction of toxic substances into our heating and
ventilation system. We also upgraded the ventilation control and fire
alarm systems in our passport production building. We further reduced
the number and operating hours of building access points and
implemented more rigorous metal detection and package x-ray policies.
This month we are installing an upgraded access system based on smart
card technology which will allow us to incorporate digitally signed
certificates and biometric identification data into our building and
computer access control systems. Finally, we are in the final phase of
acquiring an emergency mass notification system, which will enable us
to individually notify and instruct all of our employees in a matter a
few minutes during an emergency. Collectively, these actions represent
a significant upgrade of our ability to protect and secure GPO
employees and property.
In the area of continuity of business operations, we this week
signed the Memorandum of Understanding with the Congress which will
enable the GPO to backup our critical computer databases and
applications at the Legislative Alternate Computing Facility (ACF). In
preparation for this, we have been consolidating databases and systems
at our main North Capitol Street facility into a state-of-the-art data
center, which we currently back up on a daily basis. As we implement
our new capability at the ACF, we will be able to back up systems
continuously and thus will be able to provide virtually uninterrupted
support to Congress and our other Government customers in all but the
most catastrophic disasters. Last summer, we initiated a comprehensive
program to complete enterprise-wide risk assessments and security
upgrades for all of our business applications and databases. This
effort will be complete by the end of fiscal year 2004 and will further
secure the integrity and security of our operations.
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE
STATEMENT OF DOUGLAS HOLTZ-EAKIN, DIRECTOR
ACCOMPANIED BY ELIZABETH ROBINSON, DEPUTY DIRECTOR
Senator Campbell. Now we will hear from our third panel
from CBO, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, the Director, accompanied by
Elizabeth Robinson, the Deputy Director. Mr. Holtz-Eakin, if
you would like to proceed, your complete testimony will be in
the record. I see you have got abbreviated notes right there in
front of you.
Mr. Holtz-Eakin. I have very little to say.
Senator Campbell. They look like the kind of notes I use
too.
Mr. Holtz-Eakin. I thank you for the chance for us to be
here this morning to talk about CBO's budget request for 2005.
I want to take the opportunity to introduce Beth Robinson, who
has done a sterling job in under a year as the Deputy Director
of CBO. And I want to thank the committee for its support with
our----
Senator Campbell. May I interrupt you? What was your
background before you got to the position, Ms. Robinson?
Ms. Robinson. It was an eclectic one. I have training as a
geophysicist actually.
Senator Campbell. A geophysicist.
Ms. Robinson. Yes, and I spent some time on the Hill at the
Office of Technology Assessment.
Senator Campbell. Does the geophysicist background help you
with CBO?
Ms. Robinson. Well, sometimes I wonder, but basically a lot
of skills that you learn to handle large data sets, to get the
computers to give you the answer you want, we use a lot at CBO.
Senator Campbell. I have got an eclectic background too,
and I am not sure it helps me being a Senator.
Mr. Holtz-Eakin. She is being very modest. One of the
reasons I was attracted to her is, in fact, that she has a
background in science; and the range of issues that rolls
through the CBO is quite broad. She brings skills that we did
not previously have.
Senator Campbell. Welcome aboard. Please proceed.
OVERVIEW OF CBO'S REQUEST
Mr. Holtz-Eakin. Briefly, this year we have a request that
would be an increase of $1.6 million for pay and benefits for
the existing FTEs at CBO and an additional roughly $200,000
that would cover a variety of needs--including our alternative
computing facility communications, which are part of the
disaster recovery system at CBO, and some higher costs for the
Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board, and other things
are detailed in the written request.
The total would be a budget of $35.5 million, an increase
of $1.8 million, or 5.5 percent. We view this as essentially a
current-services request, which will allow us to maintain our
level of productivity, which we hope is well documented in our
submission, in supporting the Congress in its need for
budgetary and economic advice.
We have made great progress, I think, in being responsive,
cutting the time required to produce reports and being timely
in their delivery for the deliberations of Congress. I would be
happy to expand on that if necessary.
As you mentioned in your opening remarks, we recognize that
Congress may desire an even more limited request, and we
respect Congress' desire to limit the growth of spending in the
Federal budget and will work with this committee as necessary
to meet any target that you might provide.
I will point out that we have modest opportunities in the
non-pay part of CBO's budget, which is only 12 percent of the
budget. Many of those would be one-time reductions, which we
will entertain as possible. But to the extent that there was an
ongoing need for budgetary stringency, it would be concentrated
in our personnel, which constitute 88 percent of the CBO
budget. Moving to a freeze, for example, given the current pay
and benefits requirements, would create the need to reduce by
about 12 full-time equivalents at CBO.
Senator Campbell. Twelve employees, twelve FTEs?
Mr. Holtz-Eakin. With more flexibility on the scale of the
pay increase, that, of course, could be different, and we could
ameliorate that to some extent through the non-pay part of the
budget.
PREPARED STATEMENT
But certainly we would work with you. We look forward to
additional guidance on the kind of request that is appropriate
and would be happy to answer 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 2005 budget request for the Congressional
Budget Office (CBO). The mission of CBO is to provide the Congress with
timely objective, nonpartisan analyses of the economy and the budget
and to furnish the information and cost estimates required for the
Congressional budget process.
The Congressional Budget Office's proposed budget for fiscal year
2005 is effectively a ``current-services'' request, in which the
increases from 2004 are primarily for pay, benefits, and general
inflation. The request totals $35,455,000, a $1.8 million, or 5.5
percent, increase over the appropriation for fiscal year 2004 (after
the rescission of 0.59 percent).
The total increase requested is dominated by $1.6 million for
expected increases in staff salaries and benefits. Funding for salaries
and benefits constitutes 88 percent of CBO's budget, and those costs
will grow by 5.5 percent in 2005. Additional factors include a new
$75,000 charge for telecommunications services associated with the
Alternate Computing Facility, a component of the legislative branch's
disaster recovery system, and a $32,000, or 8.1 percent, increase in
CBO's portion of the cost of operating the Federal Accounting Standards
Advisory Board (FASAB). The remainder of CBO's budget request increases
by 3.2 percent over that in 2004, a rate of growth affected by the fact
that this portion of the budget will absorb almost half of the 0.59
percent rescission in 2004.
With the requested funds for 2005, CBO plans to continue to support
the Congress in exercising its responsibilities for the budget of the
United States government. CBO participates in the Congressional budget
process by providing analyses required by law or requested by the House
and Senate Budget Committees; the Committees on Appropriations, Ways
and Means, and Finance; other committees; and individual Members. In
particular, CBO:
--Reports on the outlook for the budget and the economy to help the
Congress prepare for the legislative year;
--Analyzes the likely effects of the President's budgetary proposals
on outlays and revenues;
--Estimates the costs of legislative proposals, including formal cost
estimates for all bills reported by committees of the House and
Senate and for unfunded mandates on states and localities and
the private sector;
--Constructs statistical, behavioral, and computational models to
project short- and long-term costs and revenues of government
programs; and
--Conducts policy studies of governmental activities having major
economic and budgetary impacts.
In fiscal year 2005, CBO's request will allow the agency to build
on current efforts:
--Increase the number and reduce the preparation time of reports and
in-depth analyses for the Congress, extending progress begun in
2003. The request will support a workload estimated at 2,120
legislative and mandate cost estimates, 82 major analytical
reports (11 percent more than in 2003, which itself represented
a 76 percent increase over 2002), 74 other publications, and a
heavy schedule of Congressional testimony.
--Consolidate gains from additional staff resources provided by the
Congress for 2004 to augment the agency's ability to estimate
revenues and conduct dynamic analyses of the budget. Overall,
the request will support 235 full-time-equivalent positions,
the same number as in 2004. It includes an across-the-board pay
adjustment of 3.5 percent for staff earning a salary of
$100,000 or less, which is consistent with the pay adjustment
requested by other legislative branch agencies, along with a
projected increase in benefits of 7.0 percent.
--Fund a combination of promotions and merit increases for all staff,
including those whose salary exceeds $100,000 and who do not
receive automatic annual across-the-board increases.
--Provide $429,000 for CBO's share of FASAB's budget.
--Provide $75,000 (previously paid by the House of Representatives)
for telecommunications services for the Alternate Computing
Facility.
--Complete the replacement of CBO's Budget Analysis Data System, the
agency's primary budget-tracking system, with a lower-cost,
more-capable in-house system. After accomplishing that
replacement midyear in 2005, CBO plans to continue to develop
and exploit the capabilities of the new system--to improve the
speed and breadth of the agency's analyses--during the
remainder of the year and into the next, but at a much lower
annual development cost.
Before I close, I would like to thank the Committee for its support
of CBO's 2004 budget request, in particular, the two new positions that
it approved to strengthen the agency's ability to forecast the economy
and project revenues. And I would also cite the Committee's ongoing
support of the student loan repayment benefit, which is an increasingly
valuable tool in CBO's recruiting.
I look forward to answering any questions that you might have about
this request.
STAFFING IN DIFFICULT AREAS
Senator Campbell. Thanks.
In fiscal year 2004, the committee agreed to provide two
additional staff for CBO. Are those staffers both on board?
Mr. Holtz-Eakin. Those were identified to address needs for
enhanced precision in our baseline receipts forecasts, and also
to meet the desire for Congress to have some more dynamic
analysis of macro-economic effects and also some budgetary
proposals. We have not only enhanced the FTEs and are hiring
for those, but we have also done some internal reallocations to
make sure that there are people available in some of the tough
cross-cutting areas, in particular finance. A lot of the
difficulties in forecasting baseline revenues in the past
several years have involved large run-ups in the stock market
and then declines and associated bonuses and options. Finance
people are difficult to hire, hard to retain. If Senator Durbin
were here, I would point out that that has been one of our
targets for student loan repayment. It has been successful.
Senator Campbell. They make more in New York.
Mr. Holtz-Eakin. We have had some success on that front,
and we have got more firepower in those areas.
PROGRAM CHANGES
Senator Campbell. You have $227,000 in what is described as
program changes. What are those program changes and what is the
money for, necessary at this time?
Ms. Robinson. The largest component of that is twofold. One
is a new $75,000 charge for disaster recovery for the physical
data connections between CBO and alternate computing facility.
The second one is an investment in our defense-modeling
capability, of the defense budget itself. We had been
contracting in the past for some data sets and other things,
and we find, actually, that these contractors are retiring. It
is a very specific $75,000 expense to bring that capability in-
house.
Senator Campbell. Thank you.
INCREASED PRODUCTIVITY
Your budget also discusses your effort to increase staff
productivity. What are you doing to accomplish that goal?
Mr. Holtz-Eakin. Well, there are two major problems. The
first is management: setting clear objectives for deadlines for
studies, keeping track of progress for those deadlines, and
making sure in our merit review system that productivity is a
component of the merit review. So internal management issues
are one aspect, but there are also some changes in the nature
of the process, the most notable being moving toward a more
modern platform for publication, moving from word processors to
a real desktop publishing system.
RETENTION OF EMPLOYEES
Senator Campbell. How does the CBO compare with other
Federal agencies on the retention of employees?
Mr. Holtz-Eakin. I do not have the precise statistics, but
I think we have been very successful.
Senator Campbell. Could you provide that for the committee?
Mr. Holtz-Eakin. Yes.
[The information follows:]
Employee retention is defined by the amount of turnover and
agency experiences. The chart below describes the Congressional
Budget Office's (CBO's) turnover among management and
professional staff over the last two fiscal years. (Clerical
staff are not included because CBO's workforce is less than 10
percent clerical, and the agency experiences very little
turnover among clerical staff.)
Comparing the Congressional Budget Office's turnover with
other agencies' is challenging because agencies maintain their
data in disparate ways. The chart shows the information that we
have been able to gather.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal Year 2002 Fiscal Year 2003
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Staff on Turnover Staff on Turnover
Board Separations (percent) Board Separations (percent)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Congressional Budget Office........... 190 18 9.47 193 28 14.51
General Accounting Office............. n/a n/a 8.80 n/a n/a 7.70
Congressional Research Service........ 554 31 5.60 609 22 3.61
Library of Congress \1\............... 2,622 146 5.57 2,725 123 4.51
Executive Branch Agencies \2\......... 1,232,496 71,866 5.83 1,244,493 86,285 6.93
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes Congressional Research Service as part of the Library of Congress.
\2\ Does not include the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Postal Service, or intelligence agencies (such as
the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency). Source: www.fedscope.opm.gov.
Notes:
Data are for permanent employees in management and professional positions.
n/a = not available; GAO does not track staff by the category of management and professional and therefore could
not provide this breakdown.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
Senator Campbell. Well, I have no further questions.
Senator Durbin might and/or Senator Stevens, and if they do,
they will submit those in writing to you. If you could get
those back to us. Okay?
Mr. Holtz-Eakin. Thank you very much.
Senator Campbell. I thank you and with that, the
subcommittee is recessed.
[Whereupon, at 11:43 a.m., Thursday, March 4, the
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of
the Chair.]
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005
----------
THURSDAY, MARCH 11, 2004
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 11 a.m., in room SD-138, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Ben Nighthorse Campbell (chairman)
presiding.
Present: Senators Campbell and Stevens.
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES H. BILLINGTON, THE LIBRARIAN OF
CONGRESS
ACCOMPANIED BY:
DONALD L. SCOTT, DEPUTY LIBRARIAN OF CONGRESS
JO ANN C. JENKINS, CHIEF OF STAFF, OFFICE OF THE LIBRARIAN
LAURA CAMPBELL, ASSOCIATE LIBRARIAN FOR STRATEGIC INITIATIVES
RUBENS MEDINA, LAW LIBRARIAN
DANIEL P. MULHOLLAN, DIRECTOR, CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE
MARYBETH PETERS, REGISTER OF COPYRIGHTS
DEANNA MARCUM, ASSOCIATE LIBRARIAN FOR LIBRARY SERVICES
FRANK KURT CYLKE, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL LIBRARY SERVICES FOR THE
BLIND AND PHYSICALLY HANDICAPPED
KENNETH E. LOPEZ, DIRECTOR OF SECURITY
MARY LEVERING, ACTING DIRECTOR, INTEGRATED SUPPORT SERVICES
JOHN D. WEBSTER, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
KATHRYN B. MURPHY, BUDGET OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF
FINANCIAL OFFICER
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL
Senator Campbell. The subcommittee will come to order.
We meet today to hear from Dr. James Billington, Librarian
of Congress, on the fiscal year 2005 request for the Library of
Congress. Dr. Billington will also have testimony for the
record on the Open World Leadership Program.
Dr. Billington is accompanied by the Deputy Librarian,
General Donald Scott, and a team of others; and we welcome you
this morning.
The Library is requesting almost $563 million, an increase
of 7.6 percent over the current year. In addition, a total of
$161 million is requested by the Library buildings and grounds
appropriation, under the Architect of the Capitol.
Clearly, there are many critical areas for which the
Library seeks increases, including funding activation of the
new audiovisual conservation center in Culpeper, Virginia, and
increasing acquisition costs, in addition to routine payroll
and inflationary increases. With the increases being requested,
this budget will be very tough to accommodate in the budget
environment we face this year, so we will be looking to you to
prioritize and to help us make some very difficult choices as
we move forward. Thank you very much.
The chairman of the full committee is here this morning and
I would like to yield to him.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR TED STEVENS
Senator Stevens. Well, thank you very much. I am glad to be
here with Dr. Billington and General Scott, but I cannot stay
long because of other matters. I did want to come and show my
support, basically, for the programs that are outlined in the
budget. And I agree with you, it is going to be a difficult
year. I want to make sure that we do the best we can to help
the Library. Thank you.
Senator Campbell. Dr. Billington, if you would like to
proceed. Your complete testimony will be included in the
record; as General Scott's will, too, if he has any comments.
PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR RICHARD J. DURBIN
Before you proceed, Dr. Billington, we have received a
statement for Senator Durbin who could not make it today, but
asked that his statement be submitted for 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 Library of Congress and the Open World
Leadership Center.
I want to welcome you Dr. Billington. It has been a
pleasure working with you in your capacity as Librarian of
Congress. My staff informs me that you are now in your 18th
year as the Librarian. I would also like to welcome the Deputy
Librarian, General Donald Scott, to today's hearing.
I recently had the opportunity to visit the Churchill
Exhibit. It was extremely well done and I enjoyed it
tremendously.
Your fiscal year 2005 budget request is 7.6 percent over
the fiscal year 2004 enacted level. While this is not as high
as some of our legislative branch agencies' requests, it is
rather high. I hope you will shed some light on your priorities
so we can make informed decisions in what promises to be a very
tight year.
I understand that due to security upgrades at the Jefferson
Building the retail store has been relocated. I hope you will
talk a little bit about how the retail sales are going, both
from the shop and from the Library's website, and what affect,
if any, relocating the shop will have on its visibility to
visitors to the Library.
I'd like to hear about how your security needs at the
Library are being addressed. I noticed in your budget request
that you are asking for an additional 45 police personnel. I
hope you will address the need for these extra personnel to the
subcommittee, particularly in light of the pending merger of
your force with the Capitol Police.
I'm very happy with the continuing success of the Open
World Leadership Center. The United States just hosted the
first delegation from Lithuania and I understand it went quite
well. I congratulate you on the success of this program, Dr.
Billington.
I hope you will provide us with an update on the Culpeper
National Audio-Visual Conservation Center. I noticed a request
for $5.28 million and 16 FTEs in your budget. It would be
helpful to know the particulars of the request and the need for
extra personnel.
You are requesting $160.7 million in Library of Congress
building projects under the Architect of the Capitol. In light
of our tight budget constraints, I hope you will explain to the
subcommittee what your priorities are for these projects.
I'd also like to hear more about the Veterans' History
Project.
I'm anxious to hear more about your technological advances
to the Blind and Physically Handicapped Program. I hope you
will describe to the subcommittee the Digital Talking Book
Machine.
Thank you both for attending today's hearing. I look
forward to hearing your testimony.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
INTRODUCTION OF THE ASSOCIATE LIBRARIAN FOR LIBRARY SERVICES
Dr. Billington. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First, I would
like to introduce Deanna Marcum, our new Associate Librarian
for Library Services.
She is coming back to the Library from a decade-long
position as President of the Council on Library and Information
Resources, which is the only think-tank in the world, Mr.
Chairman, devoted exclusively to library concerns.
She was with us before as Director of Public Service and
Collection Management at the Library of Congress; and she was
previously Dean of the Library School at Catholic University.
So, we are very fortunate and grateful to have her with us.
OPENING STATEMENT OF THE LIBRARIAN
The Library, Mr. Chairman, in many ways can be seen as the
Nation's strategic information reserve, at a time when our
security, economic competitiveness, and our creative dynamism
is increasingly dependent on information. The Library provides
America with the world's largest and most diverse collection of
retrievable human knowledge. At the same time, it is the mint
record of American private sector creativity and a world leader
in freely distributing high-quality material on the Internet.
From this time last year to this year, we estimate that we
had about 3 billion electronic transactions. At the same time,
we are digitally transforming our internal processes, ranging
from re-engineering the Copyright Office to moving into new
user-friendly digital materials for the blind and physically
handicapped.
We are also developing a national plan to store digital
collections, even as we continue to add 10,000 new analog items
to the Library every day. We are doing all this with 7.7
percent fewer full-time equivalent staff than we had in 1992,
before all this began, and with a magnificent but somewhat
aging workforce, 25 percent of whom will be eligible for
regular retirement by September of this year with potentially
another 23 percent, if early retirement is offered as an option
at the Library.
Guided by our strategic plan and a rigorous review process,
we are requesting some resources needed to continue performing
our statutory obligations and core mission for Congress and the
Nation. We must increase our modest acquisition budget for
traditional print materials, which are growing by an estimated
15 percent, particularly in troubled regions of the developing
world that are of concern to American foreign policy.
ACQUISITION AND PRESERVATION OF LIBRARY MATERIALS
In our extraordinary Arabic collections, we discovered an
autobiography of Osama Bin Laden and two volumes of
Afghanistan's traditional laws, that were destroyed by the
Taliban. These were, in part, reconstructed largely by our Law
Library, which digitized them within 24 hours for distribution
to 1,000 institutions in Afghanistan. So, these acquisitions
are extremely important and we must also adequately preserve
and store them. We have 128 million analog items.
NAVCC--CULPEPER
By far the largest private gift ever received by the
Library, is an unprecedented $120 million, which is being
donated by the Packard Humanities Institute. This is to build a
national facility for housing the audiovisual heritage of 20th
century America, where much of the world's history and of our
Nation's creativity is preserved, but in presently fragile and
perishable forms at widely scattered locations.
This will be a state-of-the-art facility in Culpeper. The
construction is already well underway but it requires some
modest, largely one-time increases in our own budget to equip
it, to prepare for the move, and to sustain for the future of
the good relationship with our extremely generous donor.
FORT MEADE PROJECTS
We are also requesting in the Architect of the Capitol's
budget, continuation of the Fort Meade storage project for
specially formatted collections. About 15 million of them will
be housed here in accordance with a plan previously discussed
with the committee. We also need a copyright deposit facility
for housing the vast, but presently scattered, creative record
of America into one location. This is needed to fulfill our
preservation obligations to depositors and to assure
continuation of the voluntary deposit system that annually
provides more than $30 million worth of material for the
Library's collections. These occur, actually, in the
Architect's budget.
FLEXIBLE HIRING TOOLS
Now, the single greatest challenge facing the Library in
the digital age is to develop a workforce that can think and
work in new ways, without losing the immense inherited
traditional knowledge and memory embedded in our staff. We will
soon need the committee's support for a package of flexible
human capital tools, in line with practices already in use
within the Federal Government. The Library simply must be able
to train a new type of objective knowledge navigator, to
provide Congress and the Nation with seamlessly integrated old
analog and the new digital materials.
POLICE MERGER
With regard to the police merger, Mr. Chairman, the Library
is fully engaged in increasing security, integrating police
operations, and improving budget economy here on Capitol Hill.
We are, however, deeply troubled by the proposed plan that the
U.S. Capitol Police have issued for implementing the merger of
the Library's police force with that of the U.S. Capitol.
The proposed plan that the U.S. Capitol Police have
submitted for congressional approval does not protect the
statutory responsibilities that we bear and the distinct
problems connected with protecting the collections, as well as
the buildings and people of the Library. The merger is
happening de facto and is eroding the Library's authority to
exercise this core task, since we no longer can hire our own
police.
NATIONAL FILM PRESERVATION PROGRAM
The Library also submitted, during the first session of the
108th Congress, a request for re-authorization of the National
Film Preservation Program that has brought 375 motion pictures
into the National Film Registry, which was created by Congress
in 1988. This program has played the leading role in
identifying endangered films, and setting national preservation
standards, and working with other archives to save American
films of all kinds from otherwise irreversible deterioration.
PREPARED STATEMENTS
On behalf of the Library and all of its staff, I want to
thank this committee for its continued support for, and
interest in, the Library. Individual members of this committee
have provided continuity and guidance for the Library. We are
all in your debt and we will be happy to answer your questions.
Senator Campbell. Thank you, Dr. Billington.
[The statements follow:]
Prepared Statement of James H. Billington
I appreciate the opportunity to discuss the Library of Congress
budget request for fiscal year 2005. This unique institution has become
increasingly important to the nation as the economic and security needs
become increasingly dependent on knowledge and the wise use of
information. All libraries--and especially the Library of Congress--
must deal with the greatest upheaval in the transmission of information
and knowledge since the invention of the printing press--the electronic
onslaught of digitized information and communication. The Library is
responding to this challenge, with program-focused goals and objectives
contained in our new strategic plan, which was forwarded to the
Congress in September 2003. The plan will undergo continuous
improvement to ensure our place as the foremost library of the 21st
century.
The Library's mission is unchanging--to make its resources
available and useful to the Congress and the American people and to
sustain and preserve a universal collection of knowledge and creativity
for future generations. What is new is the need to acquire, sort, and
provide access to the massive unfiltered content of the Internet in
order to keep our collections universal and continue to provide full
information and services to Congress and the American people.
The Library must continue to acquire, preserve, and provide access
to analog collections with new storage facilities and mass
deacidification. At the same time, the Library must implement
fundamental technological changes to accommodate the digital
revolution. Both collections and staff are being reconfigured by new
initiatives in digital preservation, digital talking books, and
Copyright reengineering, and by the increased reliance on digital
services. The fiscal year 2005 budget request addresses this
``Challenge of Change; Maintenance of Tradition.''
The priorities of our fiscal year 2005 budget, reflecting the major
objectives in the Library's strategic plan, are: to bring the National
Audio Visual Conservation Center into operation; to restore the
diminished acquisition capabilities for our collections; to regain full
funding for the Congressional Research Service staff capacity at 729
full-time-equivalent (FTE) positions; to implement the Copyright
Office's reengineered processes; to support the conversion to digital
talking book technology for people who are blind and physically
handicapped; to fund the fifth increment of the Library's mass
deacidification program; to accelerate the Veterans History Program; to
gain additional security for the Library's systems, staff, buildings,
and collections; and to address critical infrastructure support
requirements.
For fiscal year 2005, the Library of Congress requests a total
budget of $602.3 million ($562.6 million in net appropriations and
$39.7 million in authority to use receipts), a total increase of $43.0
million above the fiscal year 2004 level. The total increase includes
$20.5 million for mandatory pay and price-level increases and $34
million for program increases, offset by $11.5 million for non-
recurring costs. The Library's fiscal year 2005 budget request is a net
appropriations increase of 7.6 percent above that of fiscal year 2004.
The Library has submitted a fiscal year 2005 budget amendment, which is
reflected in the above numbers, that increases the net appropriations
amount by $1 million, which is discussed under the headings ``Copyright
Office'' ($.8 million) and the ``Sustaining the Collections'' ($.2
million).
Requested funding supports 4,363 FTE positions, a net increase of
80 FTEs above the fiscal year 2004 level of 4,283. The 80 additional
FTEs are requested to support the core needs of the collections,
security, and management.
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 128 million
items include almost all languages and media through which knowledge
and creativity are preserved and communicated.
The Library has more than 29 million books and other print items;
12 million photographs; 4.8 million maps; 2.7 million audio materials;
925,000 films, television, and video items; and 57 million manuscripts.
Every workday, the Library's staff adds some 10,000 new items to
the collections. Major annual services include handling more than
875,000 on-line and customized Congressional inquiries and requests,
registering more than 534,000 copyright claims, and circulating
approximately 23.8 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 and provides the bibliographic record inexpensively to the
nation's libraries, saving them millions of dollars annually.
The Library also provides free on-line access, via the Internet, to
its automated information files, which contain more than 75 million
records, including more than 8.5 million multimedia items from its
American Memory collections. The Library's acclaimed Web site
(www.loc.gov) will record more than 3 billion hits in 2004.
21st century library
As impressive as the everyday work of the Library of Congress is,
we recognize the need to address the future. All libraries are rapidly
changing in response to new digital technologies. The Library of
Congress, like other research libraries, is building digital
collections, making them readily accessible on-line, and developing
search services previously not feasible. Digital technology also
benefits smaller libraries because it allows them to expand and enhance
resources for their patrons in colleges, schools, and communities.
Libraries, in effect, are moving their catalogs and collections from
physical buildings into patron's computers and are transforming their
individual storage repositories into collaborative information-service
centers. As this transformation continues, 21st century libraries will
develop in the following significant ways: libraries will collect at
the point of creation rather than after publication; libraries will
complement classification systems with simpler search services;
libraries will work with information creators and publishers to create
digital preservation repositories; libraries will work with legislators
to balance copyright against access needs; and libraries will retrain
print oriented staffs for digital information services.
In a world in which Google is the preferred search mechanism, the
library of the future will be less the custodian of a collection in a
physical building than a guide to Internet-accessible resources and a
creator and provider of on-line information services. Realizing this
library of the future depends on providing opportunities for today's
librarians to learn to take advantage of digital developments and on
integrating this new digital technology into the basic library
processes of acquisition, cataloging, preservation, and reference
services. The Library's strategic plan and this fiscal year 2005 budget
request are helping guide us in making this inevitable change to a 21st
century library.
fiscal year 2003 accomplishments
Even as the Library plans for a dramatic new future, the immediate
challenges continue to be addressed. In fiscal year 2003, the Library
provided concerted congressional research support in more than 150
major policy areas, including terrorism, health care, the U.S. economy,
environmental and resource issues, and space exploration. The Library
supported the war effort by making information and services available
to the Congress as it executes its constitutional responsibilities, by
documenting for future generations the war as it progresses, and by
helping reconstruct the national libraries in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Specifically, the Law Library helped reconstruct the destroyed law
codes of Afghanistan from its collections.
The Library also received congressional approval for the plan for
the National Digital Information Infrastructure and Preservation
Program; expanded the Global Legal Information Network to include the
laws of 48 countries and international organizations; added seven new
multimedia historical collections to the American Memory Web site;
increased to more than 8.5 million the number of items freely available
on-line or in digital archives; recorded more than 2.6 billion
electronic transactions on the Library's Web sites; registered more
than 534,000 copyright claims; added more than 1.8 million items to our
collections; opened the off-Capitol Hill storage facility at Fort
Meade, Maryland; and produced more than 2,700 new braille, audio books,
and magazine titles for the blind and physically handicapped. Private
funding enabled the Library to make notable new acquisitions, including
the great Alan Lomax collection of Americana, and brought into
residence a distinguished new cohort of invited senior scholars and
competitively chosen junior researchers in the Thomas Jefferson
Building with the opening of the John W. Kluge Center.
national audiovisual conservation center (navcc)
An increase of $5.28 million and 16 FTEs is requested for the
NAVCC, a projected state-of-the-art facility for audiovisual
collections. These funds are needed to continue the construction of the
NAVCC and to begin the move-in of collections and staff of the Motion
Picture, Broadcasting and Recorded Sound Division of the Library. The
Packard Humanities Institute (PHI) is generously providing the majority
of the funding to build the NAVCC--consolidating in one place and
enhancing film and recorded sound preservation. The Library continues
to work closely with PHI representatives and the Architect of the
Capitol (AOC) on this much-needed project.
Construction on this national repository for America's audiovisual
treasures began in early September 2003, and the current schedule calls
for the newly renovated Collections Building and Central Plant to be
ready for collections to be moved in by summer 2005. The new Nitrate
Vaults and Conservation (Laboratory) Building is scheduled to be ready
for staff move-in by summer 2006. The Library's ability to procure,
deliver, and install NAVCC furnishings, equipment, and infrastructure
will require close coordination with PHI's construction schedule. The
requested additional funding in the current budget is essential to
maintain the construction schedule and the various components and
procurements that support the transition to the new facility. Fiscal
year 2005 funding will support staff relocation, collections
relocation, and the design, procurement, and integration of the complex
digital preservation systems within the NAVCC's audiovisual
laboratories.
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. When the
entire NAVCC complex is opened in 2006, the Library for the first time
will be able to consolidate all of 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. 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. The NAVCC will also include a Digital Audiovisual
Preservation System that will preserve and provide research access to
both newly acquired born-digital content and analog legacy formats.
This new system is contributing to the Library's overall development of
a digital content repository and signals a new paradigm of producing
and managing computer-based digital data.
The Packard Humanities Institute's contribution to building this
new state-of-the-art facility will represent the largest private
donation to the Library of Congress in its entire history.
sustaining the collections
Acquiring timely and comprehensive collections for the National
Library and Law Library as well as the highly specialized research
materials required for the Congressional Research Service (CRS) is
among the most essential tasks the Library performs. All else depends
on acquiring needed materials--preferably at the time they appear on
the market. The rising tide of new kinds of knowledge and new formats
make it essential that the Library address the already-serious
catastrophic projected shortfalls in these areas. A total of $4.462
million and seven FTEs are requested for addressing--for the first time
in many years--this critical area. Lost purchasing power and the
increased complexity and cost of acquiring proprietary electronic
resources make this a critical problem that must be addressed.
Serial subscriptions prices alone have increased by 215 percent
over a 15-year period ending in 2001, yet the Library's GENPAC
appropriation--used to purchase library materials--has grown at an
annual average rate of only 4 percent. These shortfalls accumulated
because the Library understated annual price-level increases for
research materials. The Congress, in most years, has supported the
Library's modest requests for inflationary increases in research
materials, but the Library's methodology did not adequately factor in
the value of the dollar, the sharp escalations in market prices for
serials, budget rescissions, and the changes in how research materials
are packaged and sold. The Library's fiscal year 2005 acquisitions
budget proposals include funding for the recovery of lost purchasing
power (a one-time increase to the Law Library [$205,000] and CRS [$1
million], and a one-time and incremental increase in the National
Library [$2.333 million]), for a total of $3.538 million. The $3.538
million request includes a $.2 million budget amendment for the CRS
element; the original CRS catchup amount was determined through fiscal
year 2004 rather than fiscal year 2005. During the next year, the
Library will develop a new formula that will adequately reflect the
inflationary increases for research materials beginning in fiscal year
2006.
In addition, $479,000 and 7 FTEs are requested to support the new
acquisitions methodology and policy that has been successfully piloted
in China. Collecting materials published in China is difficult, but a
three-year pilot project, funded by private donations, successfully
demonstrated that the Library can acquire high quality, hard-to-obtain
and politically sensitive materials, which traditional channels are not
providing. Funding of $479,000 is requested to establish six teams of
experts in the social sciences, located at carefully selected sites
throughout China. The teams will recommend materials from their
regions, which will then be shipped by the Library's established
vendors. The Library's pilot program has proven that important added
information about China can be obtained in this way. The Library
requests funding to make this a permanent acquisition process for the
world's largest country as it assumes an even-greater world role.
Lastly, $445,000 is needed to allow the Law Library to begin
properly reclassifying 800,000 volumes or one-third of its legal
collections from the ``LAW'' class--previously used to shelve legal
materials--to the ``Class K,'' (the new international standard for the
classification of legal materials that was developed by the Library of
Congress). Currently, one out of every four foreign legal documents
cannot be located because of the outdated classification system, and
the inevitable change to the new ``Class K'' cataloging system is
required to effectively provide foreign legal research. The five-year
project would enable the Law Library to meet its own cataloging
standards before the few remaining staff with the experience and
knowledge of the outdated ``LAW'' class cataloging leave or retire.
crs staff capacity
In fiscal year 2005, CRS must face the increased cost of sustaining
the research capacity needed to meet the legislative needs of the
Congress. CRS is requesting a base increase of $2.71 million--the
equivalent of about 25 FTEs. During the past ten years, the total size
of CRS has decreased from 763 to 729. However, the salary costs per
person have increased at a rate that exceeds the funding provided in
the budget process. Without the proposed base increase, CRS would have
to staff down further to a level of about 704 FTEs. The impact of this
reduction would be a loss of CRS capacity in serving the Congress of
about 275 hours a year in each of more than 150 major policy areas in
which the Congress can be expected to be engaged. CRS would lose
between eight and nine weeks of capacity per major policy area.
CRS has been evaluating workforce opportunities and authorities to
improve the productivity, efficiency, and attractiveness of CRS as an
employer. During fiscal year 2003, CRS hired approximately 90 new
staff--nearly 13 percent of the total staff population. To enhance
retention of new staff and to further staff development Service-wide,
CRS is requesting $546,000. This funding would be used to initiate a
pilot student loan repayment program, to increase slightly its training
and related travel budgets, and to provide monetary incentive awards to
the Service's most highly talented and productive employees. The CRS
Director will provide more details of this request in his statement.
copyright office
The Copyright Office's Reengineering Program, which will be
completed in fiscal year 2006, requires additional funding authority
for fiscal year 2005. The extensive multiyear Reengineering Program has
redesigned the Office's business processes, developed a new information
technology infrastructure, created new work-flows and new job roles,
and developed a new facilities plan. The program will allow the
Copyright Office to replace outdated information systems with
technology that promotes the use of electronically transmitted
applications and works. The Library requests $3.66 million, in budget
authority and equal offsetting collections authority (zero net
appropriations), in order to implement the facilities portion of the
Reengineering Program. This funding will support relocation of staff,
redesign and construction of current space, and acquisition of
furniture and other equipment.
In developing the fiscal year 2005 budget request, inflationary
factors for mandatory pay and price level increases were applied to
both the Copyright Office's net appropriated funds and receipts funds.
In reviewing this approach and upon further analysis, the Library has
determined that the increases needed to cover inflationary growth
cannot be met by the initially requested receipt level. As a result,
the Library is requesting, via a budget amendment, that the fiscal year
2005 receipt level be reduced by the inflationary adjustment of
$810,000, with a corresponding increase in net appropriations. The
Register of Copyrights will provide in her statement more details about
the Reengineering Program and this adjustment.
digital talking book machine
In support of the Blind and Physically Handicapped (BPH) program,
the National Library Service (NLS) for the BPH is implementing a
revolutionary change from analog to digital technology, which has been
projected and planned since the early 1990s. The service will replace
cassette tape players with Digital Talking Book (DTB) players and
introduce a new medium for distributing the DTBs: solid-state
(``flash'') memory, replacing the present cassette tape.
NLS plans to introduce the DTB players to its customers by fiscal
year 2008. The Library is requesting a total of $1.5 million in fiscal
year 2005, of which $1 million will support the beginning of the design
phase of the DTB player. In concert with the development of a DTB
player, NLS will begin converting its current analog collection to
digital format to ensure that its patrons will have a large and diverse
collection of DTBs by fiscal year 2008. The balance of $500,000 in the
request is for the first installment of a three-year conversion of
10,000 audio titles from analog to digital format. Support for the
fiscal year 2005 budget will help prepare the way for the new delivery
system to replace the current analog cassette tape technology.
mass deacidification
A total increase of $948,000 is requested for the fifth increment
of the Library's five-year, $18 million initiative to save through
deacidification one million endangered acidic books and five million
manuscript sheets during the period 2001-2005. The Congress has
approved the first four increments of this critical preservation
program, and the Library requests the planned increase to continue to
scale up to $5.7 million annually. By 2005, the Library plans to have
reached the capacity to deacidify 300,000 books and 1,000,000
manuscripts annually.
veterans history project
Additional funding of $1.035 million and four FTEs is required for
this important and growing project. Support is requested to increase
public participation in interviewing veterans and creating the
collection; to preserve accounts and documents for researchers,
educators, and future generations; and to disseminate this compelling
material to the public more widely. The overwhelmingly positive
nationwide reaction to this program has exceeded our expectations, and
will require additional resources to respond to the growing demands of
this mandated program.
security
The Library is requesting an increase of $7.306 million and 47 FTEs
to support improved security of the Library's systems, staff,
buildings, and collections. The Library continues to work with the
Architect of the Capitol (AOC) to support major perimeter security
improvements, consistent with the entire Capitol Hill campus (e.g.,
garage barriers, bollards, entrance reconfigurations). Seventy-five
percent of Phase I (Jefferson and Madison Buildings) perimeter security
project construction has been completed. However, unforeseen structural
conditions below the James Madison Building have resulted in a partial
redesign and additional AOC costs to complete the Phase I work. The
Library understands that the AOC is working with the Committee to fund
the additional costs and complete the initial phase. We ask the
Committee to support the funds required to bring our perimeter security
fully up to Capitol Hill standards.
The Library is also working with the Capitol Police regarding the
filling of 23 new police officer positions authorized by the Committee
for the Library's campus. Capitol Police officers will be detailed to
the Library to fill the new positions beginning in March 2004.
Components of the Library's fiscal year 2005 security budget
request are:
Police Staffing.--The Library is requesting $3.825 million and 45
FTEs for the continuation of the fiscal year 2004 hiring initiative,
which identified a police staffing shortfall of approximately 100 FTEs.
This is the second of three fiscal year requests for funding beginning
in fiscal year 2004. For fiscal year 2005 funding and staffing are
being requested in the Library of Congress's budget to ensure that this
critical need is set forth to the Congress. The staffing requirements
will not diminish if and when the Library's Police Force merges with
the Capitol Police Force. The requirements will be the same, regardless
of which force provides the service. The Library needs additional
police positions to meet minimum staffing levels at all public building
entrances; to staff new and enhanced fixed exterior posts; and to
ensure an overtime rate that does not exceed 10-15 percent above the
standard 40-hour workweek.
Police Merger.--On August 6, 2003, the Library responded in a
letter to U.S. Capitol Police Chief Gainer regarding the U.S. Capitol
Police Implementation Plan for the Merger of the U.S. Capitol Police
and the Library of Congress Police. In this response, we relayed our
concerns about how this proposed plan will impact the Librarian's
statutory responsibility to protect Library assets.
The Library remains concerned about the how the merger of the
Library of Congress Police Force with the U.S. Capitol Police Force
diminishes the Librarian's authority to exercise his responsibilities.
The current plan proposed by the Capitol Police does not take into
account the statutory obligation of the Librarian of Congress to
oversee the Library's collections and buildings. The Library's police
force is focused not only on the physical safety of our staff,
visitors, and buildings, but on the integrity and security of our
invaluable collections and is the primary arm for the Librarian of
Congress in discharging this responsibility. At the very least, the
Library must have a presence on the Capitol Police Board in order to
argue for the level of resources made available to protect the
Library's assets. The Capitol Police officers that serve on Library
property must also be under the technical direction of and accountable
to the Librarian of Congress. The Library looks forward to working with
this Committee and the authorizing Committees to ensure that the merger
is completed in a manner that preserves the mandated authority of the
Librarian.
Security Equipment Maintenance.--A total of $930,000 is requested
for the maintenance and repair costs of five new major electronic
security systems, which will become fully operational in fiscal year
2005. Sustaining their operations will be crucial for Library security.
The requested funding will ensure that these vital security systems,
installed in accordance with the Library's Security Enhancement Plan,
are adequately maintained and repaired by accepted best industry
practices.
Intrusion-Detection System.--$1 million is requested to build-out
the electronic access control and primary intrusion detection systems
requirements identified in the Library's Security Plan's risk framework
and needed to mitigate safety risks within the Library.
Alternate Computer Facility (ACF).--An increase of $622,000 is
needed for CRS to support the annual recurring operating costs of this
all-important facility. The ACF will provide for IT business continuity
in the event of a catastrophic failure of the Library's computer
center. In the event that the Library's primary computer center becomes
inoperable, the ACF will also provide continued on-line service to the
Library's remote/local users, preventing disruption of service to the
Congress and its constituency.
IT Security Certification and Accreditation.--Security must be
treated as an integral part of the Library's overall IT infrastructure
if risks are to be systematically reduced. Accordingly, the Library has
embarked upon a thorough review of its IT security. Funding of $929,000
and two FTEs is requested in fiscal year 2005 for ITS to certify and
accredit existing, mission-critical IT applications, systems, and
facilities of the Library ($720,000) and to conduct computer security
audits by the Inspector General Office ($209,000/2 FTEs).
infrastructure support
The Library is requesting $6.531 million and nine FTEs to address
critical support systems, space, and staff initiatives. These Library-
wide initiatives support all organizational entities and are key to
performing our varied tasks efficiently and to providing our customers
with efficient and seamless services. Funding supports:
Information Technology (IT).--IT is a critical tool for achieving
organizational success in the Library. An additional $3.316 million is
needed for the Library's IT infrastructure. To keep pace with the rapid
increase in electronic traffic, ITS server processing power and
associated storage has increased, and the corresponding funding for
maintenance must also increase. A total of $1 million is needed to
cover ITS's actual and projected maintenance costs (we anticipate a 14
percent increase in hardware maintenance and a 6 percent increase in
software maintenance in fiscal year 2005). The Library's technology
needs change as services expand, and they require 24-hour support to
satisfy the Library's customers, which sharply raises contract costs.
The requested $1.017 million will allow ITS to support the increasing
costs of the IT service provider contract, which the current ITS budget
cannot fund. Without added funding, ITS will have to either curtail
services or dangerously cut back on equipment purchases or maintenance.
One-time funding of $1.299 million is also needed to implement a single
integrated search function for the Library's primary on-line
information sources (LIS/Thomas, American Memory, LC Web pages, and the
Integrated Library System bibliographic catalogs). This initiative will
support searching with the commonly used data standard (XML) that the
Congress is now applying to the preparation of its publications. As the
House and Senate develop and implement new authoring systems that
support XML, the congressional clientele expect the Library to have a
search engine and related software that can handle XML. CRS will be
partnering with the ITS Office to identify the requirements, develop
solutions, and procure, migrate, configure, and optimize the needed new
search engine tools.
Facilities Management.--An increase of $1.880 million and nine FTEs
are requested to modernize the Library's facilities services,
supporting space management ($1.658 million/8 FTEs) and custodial
services ($222,000/1 FTE). The Library's Facilities Services Division
cannot effectively meet current and future Library space support
requirements, and lacks flexibility to respond to the Library's rapidly
changing needs. Multiple internal and external audits and studies of
Facilities Services have identified fundamental problems in facilities
programs that only division-wide modernization and workforce
development can improve. The funding request addresses the most urgent
recommendations identified by the auditors, several outside expert
consultants, the ISS Director, and the Facilities Services management
team. Implementation of these recommendations will provide the Library
with the basic support tools, previously not available to the Library
but used throughout industry and by other government agencies, to
increase the efficiency of all space-related projects, and enable
rotated scheduling of preventive maintenance (reducing costly repairs
Library-wide). These steps are especially important for the Offices of
Safety Services, Security and Emergency Preparedness, and for ITS.
Reduced funding for custodial services in recent years has resulted
in a general deterioration of building conditions, and an additional
$196,000 and one FTE (custodial work inspector) is needed to supplement
the current contract. Since Fort Meade will add 335,000 square feet of
space between fiscal year 2005-2009, the Library is requesting $26,000
to fund the needed custodial services.
Personnel Management.--A total of $1.335 million is requested to
upgrade the Library's personnel hiring system. The future of all of the
Library's efforts depends on our greatest asset the expertise,
intellect, and dedication of a Library staff that makes our vast
collections and services relevant and accessible. Library management
must be able to train, develop and renew its staff and add fresh talent
to sustain the Library's leadership role amid the massive technological
changes in the 21st century. The Library's Human Resources Services
(HRS) needs a fully integrated and comprehensive Web-based Human
Resource Information System (HRIS) that interfaces with the Library's
payroll provider. The added funding of $1.335 million requested for
fiscal year 2005 will procure and implement staffing and classification
modules that will be integrated with the emerging HRIS and will improve
the timeliness and efficiency of the Library's hiring and
classification processes.
library buildings and grounds
The Architect of the Capitol (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 in its fiscal year 2005 budget an increase of $121.8 million
for Library-related work and support. The AOC budget includes funding
for six key projects requested by the Library. The two most crucial
projects are (1) continuation of the Fort Meade construction program by
the construction of Book Storage Modules 3 and 4 ($38.5 million) and
(2) construction of the Copyright Deposit Facility ($59.2 million).
Both of these capital improvement projects are critical in addressing
basic storage and preservation deficiencies, as well as serious
environmental, fire, and employee safety issues. Delay in funding this
construction will make an already-critical situation worse and will
increase the future cost of construction. Funding is also requested for
increased space modifications ($150,000), construction of six secure
storage rooms/vaults ($860,000), a dishwashing machine for the Madison
cafeteria ($210,000), and an integration and upgrade study ($400,000)
of our aging book conveyor system. The Library strongly recommends the
approval of the AOC's Library Buildings and Grounds budget, which is
essential for the effective functioning of the Library.
legislative initiatives
The Library has proposed language to extend, by five years, the
period for securing commitments from partners to join the National
Digital Information Infrastructure and Preservation Program (NDIIPP),
to provide the mandated matching funds, and to work out formulae to
include grants, cooperative agreements, contracts, and other legally
enforceable pledge agreements entered into before 2010.
The Library's strategy for meeting the requirements of the
legislation revolves around making investments that require mutual
participation and cost-sharing agreements with a wide variety of
stakeholders. Given the current economic climate, the Library
anticipates that a substantial volume of non-federal matches will be in
the form of in-kind, cost sharing contributions to the joint NDIIPP
projects that will be defined and developed by the Library over time.
The Library seeks to extend the period of time in which these non-
federal contributions can be solicited and received. The Library's
ability to support these jointly funded projects will be substantially
enhanced if the $75 million that is subject to a matching requirement
can be made available for obligation over the extended time frame in
which the different schedules of pledge donations are likely to be
fulfilled.
The Library is funding the NDIIPP by investing in a first set of
practical experiments and tests. Following an assessment, we will fund
a second set of investments as described in the plan that was submitted
to and approved by the Congress in December 2002. The initial planning
and fact-finding phase of NDIIPP made it clear that the entire amount
available to NDIIPP could not be responsibly committed without the
benefit of the earlier testing and iterative learning, followed by
reinvestment in a second generation of work. The language we are
proposing for fiscal year 2005 is required to implement this approach,
which was needed for the Congressionally approved NDIIPP plan.
Attaining the $75 million of matching federal funding and achieving the
desired results in the preservation of digital material requires
investing the initial $20 million in a series of practical projects
that will unfold over a five-year period.
The creation of an attainable national preservation strategy will
occur incrementally, because of the complexity of the challenge and the
number and diversity of partners involved. The Library is taking
actions to begin building the preservation infrastructure by: building
the technical architecture that can support these multiple
partnerships; developing a network of partners who will share the
responsibility in the course of the next five years; and participating
in joint collaborative research on long-term digital preservation and
archiving issues.
A first formal call for network partners was released in August
2003, and we received final proposals on November 12, 2003. The
Library, along with the National Endowment for the Humanities, is
making selections among the proposed applicants to seed the NDIIPP
network with partners for long-term preservation of digital content.
The Library anticipates awarding up to $15 million of the available $20
million available in this initial round of investments.
The Library is simultaneously funding a test of existing
architectures to assess how digital content can be shared and inter-
operate among different institutions. This will result in a revised
technical architecture and a second generation of investments in
developing the overall technical preservation architecture.
The Library is partnering with the National Science Foundation
(NSF) in a digital archiving and long-term preservation research
program. The goal of the program is to stimulate research that builds
capacities for long-term management and preservation of digital
materials. The intent of the program is to support both technical and
economic, social, and legal research topics related to archiving
digital materials. The Library signed a memorandum of understanding
with NSF in February 2004.
Language is also proposed to prohibit transferring funds from the
Library of Congress to the State Department (DOS) for the construction
of embassies. The DOS has proposed establishing a Capital Security
Cost-Sharing Program that, by fiscal year 2009, would cost the Library
as much as and possibly more than the entire present cost of our
overseas offices. Under the proposed new program, the Library would be
paying DOS, by fiscal year 2009, approximately $7.4 million for 202
positions located in 12 locations--95 percent of which are located in
only six locations. This assessment would be equivalent to 90 percent
of the Library's fiscal year 2004 total present overseas budget of
$8.231 million. The DOS proposal does not follow government cost-
sharing standards and would unfairly leverage additional costs on the
Library's overseas acquisitions programs that are essential for our
continued understanding of the Near East and other foreign areas of
national concern.
The budget before this subcommittee reflects important needs for
the Library--preservation of its collections, expansion of its services
to the Congress increasingly services for the nation. As the national
library leading and working with a complex network of partners at the
beginning of the 21st century, the Library's workforce--now and in the
future--is an essential element to the success of our mission and
goals. In previous appearances before this Subcommittee, I have
stressed the need to transfer knowledge and expertise to a new
generation of knowledge specialists. An estimated 40 percent of the
Library's workforce will be eligible to retire by 2009. The Library
must also be able to attract and retain the very best talent
available--in CRS, the Law Library, the Copyright Office, in its core
library management areas.
Elsewhere in the federal government--widely in the Executive Branch
and within sister agencies such as GAO--the recruitment, management,
and pay scales of the federal workforce are being changed. The Library
will be seeking from the 108th Congress authorization for broad-based
human capital tools and flexibilities, in line with practices already
in use within the federal government. We need to ensure that the
Library of Congress can attract, retain, motivate, and reward a top
quality and high performing workforce to serve the Congress and to
sustain and make even more usable the nation's strategic information
and knowledge reserve. In order to meet the ambitious goals of our
strategic plan and accomplish our goals, we must be able to compete on
a level playing field within the federal government for the best
talent. The Library's services to Congress and the nation are unique
and multi-faceted, and they require the Library's workforce to possess
cutting-edge knowledge and skill sets.
summary
As the keeper of America's--and much of the world's--creative and
intellectual achievements, the Library of Congress is keenly aware of
its awesome responsibility. This Library is the research and
information arm of the national legislature and contains the world's
largest storehouse of knowledge and the mint record of America's
creativity. The strategic plan and supporting fiscal year 2005 budget
request will continue the Library's great tradition, which covers the
world and has now been expanded to include Congressionally mandated
leadership in the massive task of sorting and preserving digital
material. All of this is needed to support the Congress, the public,
and the democratic ideal.
The Library's vision for the 21st century is to lead the nation in
ensuring access to knowledge and information by promoting the Library's
creative use of its unmatched human and material resources for the
Congress and its constituents. By 2008, the Library plans, with the
support of the Congress, to have achieved the following:
--The Library's National Audiovisual Conservation Center is operating
and is recognized as having assumed international leadership in
providing film and recorded sound preservation and
accessibility. The new storage facilities at Fort Meade are
operating and are recognized as an outstanding example of how
to perform off-site storage, long-term preservation, and rapid
access to the material.
--The core national programs of Library Services and the Office of
Strategic Initiatives are recognized to have sustained the
breadth and depth of the universal artifactual and digital
collections. These programs will also have provided positive,
verifiable assurance that the Library is acquiring,
establishing bibliographic control, preserving, providing 24/7
access, and securing the collections for future generations
regardless of the information's format.
--The Congressional Research Service has succeeded in restructuring
both its permanent workforce and its supplemental interim
capacity so that it is always the first-choice research
provider of the Congress for authoritative, nonpartisan,
timely, and objective research and public policy analysis in
support of legislative deliberations. It will have improved
both the quality of its analysis as well as its overall
research capacity.
--The National Library Service for the Blind and Physically
Handicapped has completed the development of digital talking
book technology and has begun conversion to use of the
technology through distribution of the new talking book
machines.
--The Copyright Office is a leading advocate of an effective national
copyright system that serves both creators and users of
copyrighted works; is the primary advisor to the Congress on
national and international copyright matters and is a relied-
upon source of information and assistance to federal agencies
and the judiciary on these matters; is providing its services,
including registrations, electronically; and is creating
registration records compatible with the Library's cataloging
system.
--The Law Library of Congress will have achieved and maintained an
enhanced electronic system involving almost all countries
important to the U.S. Congress in order to provide it with more
comprehensive, authoritative, and timely global legal
information.
--The Library has implemented human capital management initiatives
resulting in recruitment, development, and maintenance of a
diverse, well-trained, highly skilled, and high-performing
workforce to filter, navigate, analyze, and objectively
interpret knowledge for the Congress and the nation. Further,
the workforce functions in a management-supported environment
characterized by open communication, innovative thinking,
leadership in managing change, and effective and efficient
program and supporting processes rivaling the best commercially
available services. Special emphasis will be paid for providing
flexible rewards and responsibility for staff with substantive
expertise that leads to productivity improvements.
On behalf of the Library and all of its staff, I thank the Congress
for its continued support of the Library and its programs. I ask for
the support of the Library's fiscal year 2005 budget request as the
next step in moving toward achieving these strategic outcomes.
______
Prepared Statement of Daniel P. Mulhollan
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee: I am pleased to appear
before you today to discuss the work of the Congressional Research
Service (CRS) and our fiscal year 2005 request. I want to thank this
Committee for the confidence it has shown in CRS in the past and the
support that has enabled CRS to serve the Congress during these
difficult times of demanding policy deliberations, which have been made
especially challenging because of our heightened need to provide for
security at home and abroad, and because of greatly increased fiscal
constraints.
As CRS completes its ninth decade of service to the Congress, we
continue to uphold our sole mission: We work exclusively and directly
for the Congress, providing research and analysis that is
authoritative, timely, objective, nonpartisan, confidential, and fully
responsive to the policy-making needs of the Congress.
The Congress continually and routinely calls on CRS research
assistance as it examines policy problems, formulates responses, and
deliberates on them across the broad range of complex and challenging
issues on the legislative agenda. Our paramount concern, especially
given the critical constitutional role of the Congress during a time of
war, is preserving independent, accessible, and responsive analytic
capacity in the legislative branch.
Mr. Chairman, my statement today highlights CRS accomplishments in
supporting the Congress over the past year. My statement also outlines
the fiscal challenges CRS will face in the upcoming year and reports on
the steps we have been taking to contain costs. I am concerned about
the Service's ability to continue providing the level of support
Congress has come to rely upon. For the coming year, we seek to
maintain our research support for the Congress including priorities
targeted to meet major law-making needs as Congress faces continuing
and unfolding policy concerns, as well as significant, unanticipated
crises.
fiscal year 2003 highlights in crs legislative support
Throughout fiscal year 2003 Congress called on CRS as it confronted
numerous, challenging public policy problems in its demanding schedule
of legislative and oversight activities. Today I will touch upon some
issues emanating from the war with Iraq and efforts to enhance homeland
security last year. CRS has and continues to play a significant role in
keeping the Congress abreast of policy questions, options and their
implications during rapidly changing situations of vital importance to
the Nation.
The War with Iraq.--U.S. involvement in Iraq--the diplomatic
activities and military preparations leading up to the war, the war
itself, and the war's aftermath--dominated the congressional foreign
affairs and defense agenda during the year. CRS specialists responded
to diplomatic, military, and postwar issues; provided briefings on the
congressional joint resolution authorizing the President to use force
against Iraq; and fielded queries on war powers, declarations of war,
and the preemptive use of force under international law.
As military action began, CRS assisted with issues such as Iraq's
relations in the Middle East, U.S. efforts to change the Iraqi regime,
and the United Nations oil-for-food program. Analysts examined the
postwar needs of Iraq for humanitarian and reconstruction assistance,
the role of the international community and the United Nations, Iraq's
economy and foreign debt, and the likelihood that any U.S. loans to
future Iraqi governments would be repaid.
Homeland Security and the Potential for Terrorism.--To assist the
Congress as it addressed homeland security and terrorism, CRS continued
its Service-wide, coordinated response that draws upon a wide range of
expertise. Following passage of the Homeland Security Act, CRS experts
developed a comprehensive organization chart that identified statutory
requirements for congressional staff who monitor the establishment of
the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). As Congress began oversight
activities pertaining to this new government agency, CRS provided help
with procedural and jurisdictional questions, briefings on the
operational and organizational aspects of DHS, and analyses on the
protection, use, and disclosure of critical infrastructure information
submitted to DHS. Anticipating the subsequent intense demand for
information and analyses on new or expanded programs related to
homeland security, CRS examined such matters as emergency management
funding programs, federal disaster recovery programs, and federal
assistance programs aiding state and local government in terrorism
preparedness.
Other related domestic policy issues related to the war and
terrorism arose late in the 107th and continued throughout the 108th
Congresses. CRS responded to requests regarding bioterrorism and health
issues, such as the public health system's ability to respond to health
threats posed by chemical and biological agents; border and
transportation safety; the continuity of Congress in the event of a
catastrophic attack; critical infrastructure security including
communications systems, oil and gas pipelines, electrical power grids,
and highway systems; immigration concerns such as restructuring the
issuance of visas; and legal ramifications of anti-terrorist
enforcement, including the roles and authorities of law enforcement and
the intelligence community.
The Service's overall productivity and performance in fiscal year
2003 are best illustrated by four measures of its workload during the
year: (1) support for 160 major policy problems at all stages of the
legislative agenda; (2) maintenance of 900 key products in major policy
areas, representing a 30-percent increase over the 700 products
maintained at the close of last fiscal year; (3) immediate 24/7 online
access to key products and services through the Current Legislative
Issues (CLI) system on the CRS Web site, with a 10-percent increase in
congressional use of our electronic services over use last year; and
(4) custom work for the Congress--thousands of confidential memoranda,
in-person briefings, and telephone consultations. In fiscal year 2003,
CRS delivered 875,197 research responses, a number that includes
analysis and information requests, product requests, in-person requests
and services at Research Centers, electronic services, and seminars.
cost containment efforts
Over the past several years, in order to sustain the level of
research support on issues such as those outlined above, CRS has
conducted numerous management reviews to evaluate current operations,
maximize value, and implement cost containment measures. As stewards of
the taxpayers' money, it is our obligation to review continuously how
we can work most cost-effectively. Our reviews identified opportunities
for containing operational costs of current services: for example,
closure of the Longworth Research Center and one copy center,
elimination of the Info Pack, and reorganization of the Service's
information professional staff. In addition, the Service formed
collegial research partnerships with major public policy universities
to enhance research capacity, created a hiring strategy that does not
routinely replace staff attrition one-for-one, but rather continually
adjusts the work force composition to respond to the evolving needs of
the Congress, and examined outsourcing of selected activities where
cost efficiencies could be realized. I assure you that CRS has
exhausted all reasonable means of realigning existing resources to
maximize its efficiency and effectiveness in supporting the Congress.
Yet despite these many efforts, our research priorities for the future
remain in jeopardy without additional funding.
fiscal year 2005 budget request
Mr. Chairman, I am requesting a total of $100.9 million for fiscal
year 2005. This represents a 10.7 percent increase in funding over
fiscal year 2004. This funding request is critical to the continual
delivery of high-quality analysis to the Congress. A 2001 congressional
directive obligates the CRS director to: ``. . . bring to the attention
of the appropriate House and Senate committees issues which directly
impact the Congressional Research Service and its ability to serve the
needs of the Congress. . . .'' [H. Rept. 1033, Cong. Rec. 146, H12228,
November 30, 2001]. I am fully aware of the fiscal realities that the
Congress faces and the hard choices that must be made in the coming
months, and I make a request for this funding because I believe that
these resources are critical to preserving our ability to provide the
Congress with the level of expertise and breadth of services it has
come to rely upon so heavily.
The remainder of my statement summarizes three critical challenges
facing the Service this upcoming year preserving the Service's research
capacity, meeting congressional requirements, and funding
uncontrollable increases for essential research materials.
preservation of crs research capacity
Preserving CRS's research capacity is of the highest priority. Over
the last several years, with the help of the Congress, the Service has
been able to abate erosion of its workforce. The Service's capacity--
measured by the number of full-time equivalent positions (FTEs)--has
decreased from 763 in 1994 to 729 this year. After delays due to the
implementation of the Library's new merit selection, the Service has
nearly rebuilt its capacity by hiring much needed analytic staff. To
preserve this capacity the Service is requesting two actions full
funding for its mandatory pay and inflationary increases and a one-time
adjustment to sustain its current ceiling of 729 full time equivalent
staff.
CRS needs $4.3 million to cover its mandatory and price-level cost
increases. Without this adjustment, the Service would have to reduce
its full-time equivalent (FTE) capacity by 37 staff. In addition, the
Service's budget request includes a one-time financial adjustment of
$2.7 million to sustain the CRS current FTE level of 729. Without the
one-time funding adjustment, CRS would have to staff down further by
another 25 FTEs.
Change in the CRS workforce composition is an increasingly
significant factor affecting personnel costs. The nature of the work--
reflecting the increasingly complex and specialized research and
information requirements of the Congress--dictates that CRS hire
individuals with high levels of formal education and specialized
experience. In the period from fiscal years 1995 to 2003, the grade
level of the average competitive CRS hire has increased from a GS-7,
step 9, to a GS-13, step 1.
When Congress confronts unanticipated major policy events, it turns
immediately to CRS to draw on the existing stock of knowledge of CRS
experts and their proven ability to assess situations and options
reliably and objectively. Congress gained significant, immediate
support from CRS experts as the world listened to early reports of the
Columbia Space Shuttle accident, during the electricity blackout last
August, when Mad Cow disease was found in the United States, when ricin
was discovered in a Senate office building, and on many other
occasions.
Congress routinely turns to CRS as it engages in long-term policy
endeavors for which precedents or experience is limited. Congress is
receiving continuing assistance from CRS experts in formulating,
implementing and overseeing a complex complement of provisions for
homeland security; in grappling with major revisions in government
personnel practices; in responding to an array of novel assaults on
corporate and financial integrity; in responding to world health
threats from SARS, avian flu, and AIDS; in assessing unique conditions
in Iraq and Afghanistan relating to security, reconstruction and
governance; in relating a mix of policy objectives across the use of
the tax code and providing for a robust economy in a far more
globalized setting than experienced before.
Without the full funding of our mandatory costs and the one-time
adjustment to our salary base, CRS would loose a total of 62 full-time
equivalent staff--a 9 percent reduction to its workforce. The results
would be devastating. What could be said with certainty is that,
overall, CRS would not be able to provide the Congress with 102,300
productive work hours per year. For example, for the 160 active policy
areas for which CRS maintain ongoing research coverage, 682 productive
work hours--more than 21 weeks per year--per major issue--would be
unavailable to the Congress. While the Service would do its best to
carry out its mission to serve the Congress as it carries out its
legislative function, this outcome would, by the very scope of its
effect, force the Service to reduce seriously or eliminate customized,
timely, and integrative analyses of some critical policy issues. It
would be difficult to predict what issues would be the most impacted
but seasoned, expert staff working on high demand issue areas will
likely leave and we would not be able to replace them.
meeting congressional requirements
Another challenge facing the Service is to support CRS business
continuity and improved technological infrastructure activities as
required by the Congress. I am seeking $622,000 for continuing
operations of the alternative computer facility (ACF) that houses back-
up and emergency computer and other technology capacity for the
Congress, the Library and CRS. With this facility CRS will be able to
meet needs of the Congress in emergency situations while maintaining a
secure and reliable technology environment.
The Service is also requesting $549,000 to develop the XML
international standard authorized by the Congress as the data standard
for the creation and accessibility of all congressional documents
through the Legislative Information System (LIS). CRS will continue to
work with the House Committee on House Administration, the Senate
Committee on Rules and Administration, and the Library's Information
Technology Services to implement this much-needed capability. Without
funds to replace the existing search system, the LIS will need
extensive, costly, and proprietary modifications to be able to receive
and index the legislative documents you need.
meeting uncontrollable inflationary increases for essential research
materials
And the last challenge facing the Service is funding research
materials. Providing accurate, timely, authoritative, and comprehensive
research analysis and services to the Congress has become increasingly
difficult due to the high annual increases in the costs of research
materials. Thus our budget includes a one-time financial adjustment of
$1.0 million to meet cumulative increases over recent years in
subscription and publication prices. Restrictive industry policies
limit our alternatives for obtaining needed materials, especially
electronic resources, in a more cost-effective manner. Information
resources sought with the additional funding include those that provide
information on port security, prescription drug pricing, and the nature
and status of corporate financial reporting.
In closing, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to inform
the Committee about the state of CRS. During a time of war, Congress,
the First Branch of Government, must ensure that it maintains its
independent capacity to analyze the complex challenges that the Nation
confronts in combating terrorism and sustaining homeland security.
I trust that you agree that CRS contributes significantly to this
independent capacity of the Congress. I also trust that you believe we
are fulfilling our mission in a way that warrants your continued
support. I am, of course, always available to answer any questions that
the Committee might have.
______
Prepared Statement of Marybeth Peters
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: Thank you for the
opportunity to present the Copyright Office's fiscal year 2005 budget
request.
For fiscal year 2005, the Copyright Office is seeking the
Committee's approval of two major requests. First, we are requesting
$3,660,000 in new offsetting collections authority and spending
authority to construct the new office space required to support our
reengineered business processes. I am pleased that, with this
Committee's support, we have been able to keep our Reengineering
Program moving ahead and are now planning for full implementation in
fiscal year 2006. Second, as part of the Architect of the Capitol's
budget, we are requesting $59.2 million to construct a Copyright
Deposit Facility at Fort Meade. This facility will, for the first time,
ensure that copyright deposits not selected by the Library are stored
for certain periods in environmental conditions that allow us to meet
our legal requirements to retain, and be able to produce copies of,
these works.
I will review these two areas in more detail, but first will
provide an overview of the Office's work.
review of copyright office work and accomplishments
The Copyright Office's mission is to promote creativity by
sustaining an effective national copyright system. We do this by
administering the copyright law; providing policy and legal assistance
to the Congress, the executive branch, and the judiciary; and by
informing and educating the public about the principles of our nation's
copyright system. The demands in these areas are growing and becoming
more complex with the rising use and evolution of digital technology.
I will briefly highlight some of the Office's current and past
work, and our plans for fiscal year 2005.
Policy and Legal Work
We have continued to work closely with Members and committees on
copyright policy and legal questions during the present Congress.
During the past year, I testified at hearings on peer-to-peer networks,
state sovereign immunity and the ``broadcast flag'' issue, and the
Office's General Counsel testified at a hearing on additional
protection for databases.
Last April, the House Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and
Intellectual Property held a hearing on the Copyright Royalty and
Distribution Reform Act of 2003 (H.R. 1417), a matter which could
impact the operations and budget of the Office. This bill, which was
reported to the House on January 30, would replace Copyright
Arbitration Royalty Panels (CARPs) with three full-time independent
Copyright Royalty Judges appointed by the Librarian of Congress. CARPs
are ad hoc panels composed of arbitrators which determine royalty
rates, distributions, and conditions of payment. Panels have been
operating under Copyright Office auspices since Congress eliminated the
Copyright Royalty Tribunal in 1993.
The current system authorizes the Copyright Office to deduct CARP
administrative costs from royalty fees collected by the Office. The new
program would require funding primarily from net appropriations. We
estimate these new costs could approach $1 million.
During the remainder of this session, the Office expects to assist
Congress with legislation on and oversight of a number of copyright
issues, including the extension of the Satellite Home Viewer Act (which
expires December 31, 2004) and review and possible revision of section
115 of the Copyright Act, and in particular, the provisions of section
115 governing digital transmissions of music.
Last year, we assisted the Department of Justice in a number of
important copyright cases, including cases before the Supreme Court. We
also completed the bulk of our work on the second Section 1201
rulemaking to determine whether any particular classes of copyrighted
works should be exempted from the protection afforded by the
prohibition on circumventing technological protection measures that
control access to such works. As a result of this rulemaking, four such
classes of works were exempted, including one proposed by the American
Federation for the Blind and supported by library organizations aimed
at making sure that the blind and visually impaired gained meaningful
access to literary materials.
The Copyright Office continues to provide ongoing assistance to
executive branch agencies on international matters, particularly the
United States Trade Representative (USTR), the Department of Commerce,
and the Department of State.
As part of this work, our staff participated in U.S. delegations to
negotiations of several bilateral and plurilateral Free Trade
Agreements that have been recently concluded, including with Australia,
Morocco, and a group of Central American countries, and will continue
involvement with ongoing negotiation efforts, such as with the Free
Trade Area of the Americas and Bahrain. We also were active in drafting
and negotiating the intellectual property provisions of the bilateral
Free Trade Agreements with Chile and Singapore signed in 2003.
We have also participated in U.S. delegations to multilateral fora
such as meetings of the World Intellectual Property Organization's
Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights and ad hoc Committee
on Enforcement, and the preparatory meetings for the World Summit on
the Information Society. We completed reviews of draft copyright laws
for a number of countries and, for USTR, provided assistance to other
nations in their World Trade Organization accession processes. In the
past year, we also advised and assisted the Bureau of Customs and
Border Protection in resolving issues and developing new procedures
relating to border enforcement.
Registration and Recordation
In fiscal year 2003, we made it a priority to complete our recovery
from the fiscal year 2002 mail disruption while also improving the
timeliness of our registration and recordation services. During fiscal
year 2003, the Copyright Office received 607,492 claims to copyright
covering more than a million works. Of these, it registered 534,122
claims. The Examining Division reduced its registration work on hand by
half and continued toward a goal of currency in correspondence. Two
years ago, the Office required an average of approximately 200 days to
issue a registration certificate. By the beginning of fiscal year 2003,
we had shortened the average processing time to approximately 130 days.
In January 2003, the Office began a focused effort, reducing the number
of claims awaiting processing by nearly a third over the course of the
last nine months of the fiscal year. At year's end, the average time to
process a claim was 90 days.
We also reduced processing times in the Cataloging Division. The
Division created cataloging records for 543,105 registrations in fiscal
year 2003. Throughput time from receipt in the division until the
completion of a public record was reduced from over seven weeks to less
than five.
As part of its statutory recordation services, the Copyright Office
creates records of documents relating to copyrighted works that have
been recorded in the Office. These documents frequently involve works
of significant economic value. During fiscal year 2003, the Documents
Recordation Section recorded 16,103 documents covering approximately
300,000 titles of works. The majority of documents involve transfers of
rights from one copyright owner to another. Other recorded documents
include security interests, contracts between authors and publishers,
and notices of termination of grants of rights. During the course of
the year, the Section cut its processing time by more than half.
Licensing Activities
As part of our responsibilities for the copyright law's statutory
licenses, we administered six Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panel
proceedings. Five involved rate adjustments, and one was a distribution
proceeding. The use of electronic funds transfer (EFT), including the
Treasury Department's ``Pay.gov'' Internet-based remittance collection
system, in the payment of royalties increased. The percentage of
remittances made via EFT was 94.5 percent at the end of fiscal year
2003. The Licensing Division deducts its full operating costs from the
royalty fees.
Public Information and Education
In fiscal year 2003, the Office responded to 371,446 in-person,
telephone, and e-mail requests for information, a 4 percent increase.
The Office web site received 16 million hits, a 23 percent increase. We
were pleased to inaugurate new Spanish-language web pages on our site
which provide basic information on copyright and instructions on how to
register a work.
Finally, we worked throughout the year on a project to develop a
new official seal and an updated logo for the Office. For more than 25
years, the Office's seal and logo has been a representation of a pen in
a circle. The new seal and separate logo became effective on January 1,
2004.
fiscal year 2005 budget request
I will now describe the two principal areas of our fiscal year 2005
request.
Reengineering Program
Since my testimony last year, we have made significant progress in
our Reengineering Program:
--On August 22, we awarded a contract to SRA International to build a
new integrated IT systems infrastructure which will support our
new processes and public services. This work began in
September; since then we have defined the system architecture,
refined our system requirements to match the selected software
environment, and completed the preliminary design of staff
screens and the system's data model.
--We completed a facilities project plan, a program report
identifying facilities and requirements across the Office,
adjacency and blocking diagrams, and began detailed design work
for each division.
--We completed much of the process of reviewing and revising the more
than 135 position descriptions for jobs that will be changed,
in some way, in our new processes.
Our challenge over the next two years is to coordinate our
execution across the three reengineering fronts of information
technology, facilities, and organization. Since our processes are
changing so dramatically, our Office structure in each of these areas
will change dramatically as well to the point that our new processes
cannot begin without full implementation of each front.
At the same time we are making this dramatic transition to our new
processes, we need to make sure that we continue to provide our
services to the public including registration, recordation, licensing
activities, and acquisition of copyrighted works for the Library's
collections. We realize that the most significant impact on our public
services, in terms of the Office's transition, will be in the area of
facilities. As such, we need to complete our facilities work as quickly
as possible. We determined that under the fastest construction
schedule, this redesign would take at least six months. We then
concluded that, in order to keep providing our services to the public,
the best option would be to move off site into rental space during the
construction period.
Our plans are to begin construction in October 2005 and complete
this work in April 2006.
We are including in our fiscal year 2005 approximately $7.5 million
in spending in the facilities area, consisting of both relocation and
construction costs. As I mentioned, this budget submission requests an
increase of $3,660,000 in offsetting collections authority to allow us
to use funds in the No-Year Account for these tasks.
We are working with the staff of the Architect of the Capitol on
the overall facilities approach, and are very appreciative of their
understanding of our requirements and willingness to work with us to
address them. We are on schedule to fully complete the design and
construction documents this year so that the Architect can request
fiscal year 2006 funding to perform the structural and safety aspects
of the construction work.
In addition to our facilities work, in fiscal year 2005, we will be
piloting our new processes with the new IT systems, obtaining Library
approval of our new organization, and completing bargaining with the
unions.
While we still have a lot of work ahead of us, I believe the entire
Copyright Office staff is excited that they are involved in building
the Copyright Office of the future. The result will be better service
to our customers, including more of our products being available
online, and a better work environment for our staff.
Fort Meade Copyright Deposit Facility
The imperative for the Copyright Deposit Facility at Fort Meade is
to fulfill the requirement under the Copyright Act for the Office to
provide for long-term preservation of copyright deposits. The Copyright
Office is required by statute to retain unpublished copyright deposits
for the full-term of copyright, which is the life of the author plus 70
years, and to retain published deposits for the longest period
considered practicable and desirable by the Register. Retention periods
of 120 years for unpublished deposits and 20 years for the published
deposits have been established to fulfill this legal requirement.
Deposits serve as evidence of what was registered; they reflect the
nature and extent of the material that has been registered. Copies of
copyright deposits, certified by the Copyright Office, are used in a
variety of legal proceedings. The Office retrieves approximately 2,500
works from its offsite storage each year.
The present retention requirements took effect in 1978. If we
continue to hold deposits under the conditions that have been in place
since then, some works will deteriorate to such an extent that we would
not be able to either ascertain the full work or make a copy.
The Office currently stores about 50,000 cubic feet of deposits at
the Landover Center Annex, a GSA leased facility. In addition, the
Office stores over 85,000 cubic feet of deposits at a commercial
records management storage facility in Sterling, Virginia run by Iron
Mountain.
The legal deposits consist of a variety of formats and types, which
include: paper in varying quality and size such as books, architectural
drawings, sheet music, and computer code printouts; magnetic tape (both
audio and video); photographs; CD-ROMs, CDs, and LPs; and fabric.
The current storage space, both at the leased facility and the
commercial records storage facility, fails to provide the appropriate
environmental conditions necessary to ensure the longevity of the
deposit materials. The storage space at the Landover Annex is subject
to wide temperature variances, high humidity levels and water leaks.
The commercial records storage facility is also subject to seasonal
temperature fluctuations and uncontrolled humidity levels.
Continued storage under present substandard environmental
conditions will accelerate the aging of the deposit material and reduce
the useful life span by 75 percent, i.e., deterioration that would
occur in 100 years occurs in 25 years. These conditions place these
legal deposits at risk in the long term. This is particularly
applicable to the video and audio magnetic tapes in storage which are
especially sensitive to environmental conditions. In addition, the
current storage space at the Landover Annex and the commercial records
storage facility does not meet the NARA fire protection requirements
for storage of long-term records which must be in place by fiscal year
2009.
The Fort Meade facility would be a highly secured, environmentally
controlled, high-density storage building with sufficient space for
retaining current and future deposits. The facility has been 100
percent designed and construction documents are complete. It will be in
full compliance with the NARA regulations for records storage
facilities, and would bring together all copyright deposits in a single
location, improving retrieval time and our service to the public.
The Fort Meade facility will allow for 245,000 cubic feet of
storage. When the building is ready for occupancy in fiscal year 2007,
we would immediately occupy about two-thirds of that space. Currently,
the Copyright Office is adding an average of 3,500 cubic feet of
deposits of published works and records and 3,500 cubic feet of
deposits of unpublished works annually. Although it is difficult to
estimate the volume of copyright deposits that we will receive in the
future, we project that the facility would provide adequate storage
space at least through 2020.
We consulted with the Library's Preservation Directorate to
determine the climate control requirements to ensure that the useful
life of the legal deposits would be sufficient to meet the legally
mandated retention periods. Because published and unpublished deposits
retention periods are different, the necessary environmental
requirements are different as well. Published deposits need to be
stored in a temperature of 68 degrees Fahrenheit (F), and 45 percent
relative humidity (RH). Unpublished deposits must be stored in a
climate-controlled area maintained at 50 degrees F and 30 percent RH.
We have briefed the Committee staff on our current storage problems
and our need for this facility. The Committee staff has asked us to
ascertain whether there are acceptable alternative storage options. We
have contacted NARA and Iron Mountain to determine whether other
storage options exist. All options need to be evaluated based on our
requirements in the areas of environmental conditions, security and
retrieval of deposits. We will report our findings to the Committee
shortly.
fiscal year 2005 offsetting collections authority request
As I have mentioned, for fiscal year 2005 the Office is requesting
a one time increase of $3,660,000 in offsetting collections authority,
to be funded by fee receipts in the No-Year Account, for the facilities
work related to our Reengineering Program. In addition, the budget
submission contained inflationary factors for mandatory and price level
increases that were applied to both the Copyright's appropriated and
receipt funds. This resulted in an additional $809,594 increase to
offsetting collections authority for a total increase of $4,469,594.
In reviewing this approach, and upon further analysis of receipt
projections, we have determined that inflationary increases cannot be
met by the requested increase in offsetting collections authority.
Receipts have generally been level since fiscal year 2001 and there
does not appear to be any basis to believe they will increase in fiscal
year 2005. As a result, we are requesting that the fiscal year 2005
offsetting collections authority be reduced by the inflationary
adjustment of $809,594, with a corresponding increase in net
appropriations. We have submitted a formal budget amendment to make
this change.
Certain factors support a conservative receipt projection in fiscal
year 2005. Currently, there is no mail backlog, so all receipts have
been accounted for. Recent delays in the delivery of mail, however,
underscore the Office's vulnerability to unforseen events and the need
for conservatively projecting receipts. The relocation and construction
phase of the Reengineering Program could disrupt fee processing for a
few weeks, reducing the receipt level in fiscal year 2005.
In summary, I ask that the fiscal year 2005 budget request for
Copyright Basic offsetting collections authority be reduced to
$26,843,406, and that net appropriations be increased by $809,594 for a
total of $20,178,594. The use of the no-year funds to partially fund
the facilities piece of the reengineering implementation will leave
approximately $620,000 in the account for unanticipated decreases in
fee receipts.
I would be most grateful for the Committee's acceptance of this
budget amendment.
conclusion
Mr. Chairman, this fiscal year we are determined to continue the
improvements we have made in providing public services and to maintain
steady progress in our Reengineering Program.
Our fiscal year 2005 request permits us to move forward on the
facilities work critical to the final implementation of our
Reengineering Program. The new Copyright Deposit Facility at Fort Meade
gives us the assurance that we will be able to meet the copyright law's
requirement that deposits be retained under proper conditions.
I thank the Committee for its consideration of this request and for
its support of the Copyright Office in this challenging time of
transition and progress.
OPEN WORLD LEADERSHIP PROGRAM
Senator Campbell. Since the chairman of the full committee
is here, I would like to ask one question first, that I was
going to get to a little later, but as the chairman of the
Board for the Open World Program, this is a program that
Senator Stevens was instrumental in helping move.
Would you give us a quick update on the program, since we
authorized that expansion to new countries?
Dr. Billington. Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman. We will shortly be
delivering the Open World's 2003 Annual Report to the Congress;
but just a few highlights.
In 2003, a total of 1,201 families, in 542 communities in
46 States, hosted people from this program. We have completed
pilot programs also in Ukraine, Uzbekistan, and Lithuania,
launched a new cultural program in Russia, while continuing to
bring political and civic leaders in Russia. Our alumni now
total 7,547. There is also a group who came from Belarus.
This has been extremely useful. I think the addition of
Russia's cultural leaders, who play an important role in the
development of the country, has been an important new
dimension; and it focused on vibrant areas outside of Moscow
and Petersburg that have not previously had the opportunity to
come. The first hosting was in North Carolina and Michigan, and
it has already spurred some collaborative efforts in historic
preservation and plans for exchanges of exhibitions. So, the
spin-out, the roll-out, of this is very gratifying.
The focus on the rule of law continues. We have had 838
Russian judges and legal professionals hosted by Federal and
State judges, and that has lead to the establishment of sister
courts and all kinds of relationships.
Senator Campbell. Do they come over one time?
Dr. Billington. Yes, they come--well, there have been
occasional repetitions but almost all of them are one time,
yes, from--and that is just terribly important, because they
have a lot of professional demands.
GAO REVIEW OF OPEN WORLD LEADERSHIP PROGRAM
Senator Campbell. There is a GAO review of the program now;
isn't there? Do you know what their preliminary findings are?
Dr. Billington. Yes. The GAO review, which has been
completed, and we have had a chance to comment on it. I do not
know that it has been published yet, but I have reviewed the
draft, which should be published, I think, this week.
They spent a lot of time on this, and I want to give them
full credit, traveling to Russia and Ukraine to interview State
Department officials and Open World alumni. The draft report
found that our delegates were highly favorable about their Open
World program, and noted that the congressional sponsorship was
particularly important because it helped the program attract
emerging leaders who might otherwise not have participated.
The program also came up with some recommendations for
long-term strategic and business planning, which we have
already begun on and will be incorporating into the next
meeting of the board. So, I think it has been very helpful and
it has generally reinforced the impressions we have had very
distinctly. With the average age of 38, these people--large
numbers of women, something totally new for Russia. It is
really a different kind of exchange program--and it has been
valuable to the American hosts, communities, families, and
community leaders that have given so much in-kind support.
One of the GAO recommendations is that we try to quantify
that. It is going to be hard to quantify it because it is real
people from all 89 regions of Russia----
Senator Campbell. Those are personal relationships that
carry on.
Dr. Billington. Our American hosts are real people from all
over the States, all 50 States, and the District. So, it has
been a very rewarding program that has gotten good reviews and
I think has been very successful.
We also had a group from Belarus that was very important.
They met with the Governor of Virginia, with the Helsinki
Commission.
Senator Campbell. Yes. I met several from Belarus as
Chairman of the Helsinki Commission.
Dr. Billington. Yes, sir.
FUNDING PRIORITIES AND CHALLENGES
Senator Campbell. Dr. Billington, I guess I need to ask you
what we have asked every agency that has come before the
committee, and that is: What happens if we do get a freeze in
the fiscal year 2004 level on your budget, and have you
prioritized things that you are--I mean from the wants to the
desperate; and are you prepared, if we have to, to make any
cuts in your programs?
Dr. Billington. Well, if we had a freeze, the most
immediate effect would be to radically reduce staff, since
personnel costs represent, on average, almost 65 percent of our
overall budget; and in the case of CRS, it is 89 percent. So
probably, we would have to consider RIFs, furloughs, and so
forth.
Without the requested $20.5 million, for instance, for
mandatory pay and price staff increases, we would have staff
reductions that would be about 195 FTEs in the LC,S&E
appropriation--a 7 percent reduction in capacity, 62 FTEs in
CRS--a 9 percent reduction in capacity, and 26 FTEs in the
Copyright Office.
Senator Campbell. Well, the committee is thinking of
staffing and hiring.
The committee understands that years ago you instituted a
new hiring system; is that correct?
General Scott. Yes; that is correct.
Senator Campbell. What is the status of that hiring system?
I understood in your testimony, I am not sure if that was an
across-the-board number you mentioned, of 7.7 percent fewer
staff than 1992, was that----
Dr. Billington. Yes. We presently have 7.7 percent fewer
FTEs now than we had in 1992, and we are doing a tremendous
amount more work, as I think is evident. So, to have further
reduction beyond that would be quite serious.
There would be all kinds of implications for many important
ongoing initiatives, for example Culpeper--not to do our part
that prepares for the processing and the movement of things
into the building--when the construction is underway largely
with private sector costs would upset a whole set of
relationships there.
AGING WORKFORCE
Senator Stevens. Yield to me right there. I must leave. But
would you enlighten the chairman about the problem of the aging
of your staff, and then assess these for really reaching out
now to train people, to take the place of so many people? I
think it is unique.
Also, the one thing I would like to see you consider is, I
spent some time with the archivists the other evening, and they
are now going through a digitalization program similar to what
you have gone through. I wonder if you could find the
opportunity to confer with them to see if you could assist them
in the progress of their new program to go digital with all of
their materials as possible, particularly in terms of the aging
of the staff? That worries me considerably.
Dr. Billington. Yes, this is tremendous; 48 percent of
Library staff by this September will be either eligible for
regular retirement or eligible for early out retirement, if
they are given that option. This is very serious, particularly
at a time when we are, in effect, re-tooling people to get into
the new electronic age and we are losing a lot of our subject
expertise that has enabled us to find these important things,
particularly in trouble spots around the world. But, I invite
General Scott to comment on this. We hope to bring a package
forward quite soon, and perhaps General Scott can elaborate on
this.
General Scott. Yes, sir.
Senator Campbell. General Scott.
General Scott. Thank you.
Senator Campbell. Go ahead.
General Scott. Yes, Mr. Chairman. With respect to the
Library's workforce, it is a highly qualified, aging workforce.
By the end of September this year, 25 percent of our workforce,
some 1,033 individuals, will be eligible to retire. We also
estimate that another 23 percent would be eligible to retire if
we had an early out this year.
For each year projected ahead, we would of course continue
to have more employees eligible to retire. By 2009, or
thereabout, we could be looking at one-half of our workforce
that would be eligible to retire.
Dr. Billington has just referenced that our challenge is to
retain those who we can, retrain staff to handle the new
knowledge navigation requirements under the digital period, and
remain competitive in the hiring process. We will be submitting
a legislative proposal that would in addition to other
management tools give Dr. Billington some flexibilities for
handling the fluctuation with staff retirements that we expect
to happen within the next 3 to 4 years.
Senator Campbell. What is the average years of service of
the people who are retiring?
General Scott. It ranges from 22 to 24 years.
Senator Campbell. They stay a long time.
General Scott. Yes, sir.
Dr. Billington. This requires succession planning which
includes both retraining current staff, and hiring new staff.
To successfully accomplish our planing effort, we are going to
need a great deal more flexibility. We will have a package to
present to you, Mr. Chairman, very soon that will build on the
recognition of this problem, capitalizing on HR initiatives
that have been approved by Congress for other agencies.
The demands on this institution, with a very low training
budget and an extremely high demand for skills dictate that we
focus even more energy on succession planning; CRS has been in
the forefront but this is an extremely important institutional
issue that we gain greater flexibility and competitiveness.
This is important because what our people are doing.
COLLABORATION WITH THE ARCHIVES
Incidentally, on the question on collaboration with the
Archives, we would be very happy to do that. We have been
talking with the Archives in connection with the digital
preservation plan and with other Federal agencies, as well. So,
we are happy to share our experience and to work
collaboratively with other institutions.
FLEXIBLE WORKFORCE
But this is really the development of a flexible, well-
trained workforce that is able to work seamlessly between the
old traditional materials, of which we have unique copies,
particularly in these trouble spots in the Third World that no
other library really has the materials on, and at the same
time, integrate it with the digital world, which is exploding
at an exponential rate.
The demands on our people are going to be colossal. We will
be coming back to you with proposals for legislation that can
help us in that regard.
CRS STAFF CAPACITY
Senator Campbell. Along the manpower line, I had a question
relating to CRS and I did not know if you wanted to try to
answer it; or Mr. Mulhollan, if he is with you here. Mr.
Mulhollan, come on up to the table there.
Could you tell the committee why the CRS needs $2.7 million
for what is called ``lost purchasing power''? What does that
mean? Does it mean your average pay level has increased
significantly, or are you requesting more staff, or what does
lost purchasing power mean?
Mr. Mulhollan. Yes, sir, that refers to the budgetary
resources needed to sustain the current CRS staff. You, the
Congress, are facing more complex issues--whether it is the war
on terrorism, homeland security issues, aging of the U.S.
population, infrastructure problems, or nuclear proliferation--
you require greater expertise on each of these complex issues.
For many years, CRS and this committee has been supportive of
what Dr. Billington referred to with regard to succession
planning. CRS faces the possibility of having half of our staff
retire by 2006. We have already begun replacing them--in fact,
last year, we filled 91 vacancies.
The cumulative financial impact of these two phenomenum has
been an overall shift in the composition of the CRS workforce.
In 1995, aside from special recruiting programs, the average
new hire was a GS-7, step 10. Today, it is a GS-13, step one.
This increase is indicative of the greater level of expertise
needed by the Congress. In addition, the vast majority of our
losses are staff who are covered by CSRS, the older Civil
Service Retirement System. Where the average costs of employer-
paid benefits are 13\1/2\ percent.
Nearly all of new employees are covered under the newer
retirement system, FERS, where the average benefit is 27
percent. That fact alone doubles the employer-paid benefit--
which is significant in an organization where the average grade
is a GS-13, step nine.
Another influence contributing to lost purchasing power is
the gap on the pay raise. In fiscal year 2004, we requested,
and you approved, a pay increase of 3.7 percent; however a 4.2
percent pay raise was enacted--creating a $400,000 deficit in
our fiscal year 2004 budget. That is four FTEs.
Finally, the rescission of 0.59 percent, in the CRS budget
was $540,000--equating to five FTEs. So, that is a loss of nine
FTEs in fiscal year 2004 alone. We are looking for the
committee to provide the Service with a one-time adjustment to
sustain an FTE level of 729.
Senator Campbell. I wish I had not asked that question.
I am just kidding. I appreciate that, for the record.
Mr. Mulhollan. You are welcome.
Senator Campbell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
NAVCC--CULPEPER DONATION
Dr. Billington, the very generous donation that Mr. Packard
did of $120 million, how does that compare with what we are
investing in that National Audiovisual Conservation Center?
Dr. Billington. Well, the original arrangement was that
over a period of time, the Congress would provide $16.5 million
and the Packard Humanities Institute would match it with some
$50 million. That adds up to about $66 million. The Congress
has appropriated its part for that original investment but the
costs overall have doubled to $120 million--or, actually, more
than that, but the Packard Humanities Institute has agreed to--
very generously agreed to--absorb all the additional
construction costs.
So, all we are asking for, in the current budget, is for
added staff who can work on the processing and sorting of these
materials, which is widely scattered. A lot of that is
permanent value for--as well as to begin the move; because the
train is moving very fast, thanks largely to their added
investment in this. And we will be, by next summer, ready to
move into the re-done vaults for storage; and the following
year, a whole new building will come on stream. So, this is
moving very rapidly and all the added construction costs have
been absorbed by the Packard Humanities Institute.
What our part of the bargain is, it was attached to the
agreement, the tripartite agreement among us, the Packard
Humanities Institute; and the Architect of the Capitol, of
course, is making sure that all of this conforms to all of the
relevant standards and so forth.
We are asking for some FTEs and some added funding that
will enable us to fully process this material and prepare for
the move. A lot of that is one-time cost, which will not stay
in the base; but it is essential that it be done now so that
the schedule of moving these things in can be done immediately
and will not hold up construction.
Let me see, a total of $16.5 million was appropriated for
the acquisition.
Senator Campbell. $16.5 million?
Dr. Billington. Yes, but we will need additional funding
for the annual carrying costs, which must be covered. A lot of
the requests that are included for this year will be one-time
costs that will not be repeated but are essential to come on
stream at this point, so that the whole process can go forward.
So, those are the basic outlines, Mr. Chairman. I can give
you a full, detailed accounting and projection, if you would
like, on this, for the record.
[The information follows:]
From fiscal year 2000 to fiscal year 2003, the Congress
appropriated $16.5 million to the Architect for the acquisition
of the facility. In fiscal year 2004, the Congress appropriated
$14.8 million to the Library for the National Audio-Visual
Conservation Center to support one-time equipment and other
implementation costs. In fiscal year 2005, the Library is
requesting an increase of $5.3 million for a total project cost
of $20.1 million. Total Library funds through fiscal year 2008
are projected to be approximately $77 million of which $9.8
million reflect ongoing program costs for fiscal year 2009 and
beyond.
LIBRARY BUILDINGS AND GROUNDS--BUDGET REQUEST
Senator Campbell. Your budget request includes $161 million
for buildings and grounds, which is a 312 percent increase over
the prior year appropriation for that activity. There are two
projects which account for the majority of that money; $39
million for the two new book storage modules at Fort Meade, and
$59 million for the new copyright storage facility.
Can you just briefly describe those two facilities? Are
there any alternatives to those buildings?
Dr. Billington. Well, just briefly. The one--the copyright
deposit facility is already essential for the reasons that I
have indicated. They are examining some variant options but it
does not appear that any will be cheaper than the presently
projected one.
The other is dealing with basic storage for special format
collections. For copyright deposit, the obligation to store
unpublished works has been extended for 20 years, because of
the extension of the copyright term. So, we have a much bigger
pile-up even than we had before; the same is true of our
special collections.
LEASED SPACE
Senator Campbell. The storage now of all that material, is
it mostly in leased space or in Government buildings scattered
around?
Dr. Billington. It is in leased space, namely at Landover.
I think I will let General Scott, who has been working most
closely on these issues, elaborate, if he would.
Senator Campbell. Okay.
General Scott. Thank you, sir. With respect to modules
three and four, Mr. Chairman, those modules are for special
collections. With special collections, we are talking about
maps, and we are talking about microfilm, we are talking about
prints and photographs.
Currently, those items are being stored in leased
facilities, the largest of which is in Landover. Now, modules
three and four--first, let me just make a statement that all of
the construction for the modules is about 5 years behind, which
sort of exacerbates the problem of deterioration, and making
sure that we can preserve those items.
Now, we also are concerned that in a delay, particularly
with the copyright deposit facility, any delay increases the
risk of further deterioration. There is----
Senator Campbell. Are those leased spaces climate
controlled?
General Scott. Yes. Some of it is not climate controlled,
others have minimal climate control.
Senator Campbell. What is the cumulative cost of all that
leased space to the Library of Congress, do you know off hand?
General Scott. I do not have the cumulative total, Mr.
Chairman, but I will provide that for the record.
Senator Campbell. I would like to know that, if you could
get that to us.
General Scott. Yes, sir.
Senator Campbell. It would help----
General Scott. Will do.
Senator Campbell [continuing]. When we talk about that big
increase for facility construction, if we would know the
comparative costs of what it is costing us now. I think the
committee would be interested in that.
[The information follows:]
Lease space for storage collections is costing the Library
approximately $1.293 million in fiscal year 2004 and $1.390
million in fiscal year 2005.
COPYRIGHT DEPOSIT FACILITY
General Scott. Yes, sir. I will add that with the copyright
deposit facility, that the Copyright Office is currently
looking at three alternatives. The first is in Lenexa, Kansas,
where the National Archives has leased some storage space.
Senator Campbell. Kansas?
General Scott. Yes, sir. Lenexa, Kansas. There is a cave
out there that meets some of the requirements for preservation
controls, and that sort of thing.
Senator Campbell. What is in that cave now?
General Scott. Some National Archives material. We are
looking at it to come up with some cost comparisons. We are
also looking at the alternative computing facility, which is
new out at Manassas, Virginia. And the third site is a
limestone cave at Iron Mountain. We expect to have our report
completed within 2 or 3 weeks, and we will certainly make sure
that the Committee has access to all of that information.
Senator Campbell. Okay. I appreciate that.
Dr. Billington. There are two considerations, Mr. Chairman,
on this; one is effective preservation and the other is
accessibility. One of the great things about Fort Meade module
one, which is more than two-thirds filled now, is that every
single request to retrieve has been answered successfully. They
found it and brought it to the main reading rooms, where the
stuff can be used fairly rapidly.
So, you may get excellent preservation at one of these
distant locations but you will not get the access. We have to
have continued access because you never can tell what is going
to be important, German archaeological records----
PRESERVATION OF THE COLLECTIONS
Senator Campbell. Let me ask you, in some of this leased
space that is not climate controlled, have you been able to
monitor deterioration of any of the things that you have stored
there or have you lost anything, because of it being stored in
places that are not controlled?
Dr. Billington. Well, we--yes. We do monitor our
preservation department physically restores or does
preservation treatment of some chemical or just physical sort
to somewhere between 300,000 and 500,000 physical items every
year. We have a very active program for deacidification but
also transposition into more safety-based films and so forth.
So, part of this whole process of moving into these things is
to assure that we can get the highest state-of-the-art
preservation protocols, which Congress has encouraged us to
make, and for various formats, actually brought into place.
I mean Culpeper--for instance, an archive of radio and
television materials was mandated by the Congress in 1976.
Culpeper will finally enable us to realize that. It will also
include film and recorded sound of all kinds. So, this
preservation is of capital importance; it is monitored very
heavily. We estimated that something like 75,000 or 77,000
printed volumes a year risk disintegration. So, we have turned
the pages into----
Senator Campbell. How many volumes?
Dr. Billington. So, these are problems that our
preservation department works on very intensively; and we are
making great progress thanks to the Congress' support. But
without these facilities, we cannot be sure that the progress
is uniform and that the immense 128 million item collections
are going to be safely preserved for posterity.
EMBASSY CONSTRUCTION--BUDGETARY IMPACT
Senator Campbell. I understand. Thank you. The last
question, the Library has six overseas field offices for
acquiring international publications, and you requested a
provision exempting the Library from a State Department
proposal to charge all U.S. Government agencies with an
overseas presence to pay a portion of the Department of State's
new building program.
Why do you believe the Library should be exempt from the
State Department's proposal and what would be the budgetary
impact if the State Department's proposal is enacted?
Dr. Billington. Well, the budgetary impact, I can give you
the exact computations on this, Mr. Chairman. But let me just
say that this would be really quite catastrophic. The way the
assessment is computed, in any case, is based on constructing
150 Embassies--95 percent of the Library's staff is located in
only six positions--none of which are a part of the proposed
new construction. While the Library does have three positions
in two locations where new Embassies are projected to be built,
we question the $7 million price tag for three positions.
So if you figure it up, this is an extremely cost-effective
way, not only for the Library of Congress but for the other
research universities that use these things. These offices are
almost all in trouble spots in the so-called developing world,
which are of extreme importance to the United States. We would
have to reduce, immediately, the budget for actually gathering
in these works.
I can give you some exact statistics. Let me see, the
proposal would nearly double the cost of our overseas offices
eventually to about $15 million from the $8.2 million they cost
today. As I say, it is based on the number of all employees
overseas, as opposed to the actual use of space and services.
Overseas offices are critical, as I say, to the gathering
of the information of this developing world. So, I think we
just have to block this inequitable charge from the State
Department and we would appreciate your help--these overseas
offices have never been more important. Islamabad, Delhi,
Djakarta, Nairobi, Cairo, these are areas that are extremely
important to the United States--there are very few secrets in
the world. So much can be discovered from more effectively
reading; and, to jeopardize the ability to put their maximum
effort on acquiring materials, rather than just paying this
inequitable surcharge, would make a huge difference.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
Senator Campbell. Thank you. I appreciate it. I have no
further questions, Dr. Billington. Thank you for appearing.
There may be some in writing from other members of the
committee. Senator Durbin, the ranking member, was tied up
today and could not get here. He may have some questions that
he will send to you in writing.
Thank you both for appearing.
General Scott. Thank you, sir.
Dr. Billington. Thank you.
Senator Campbell. General Scott, thank you for being here.
[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 Richard J. Durbin
retail sales
Question. Dr. Billington, as you know I have been a strong advocate
of retail sales within the Library of Congress. Could you please update
me on the status of the Library's retail activities initiatives?
Answer. The Congress appropriated $335,000 per year for 3 years to
the Library to support its retail initiatives, beginning in fiscal year
2004.
Both the Retail Sales Shop and the Photoduplication Service (PDS)
ended fiscal year 2003 in the black.
Our online sales revenues have totaled $105,000 in the year since
the last hearings. This represents an increase on the $73,000 we
reported this time last year.
We have introduced a new website that allows visitors for the first
time to purchase pre-selected images from the Library's collections.
We concentrated on major activities to implement the Business
Enterprises strategy developed and presented to Congress last year.
We focused on (1) improving and expanding existing e-commerce
operations; and (2) adding key infrastructure fixes to improve the
financial management and operations of the Sales Shop and PDS.
We took actions that included: reducing operating costs, installing
a new accounting application in PDS, and setting new pricing policies.
We have developed a ``Strategic Plan Fiscal Year 2004-2006'' and an
``Implementation Plan Fiscal Year 2004'' that provides a planning
framework, goals, and implementation actions.
We have established a team dedicated to the development of this
program in the areas of business, retail, finance, and marketing.
construction impact on security
Question. I understand that the retail store is changing locations
in the Jefferson Building due to new security initiatives. Will the new
location be more visible to visitors to the Library of Congress? What
impact, if any, has the construction related to the new security
initiatives in the Jefferson Building had on the retail store?
Answer. The retail store is scheduled to move from its current
location to one directly across from where it is now. The current move
date is targeted for between mid-January and the end of February 2005,
in order to minimize the impact of sales during the store's busy
holiday season, late October through December. Its new location will be
equally visible to visitors.
We do not expect the new security initiatives to have a negative
impact on the retail shop. In fact, in its new location, it will be
immediately accessible to visitors as they exit the Jefferson Building,
which should be an advantage for sales purposes.
police force
Question. Dr. Billington, I notice you are requesting $3.825
million and 45 FTEs for the Library of Congress' Police force. Given
that there are relatively concrete plans in place to merge the
Library's Police force with the Capitol Police, are you coordinating
your plans with the Capitol Police Board to ensure a proper skills mix
in the merged police force?
Answer. The Library did not coordinate its fiscal year 2005
staffing request with the Capitol Police Board, but the request is
consistent with the Library's multi-year fiscal year 2004 request that
was reviewed by the United States Capitol Police (USCP). The Library's
fiscal year 2005 staffing request, which reflects year two of a three-
year staffing request of 100 Library Police Officers, is consistent
with the USCP minimum staffing standards.
human capital
Question. Dr. Billington, in your statement you indicate that the
Library will be seeking broad-based human capital tools and
flexibilities to enhance recruitment and retention activities. What new
authorities will the Library be requesting? Are you working with the
authorizing committees?
Answer. The Library seeks to exercise authorities that Congress has
granted throughout the federal government, and to do so without seeking
executive branch approval. For example, consistent with that already
granted to both the executive and judicial branches, we will request
authority to offer early outs and buyouts to Library employees. We will
also be seeking authorities that will ease significant competitive
disadvantages the Library would otherwise experience in recruitment and
retention of senior managers, and skilled professionals, who would be
better compensated or experience better leave, bonuses or training
opportunities in the executive branch.
As Dr. Billington testified in his appearance before this
subcommittee, as well as the Joint Committee on the Library, we will be
sending our legislative request to the Library's House and Senate
authorizing committees.
open world leadership program
Question. I understand that the United States recently hosted the
first Open World Leadership delegation from Lithuania. How was the
expansion received in Lithuania? When will other delegations from
Lithuania be arriving?
Answer. The expansion of the Open World Program to Lithuania was
received with great enthusiasm in Lithuania. U.S. Ambassador to
Lithuania Stephen Mull and his colleagues at the U.S. Embassy were
extremely supportive of the idea from the start, and planning this
pilot would not have been possible without their assistance. A number
of Lithuanian and American organizations nominated strong candidates
under the theme ``civil society.'' The first delegation traveled to the
United States in February 2004 to examine topics such as business,
community development, media, NGO development, and youth initiatives.
Ambassador Mull spoke at their pre-departure orientation in Vilnius,
and upon arrival in Washington D.C. the delegation was greeted by
Ambassador Vygaudas Usackas Lithuanian Ambassador to the United States.
Initial feedback from this delegation is very positive, the trip gave
the Lithuanian participants the opportunity to build long-lasting
professional partnerships and friendships with their American
counterparts. The Open World Leadership Center plans to host its next
delegation of Lithuanian leaders in the fall of 2004.
Question. How is the Open World program working in Russia and other
former Soviet satellites? Do you believe it is workable in the rest of
the former eastern bloc and elsewhere?
Answer. The Open World Program has made a considerable contribution
to bettering United States-Russian relations as well as to the
development of civil society and democracy in Russia. Since the
program's inception in 1999, Open World has brought over 7,500 Russian
leaders to the United States, allowing them to experience first-hand
American style democracy and free enterprise. Now, these Russian
leaders comprise an active Open World alumni network, a network that is
working together for positive change in Russia.
In 2003, the Open World Program was expanded to Lithuania, Ukraine,
and Uzbekistan. In total, 148 participants were hosted in the United
States from the three countries under the theme ``civil society.''
While each program was adapted to meet the specific needs of the
country, these pilot exchanges prove that the Open World Program model
is applicable and useful to countries around the world. Open World
participants returned to their home countries with new contacts and
fresh ideas and inspiration. In Uzbekistan, for example, Open World
alumni are putting their Open World experience to work to better their
communities by writing articles in the local press, establishing Rotary
clubs, drafting proposals for developing child and maternity health
care services, and planning new programs for children with
disabilities.
The pilot exchanges demonstrate that leaders and activists from a
variety of countries can benefit greatly from meeting and sharing ideas
with their American counterparts. In addition, the Open World Program
has contributed significantly to furthering bilateral relations between
the United States and other countries.
crs science and technology capacities
Question. Mr. Mulhollan, what distinguishes the work done by the
Congressional Research Service in providing analysis of science and
technology issues for the Congress from those which were performed by
the OTA, and are now conducted by the General Accounting Office, the
Congressional Budget Office, the National Academy of Sciences, or other
sources?
Answer. Each of the entities that you mention performs different
activities serving different purposes. The sum total of the work being
conducted by all is complementary in that each organization brings a
different perspective or different scope of analysis to the same
problem.
The Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) conducted technology
assessments--a recognized and structured methodology that is very
distinct from legislative and public policy support. These assessments
addressed the multiple positive and negative impacts of technology on
society and offered policy options.
OTA studies were performed at the request of any congressional
committee Chairman. The Chairman may have requested work on behalf of a
Ranking Minority Member or on behalf of a majority of committee
Members. The OTA Board could also request assessments as could the OTA
Director. In practice, most assessments were requested by the Chairman
and the Ranking Minority Member of a Committee.
OTA assessments, which usually took over a year to complete, relied
heavily upon groups of external experts and involved extensive external
review, monitored by internal staff. The contracts issued to obtain
information or to write parts of the reports could cost well over
$100,000 each--with the total costs of each study reported to range
from $500,000 to nearly $1 million each.
OTA's enabling legislation permitted its reports to be made
available to the public and its work typically was not prepared on a
confidential basis.
The General Accounting Office's (GAO) current technology
assessments are being conducted on a pilot basis, pursuant to law and
report language originating in Legislative Branch appropriations.
To date, GAO has worked on three assessments--each of which has
taken about a year to complete and has cost in the hundreds of
thousands of dollars.
While GAO reports normally make recommendations, its assessment
reports seem to offer policy options, together with a discussion of
legislative implications.
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) provides budgetary analysis
on a wide range of issues related to science and technology, ranging
from health policy to high-technology industries.
The National Academy of Science (NAS) conducts studies which are
oriented to resolving technical issues or policy issues.
Most of the NAS science and technology studies are not mandated by
Congress--even those which are requested by Congress, via statutory or
report language, are contracted for by federal executive branch
agencies. Seven such studies were mandated in public laws and completed
for the 107th Congress.
The NAS studies usually cost several $100,000 and take between one
and two years to complete.
NAS retains control over the scope of these studies. The NAS
typically convenes panels of scientific and technical experts to write
reports, which undergo extensive Academy review prior to transmittal to
the agency requestor.
NAS reports typically contain recommendations and advice and are
not done on a confidential basis.
Extensive use is made of the expertise provided by the NAS and
their staff, via contracts. The topics of assessments are typically
suggested by a few interested Members of Congress.
The Congressional Research Service (CRS) undertakes analyses for
both committees and Member offices in scientific and technological
areas to: (1) assess the overall policy context on specific broad-scale
legislative issues; (2) assess tradeoffs and alternatives; (3) evaluate
proposals with heavy technical components; (4) help Congress to
understand technical and scientific background and developments; and
(5) provide program and institutional memory.
Because of the diverse and open-ended needs of Committees and
Members, the Service must work carefully to ensure that the appropriate
research capacity is available to the Congress when it needs it.
Some CRS analyses take several months to over a year to complete.
The agency's specialization, however, is on integrative policy analysis
that is legislatively oriented, client-focused, confidential, and
decision-oriented in nature.
Science and technology support includes personal, confidential
consultations, briefings, seminars, workshops, a variety of programs
for Members of Congress and their staff, technical analytical memos,
and background reports that assess oversight and legislative issues
relating to technical subjects.
For instance, CRS staff have written analytical reports on such
subjects as management and technical issues relating to the National
Ignition Facility; vaccine policy issues for the 108th Congress;
technical, trade, and policy issues for space launch vehicles; digital
television; and bioterrorism policy issues posed by ricin and
monkeypox, among many others.
Several projects involving science and technology in the aging area
are under way including Medicare assessment of molecular technologies
and interventions for coverage; biomedical issues in diagnosis and
treatment of Alzheimers disease; chronic illnesses among older people
and implications for health care programs; coverage of genetic testing
by private payers; shifting of risk and responsibilities in an aging
society; bioethical issues at the end of life; and factors driving
health care costs; among others.
CRS has also developed more formal, comprehensive, and systematic
assessments of technical and/or scientific issues
These assessments often address broad questions requiring
foresight, analysis, and synthesis.
Examples of these in-depth studies include: children's
environmental health; various global climate change studies; invasive
species issues; ecosystems management; health benefits of air pollution
control; electricity restructuring; external costs of oil used in
transportation; chemical and biological agents and pathogens; and
various studies on acid rain issues.
Such in-depth studies take several forms: some--including the ones
on children's environmental health, the health benefits of air
pollution control, and ecosystems management--have been implemented
through national symposia. Some in-depth studies have been undertaken
with internal resources, but because of their scope and the effort
required, others have been conducted under contract or through
foundation grants typically in the range of $20,000 to $100,000.
CRS continues to monitor its science and technology requests and
workload through close work with committee staff, discussions with
nationally recognized scientists, and analysis of scientific
developments. These actions help CRS anticipate issues as well as
signal future needs for resources and technical capabilities. For
example, concerns about terrorism in the 1990s led CRS to begin, before
September 11, 2001, an assessment of chemical and biological agents and
pathogens--a study that proved useful during the Homeland Security
debates of 2002 and 2003.
crs one-time financial adjustment
Question. Mr. Mulhollan, can you explain the $2.7 million ``one-
time financial adjustment'' in your budget request?
Answer. CRS is seeking a one-time budgetary adjustment of $2.7
million to sustain a total capacity of 729 FTEs. Without the additional
funding, we estimate that the current budget base will afford the
Service approximately 704 FTEs in fiscal year 2005 and beyond--25 FTEs
short of its current ceiling. Any reduction from the current level of
729 FTEs will result in a diminution in the Service's ability to meet
the needs of the Congress.
The basis for the one-time cost adjustment in fiscal year 2005 is
the confluence of two dynamic influences:
A change in the work force composition is the most significant
factor. During the past ten years, the total size of CRS has decreased
from 763 FTEs to 729 FTEs. Within these shrinking resources, CRS has
consistently produced ``more with less'' and demonstrated increased
productivity in responding to congressional needs. Economies that were
previously realized from technology and contractual assistance are no
longer possible. Assisting the Congress as it addresses increasingly
dynamic and complicated issues requires a cadre of highly skilled,
knowledgeable, and motivated workers--a work force that is increasingly
more expensive to sustain.
The second influence is related to the changing proportion of staff
in the two federal retirement systems. CRS is behind the CSRS-to-FERS
transition curve when compared to the rest of the federal sector. The
CRS workforce has historically remained with the Service for the
duration of their career--and often beyond their retirement-eligibility
dates. Recent experience confirms that: (1) the majority of CRS
retirements/separations are CSRS staff, and (2) the majority of CRS
hires are from the private sector/school--eligible only to participate
in the FERS. The employer-paid benefit rate for a FERS employee is
nearly double that of CSRS employee making the same base salary. For
fiscal year 2003, the benefits rate for a FERS employee was just over
27 percent of his/her salary versus 13.5 percent benefit rate for a
CSRS employee making the same basic pay.
Without the one-time funding adjustment, CRS services to the
Congress would be reduced by about 206 hours a year in each of over 150
major policy areas in which the Congress can be expected to be actively
engaged--between 5 and 6 weeks of lost capacity per major policy area.
Across the Service as a whole, this reduction would equate to a loss of
about 365 productive hours per week that would not be available to
provide critical research and analytical support for the Congress.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
Senator Campbell. This subcommittee is recessed.
[Whereupon, at 11:39 a.m., Thursday, March 11, the
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of
the Chair.]
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005
----------
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 31, 2004
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 2 p.m., in room SD-138, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Ben Nighthorse Campbell (chairman)
presiding.
Present: Senators Campbell, Stevens, and Durbin.
U.S. SENATE
Office of the Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper
STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM H. PICKLE, SERGEANT AT ARMS
ACCOMPANIED BY:
KEITH KENNEDY, DEPUTY SERGEANT AT ARMS
CHRIS DEY, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL
Senator Campbell. The subcommittee will come to order. We
meet this afternoon to take testimony from Senate Sergeant at
Arms Bill Pickle, and the Capitol Police Board, currently
chaired by House Sergeant at Arms Bill Livingood and the Chief
of Police Terrance Gainer.
We will first hear from the Sergeant at Arms. Mr. Pickle is
accompanied by the Deputy Sergeant at Arms, Keith Kennedy, and
his Chief Financial Officer, Chris Dey, along with a team of
others. We welcome you here today.
The Sergeant at Arms' budget request totals $187 million, a
3 percent increase over last year. This modest overall increase
reflects the final year of funding for several major projects
in fiscal year 2004, such as the recording studio project and
the digital technology migration project. Your salary budget,
as I understand it, would increase about 10 percent over fiscal
year 2004.
Following the Sergeant at Arms, we will take testimony on
the Capitol Police budget. The Capitol Police request totals
$291.6 million and total of 2,361 staff, which is a large
increase, 33 percent over the fiscal year 2004 appropriation.
That one will be a little tougher to deal with.
In addition to the Capitol Police's own appropriation, $40
million is included in the Architect's budget for the Capitol
Police buildings and grounds, including a new firing range and
an off-site delivery facility.
We will need to make some tough choices this year, as all
of us know, but I look forward to hearing your testimony. I
might tell you that I did read your testimony so you do not
need to read it again to me. I can read most of the words, and
if you will abbreviate that would be fine with me. I'd like to
turn it to a ranking member, Senator Durbin.
SENATOR DURBIN'S STATEMENT
Senator Durbin. Thank you very much, Senator Campbell. I
ask that my entire statement be made part of the record.
Senator Campbell. We will put it in the record.
Senator Durbin. And I'd like to commend Mr. Pickle; he did
an excellent job with a very, very difficult assignment on the
computer theft which we experienced in the Senate Judiciary
Committee. I thought you demonstrated professionalism, non-
partisanship, just what we expect from you.
Mr. Pickle. Thank you.
Senator Durbin. I commend you for that and all of those who
worked with you. It was an exceptional effort with a very, very
difficult assignment. I'll be asking a few questions about that
when I get the opportunity.
PREPARED STATEMENT
Chief Gainer, good to see you again, along with the Capitol
Police. And thank you and all of the men and women who serve us
so well, put their lives on the line every day for us here at
the Capitol.
Chief Gainer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[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 thank our witnesses, Mr. Pickle,
Mr. Livingood, and Chief Gainer for joining us today to review
your fiscal year 2005 budget requests.
Mr. Pickle, last November when I discovered that some
documents stored on my Judiciary Committee staff's computers
were taken from them and published in the Wall Street Journal,
I asked you to begin a Sergeant at Arms investigation into the
potential security breach. You did so almost immediately. Your
staff--including Capitol Police--worked around the clock to
secure the committee's computer servers to preserve the
evidence and interviewed dozens of staff.
I want to commend you for the professional and expeditious
way that you have handled the investigation, and your
willingness, as demonstrated in the report, to follow the facts
wherever they led you.
However, during your investigation, you came to realize
that all of the Senate committees' systems were set up in
essentially the same way, with similar vulnerabilities in
place. I hope that very aggressive steps are being taken to
assure that this does not happen again.
On another note Mr. Pickle, I had the opportunity to meet
with Greg Hanson of your staff last week to discuss the
technology available to us here in the Senate. It was very
informative and I appreciated his updating me on this issue. As
you know, I'm concerned that we are behind the House when it
comes to technology. With the increased use of the internet,
our constituents are able to get in touch with us much more
quickly and easily. In my office, we receive close to a million
emails a year. We need to be able to come up with a system that
allows us to respond to this volume of email in a timely
matter.
In this regard, I noticed in your fiscal year 2005 request
that you are asking for $10.3 million for three-year funding
for purchase of computer equipment. I'd like to hear a little
more about that.
I hope you will address the current status of the perimeter
security upgrades. I'm interested to know if this project is on
schedule and on budget.
I'd also like to hear about the status of the proposed Mail
Processing Facility/Warehouse and whether a site has been
selected to house this facility.
I hope you will talk a little bit about the security
upgrades for our state offices and when we can expect to see
these upgrades occur.
Overall your request of $186.6 million, or 3.1 percent,
seems quite reasonable. We all know how difficult this year is
going to be in terms of funding.
I read in your testimony that there are plans in place to
distribute emergency supply kits to all Senate offices. I hope
you will talk a little about the contents of these kits and
when our offices will be receiving them.
Chief Gainer, welcome. It is good to see you again. I see
that your fiscal year 2005 budget request is $291.6 million, an
increase of 33 percent. I'm glad that you have provided us with
a detailed prioritization of your request. I know that this
will come in handy a little later on when we start to make some
decisions with regard to funding.
There have been several organizational changes made at the
Capitol Police since our last hearing. I hope you will describe
for the subcommittee the changes you have made, why you have
made them and how they relate to particular goals or objectives
in your strategic plan.
I noted in your statement that in January your department
started a Diversity Training Program. I hope you will tell us
more about this training and when you expect it to be complete.
I have noticed on many occasions that the lines to get into
the Dirksen and Hart Buildings are quite lengthy. It seems
there should be a better way to get both staff and visitors
through security and into the buildings without them having to
wait in such long lines.
I hope you will update us on the progress of procuring an
off-site delivery facility. I understand that you might co-
locate this facility with the Sergeant-at-Arms' Mail Processing
Facility.
I understand that the Capitol Police and FLETC are working
together on a solution that would allow the Capitol Police to
have adequate use of the firing range in Cheltenham, Maryland,
thus eliminating the need to procure one of your own. I hope
you will elaborate on that for the subcommittee.
I am interested in your thoughts on the idea of a security
fence around the Capitol and office buildings.
Thank you Mr. Chairman.
Senator Campbell. Mr. Pickle, why don't you go ahead.
SUMMARY STATEMENT OF WILLIAM H. PICKLE
Mr. Pickle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for
those kind words, Senator. We appreciate that.
Mr. Chairman, actually, some of your remarks stole my
thunder here. I had some informal remarks to make but I'm going
to cut right through most of them. I'd like to submit a formal
statement for the record.
Senator Campbell. It will be included in the record.
Mr. Pickle. And what I would like to affirm is we are
asking for about a 3.1 percent increase in our budget. It is
modest but it is important that we get this funding to complete
some of the many programs and security enhancements that we
have begun with the approval and the support of this committee
over the previous years. As you mentioned, some of them are
very important to us. The security upgrades for Members'
offices, the alternate computing facility, the computer network
security and in particular the secure mail and package
processing protocols in our warehouse are very important to us
this year for all the obvious reasons.
Last year, when I testified before this committee, I made
the statement that I was very honored and pleased to have been
elected as the 37th Senate Sergeant at Arms. I also discussed
with the committee that my goals, and indeed the entire
Sergeant at Arms' Office, our goals are to provide the very
best customer service we could here to the Senate, as well as
the very best security and emergency preparedness. And what we
hoped to do last year was to meld and use or leverage
technology to do even a better job and be as efficient and as
effective as we possibly could. Well, this year our goals
remain the same; we've come a long way but we have a lot more
to do. Security continues to be paramount, as it has since the
anthrax scare of 2001.
We have had a very challenging year, as Senator Durbin
said; we had something occur that is rather unprecedented for
the Sergeant at Arms Office to participate in and that was the
matter of improper access to the Judiciary Committee computers.
It was unprecedented in the sense that we are not staffed to
conduct such an investigation. While the Sergeant at Arms is
the chief law enforcement officer of the Senate, he really does
not have the operational personnel or resources to do this. But
thankfully we had the Capitol Police; we also went to the
United States Secret Service and with the support of this
committee, which was involved with us when we talked about the
funding that would be needed to do the work, we completed the
investigation. And I too am very proud of our staff. I think
what it shows is that we are a very diverse organization, we
have some very talented people, and I'm just so proud of the
work that they did in this area.
The other challenge we had this year was the ricin attack
on February 3, 2004. Now, this was the second attack that's
occurred here in the past 3 years. The anthrax scare of 2001
shut down a Senate building for several months. Fortunately,
this time, because of the response of the Capitol Police and
the Sergeant at Arms Office of Emergency Preparedness, along
with our colleagues and the other entities here, we were able
to get the Senate office buildings back up and running within 5
days. Now, as much as I'd like to take some credit for that, I
think credit really belongs to my predecessor, Al Lenhardt, the
former Sergeant at Arms. Al was confronted shortly after he
arrived here with the anthrax attack and because of his efforts
we have in place a very sound architecture and many sound
security protocols that allowed us to be very successful in
dealing with this ricin attack. I think the fact that it was
only 5 days speaks well for the preparations of this body. It
also speaks well for this committee which has supported us as
well as the Rules Committee which was there to help out.
I know I'm dwelling only on security and technology, but
finally I want to close by making just a comment. We have over
800 people here in the Sergeant at Arms Office, and when you
look at the Sergeant at Arms Office, my analogy is the Senate
is like a small city or mid-size corporation. We have about
8,000 people who work here on the Senate side, and on any given
day we have many thousands more who are tourists, guests,
official visitors, so we have all the components of a city
here. I think we have several dozen different little businesses
within our office. The people who do the work and who make this
place run, day in and day out, and who are invisible to all of
us are the ones who really need to be thanked for their hard
efforts this year. And I'm talking about people such as our
facilities maintenance people who keep the Capitol clean, and
it's always spotless in the morning when you come in; our
furniture makers who make sure all the furniture and woodwork
we have is just topnotch, and our communications people, who
comprise most of our staff. These people do the job day in and
day out, and I'm just so proud of them.
PREPARED STATEMENT
With that, Mr. Chairman, I'm going to dispense with
anything else. And I'll just be happy to take questions. Thank
you.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of William H. Pickle
introduction
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, thank you for inviting
me to testify before the Committee on Appropriations. I am pleased to
come before you today to report on the progress the Office of the
Sergeant at Arms (SAA) has made over the past year and our plans to
enhance the capabilities of the Senate in the coming year.
The SAA respectfully requests for fiscal year 2005 a total budget
of $186,701,000, which is an increase of $5,669,000 or 3.1 percent over
the fiscal year 2004 budget. This increase will enable the office to
maintain the significant improvements and level of service we provided
the Senate community over the past year.
This fiscal year 2005 budget request will fund the completion and
support of several initiatives that are already in progress, including
security upgrades for Members' state offices, the Alternate Computing
Facility (ACF), enhanced communication services, secure mail and
package processing protocols, and computer network security.
Last year I testified before this Committee and identified two
priorities: (1) ensuring the United States Senate is as secure as
possible and prepared for any emergency; and (2) accomplishing this
goal through outstanding service and support, including the enhanced
use of technology. The work of this office over the past year has been
guided by these priorities.
In addition to the projects the SAA had planned to undertake and
invest in this past year, we faced unique challenges requiring that
resources be used to meet immediate, unanticipated needs. The ricin
incident and the Judiciary Committee's request to conduct an internal
investigation are two examples of such challenges. This testimony will
detail later the work of the SAA staff in responding to the ricin
incident.
The Committee on the Judiciary's request for the Sergeant at Arms
to conduct an internal investigation into whether there was
unauthorized access to the Committee's computer system was
unprecedented. We were able to respond quickly to this request and to
assemble an investigative team that included trained investigators
detailed from the U.S. Secret Service and outside forensic experts. The
sensitive nature of this matter required almost full-time involvement
of several of our senior managers. The investigation and forensic
analysis took almost four months and required a significant amount of
personnel and financial resources.
In our response to the ricin incident and the investigation for the
Judiciary Committee, we met the needs of the Senate and accomplished
the tasks set before us. In the past year we have also moved forward in
a number of crucial areas.
An outstanding senior management team led the efforts of the SAA's
dedicated staff over the past year. This team consists of Deputy
Sergeant at Arms J. Keith Kennedy, Assistant Sergeant at Arms for
Security and Emergency Preparedness Chuck Kaylor, Assistant Sergeant at
Arms for Police Operations Al Concordia, Assistant Sergeant at Arms for
Operations and Administrative Assistant Rick Edwards, General Counsel
Lynne Halbrooks, and Assistant Sergeant at Arms and Chief Information
Officer J. Greg Hanson. This team has worked to develop and implement a
comprehensive approach to Senate projects. The many accomplishments set
forth in this testimony would not have been possible without their
leadership and commitment.
This testimony highlights some of our achievements over the past
year, and demonstrates how we plan to build on our accomplishments and
to protect the Senate's interests. Specifically, this testimony
identifies (1) the security measures we have implemented and are
working toward; (2) initiatives designed to keep the Senate at the
leading edge of technology; and, (3) highlights of the critical
operational support we offer the Senate.
a comprehensive approach to security and preparedness
I am pleased to report that in the areas of security and emergency
preparedness we expanded on the significant accomplishments of my
predecessors, and particularly on the strong foundation that Sergeant
at Arms Alfonso E. Lenhardt implemented to protect the Capitol and
Senate Office Buildings after the anthrax attack in 2001.
The Senate now has in place an overall security strategy that
establishes a layered defense based upon our understanding of threats
to the Capitol and its vulnerabilities. Over the past year, this
strategy led to updated security plans, created prevention and
protection programs, and created life-safety, emergency preparedness,
and information security programs. The strategy also led to training to
educate staff and exercises to rehearse and evaluate our plans.
The SAA has relied on the strong support of the Secretary of the
Senate, this Committee, the Committee on Rules and Administration, and
other Committees and Members to advance the Senate's security and
emergency preparedness. A comprehensive approach to these critical
subjects has required the partnership and cooperation of Senate
offices, the U.S. Capitol Police, the Attending Physician, other
legislative branch offices, as well as federal and state agencies.
Together, we have made significant progress on our security and
emergency preparedness.
Despite the substantial advances in security and emergency
preparedness since September 2001, and particularly this past year, we
cannot become complacent. The Capitol and Congress remain targets to
those wishing to cause our country harm, and the means to cause that
harm are available, varied, and growing in sophistication. We need to
be vigilant, and we need to continue our comprehensive, forward-looking
security and emergency preparedness programs.
This testimony outlines the SAA's security, emergency preparedness,
and continuity of operations and government efforts. In addition to the
initiatives set forth below, there are other steps being taken to
secure Congress and the Senate community that are not appropriate to
address in an open forum.
Vulnerabilities and Threat Assessments
Understanding the threats the Senate faces is essential to
establishing appropriate and cost-effective security programs. We work
with the U.S. Capitol Police on an aggressive approach to security that
recommends and supports ongoing security projects. We are participating
in several studies that address vulnerabilities around the Capitol
relating to land-based and airborne threats, as well as chemical,
biological, and radiological threats. The SAA also works with the U.S.
Capitol Police to provide analysis of emerging global threats, current
intelligence information, analysis of vulnerabilities, and available
countermeasures. As a result of this work, policies are being developed
in conjunction with the U.S. Capitol Police that provide high levels of
protection on Capitol Hill for Members, staff, and visitors. These
coordinated efforts with respect to vulnerability and threat assessment
include:
Vulnerability Assessments.--Since 1998, the U.S. Capitol Police
Board has conducted seven formal vulnerability assessments of the
Capitol complex. These assessments serve as the basis for many of our
protective measures. The assessments complement our work with the
National Capital Region intelligence sharing initiatives for a complete
view of the threats to the Capitol.
Command Center.--Over the past year, the U.S. Capitol Police have
established a state-of-the-art command center and campus-wide security
network that significantly improve their situational awareness. This
provides information in a number of areas, which enables the police to
better understand an event and better manage the necessary response.
SAA staff work closely with the Capitol Police at the Command Center
during emergencies.
Threat Intelligence Sharing.--The U.S. Capitol Police Board has
approved the U.S. Capitol Police participation in the Targeted Violence
Information Sharing System (TAVISS), a pilot program for sharing threat
intelligence information. Created by the U.S. Secret Service to
facilitate the sharing of threat information with twenty-seven
agencies, this program will provide timely information about threats
against Members of Congress and U.S. Government officials. Research has
shown that people who attack public officials often switch targets, so
subjects who come to the attention of one agency may be known to other
agencies.
To provide more intelligence information, the U.S. Capitol Police
have officers assigned to critical National Capital Region intelligence
collection and analysis and command centers. The U.S. Capitol Police
also have a small but highly professional intelligence staff that
collaborate with their counterparts, and participate in the national
forums that provide the situational awareness we need.
Air Security.--The U.S. Capitol Police are integrated fully in
interagency air security coordination planning for the National Capital
Region and the National Capital Region Coordination Center. This
planning integrates multi-agency assets into a protective air security
system that encompasses the Capitol. The National Capital Region Air
Security Plan focuses on countering terrorist threats from the air. The
coordination uses multi-agency capabilities that involve intelligence,
law enforcement, and Department of Defense assets. Early warning and
situational awareness has:
--Enhanced detection of potential air threats.
--Improved dissemination of inter-agency intelligence information.
--Streamlined coordination of multi-agency assets to achieve command
and control.
--Differentiated navigational errors and civil violations from
hostile intent.
The threat environment is always changing, but we have the people and
organizations in place that understand the needs of the Senate and can
provide the information necessary to ensure the continued security of
Members, staff, and visitors.
Protecting the Senate's Physical Assets
The first priority of the SAA's security strategy is to deter or
prevent an incident. Our expanding protective measures program includes
physical security measures, electronic systems, and law enforcement
activities. It continues to improve the Senate's ability to prevent
incidents. Many of the details of this program are confidential and
sensitive. However, several of the significant protective measures that
have been implemented are set forth below.
Enhanced Perimeter Security Plan.--The first phase of the perimeter
security plan, proposed in 1998, was completed in 2002. The Enhanced
Perimeter Security Plan, developed after September 2001, is now being
implemented. The Enhanced Perimeter Security Plan features pop-up
barriers and bollards, hardened police kiosks, improved security at
vehicle access checkpoints, increased U.S. Capitol Police roving
patrols, and other enhancements. It also includes improved screening
procedures for visitors entering the Senate Office Buildings and the
Capitol. The Capitol Police Board is working to establish more
comprehensive and visible identification protocols to manage visitors
better, particularly in the Capitol.
Capitol Visitor Center.--The Capitol Visitor Center remains an
important focus of our security program. In 2000, almost three million
people visited the Capitol and during peak season over 18,000 people
visited the Capitol each day. In addition, delivery vehicles move tons
of equipment, food, and other material into and out of the Capitol
every day. These deliveries are essential to Congressional operations,
but they also create risks to the Capitol complex. The Capitol Visitor
Center will improve our ability to screen everything and everyone
coming into the Capitol, and will enhance the public's access and
experience while visiting the Capitol.
The Visitor Center will include a remote delivery-vehicle screening
facility for all deliveries to the Capitol. The facility will make it
easier to deliver goods to the Capitol and safer to accept those goods.
The design incorporates blast-resistant features and systems that will
minimize the risk of airborne hazards within the Capitol Visitor Center
and the Capitol.
Once the Visitor Center is completed, the public will have just as
much access to the Capitol, only through fewer access points. There
will be enhanced screening and control of everyone and everything that
enters the building. Screening will take place in the Visitor Center
instead of near the Capitol doors, and, because of the design of the
access points, the screening will make it easier to isolate and remove
individuals who pose a security threat.
Parking and Traffic Management.--Construction of the Capitol
Visitor Center, the implementation of the Perimeter Security Plan, and
other construction activities have created parking and traffic
management challenges.
To address the parking challenges, we made use of our existing
resources and created 359 parking spaces proximate to the Capitol and
Senate Office Buildings. This saved lease expenses of $1 million
annually, or approximately $2 million to date. The parking is secure,
near the Capitol, and convenient for Senators and staff.
Because the traffic that flows past the Senate Office Buildings and
the Capitol directly affects the security of the Senate, the SAA staff
worked with the Architect of the Capitol, the U.S. Capitol Police, and
the District of Columbia's Department of Transportation to ensure the
safety of Members, staff and visitors to the Senate and simultaneously
minimize the traffic impact of construction projects. Much of the
construction is limited to nights, weekends, and off-peak hours to
reduce the impact on traffic. The direction of one-way traffic is
shifted to accommodate commuting in the morning and evenings. U.S.
Capitol Police officers are stationed at major intersections to
maintain traffic control and pedestrian safety.
State Office Security.--While many of the recent security efforts
focus on Capitol Hill, Members' state offices continue to be a focus
for the SAA. During the past year and a half, SAA staff have conducted
comprehensive, on-site security assessments of the 430 state offices.
Besides completing assessments of existing offices, a system has been
implemented to assess each newly-established office.
The assessments provide the SAA an understanding of each state
office's security needs and enable us to make recommendations, help the
state office prioritize its needs and, ultimately, improve security.
Each Member's Washington, D.C., office has the results of their state
office assessments and the SAA's recommendations. We are working with
each office to determine how to proceed to implement appropriate
physical security upgrades.
This state office security project involves physical modifications
to offices, installation of physical security systems in offices, and
staff training. It is ongoing and multi-year, and the initial focus has
been on state offices in commercial spaces. The Federal Protective
Service and the Federal Marshals have been consulted regarding Members'
offices in federal and court buildings.
Emergency Preparedness
To enhance the Senate's emergency preparedness, the SAA is
addressing all aspects of preparing for, learning about, and responding
to emergencies. Over the past year, the SAA has established
notification systems, conducted training, and provided emergency
response equipment and resources. SAA staff has also worked closely
with the Architect of the Capitol and the U.S. Capitol Police to test
and, where necessary, upgrade the alarms, emergency equipment, and
notification systems in every Senate Office Building.
The Senate continues to improve evacuation and assembly area
accountability procedures by regularly conducting evacuation drills.
The SAA has also worked with Senate offices to update the procedures
for evacuating mobility-impaired staff and visitors. This outreach to
our special needs community will continue next year.
To maintain the focus on life-safety and emergency procedures, the
SAA meets weekly with the U.S. Capitol Police, the Superintendent of
the Senate, and the Capitol Fire Marshal to review life-safety programs
and issues. This has resulted in better emergency equipment access to
the Capitol Plaza and closer involvement by the Washington, D.C., Fire
Department during evacuation drills. The SAA also is engaged with the
National Capital Region's emergency management experts through a number
of high-level interagency and intergovernmental committees and work
groups that expand the National Capital Region's preparedness.
Highlights of the SAA's efforts to better prepare the Senate
community for an emergency include:
Alert and Notification Systems.--In the past two years, the Senate
provided BlackBerry devices and updated electronic pagers to Senators
and key staff. The number of BlackBerry devices in use at the Senate
continues to expand. Every office has a Senate ``Group Alert''
telephone system and approximately 1,000 telephones throughout the
Senate are connected to the System.
Last year, wireless annunciators were added as a component of the
emergency notification system. These wireless devices have been placed
in every office. The U.S. Capitol Police use the annunciators to
provide audible alerts of an incident, instructions on appropriate
action, and additional information as an event unfolds. Annunciators
supplement the Group Alert telephone system, the building fire alarms,
the public address system, and other emergency notification devices.
The SAA is in the process of testing a newly installed, more
capable automatic voice and text notification system that supplements
the existing U.S. Capitol Police Dialogic system. Once this system is
fully operational, it will be able to automatically call and send text
alerts to predesignated individuals more quickly than in the past.
Training.--Over the past year, the SAA created and delivered
training courses that cover a wide range of emergency preparedness
issues. There have been 172 training sessions providing life-safety
information to over 5,700 individuals. This training included: in-
office sessions tailored to the emergency preparedness needs of each
office, new staff and intern orientations that review emergency systems
and procedures for all new staff, monthly emergency preparedness
updates, and off-site training on the use of fire extinguishers.
Special topic seminars were conducted by SAA staff on evacuating
Washington, D.C., evacuating people with disabilities, and sheltering
in place. Training was also conducted for U.S. Capitol Police officers
and Senate office personnel regarding evacuation procedures for
mobility-impaired staff members. And, in coordination with the U.S.
Capitol Police, the SAA helped train 6,770 individuals about the proper
use of escape hoods. This training gives every participant the chance
to don a training hood.
Emergency Equipment.--Almost 19,000 escape hoods, which provide
protection against airborne hazards, are deployed in Senate offices and
at cache sites throughout the Capitol and in Senate Office Buildings.
Last year, hoods were distributed to every office. This year, escape
hood cache locations were established in restaurants, hallways, near
elevators, in the Capitol, and other public areas. These cache
locations are quickly accessible to staff and visitors. This past year
the SAA conducted the first full inventory of all the escape hoods
issued to offices. Over the next year, options will be evaluated for
replacing the escape hoods in anticipation of replacing the current
hoods at the end of their shelf life in fiscal year 2006.
Last fall, in consultation with Senate offices, the SAA developed
an emergency supplies kit that will be useful to offices in any
emergency. The SAA plans to issue the kits and provide training to the
Office Emergency Coordinators this spring.
Continuity of Operations and Government
This past year the SAA and the Secretary of the Senate developed
and published the Senate Continuity of Operations and Continuity of
Government Planning Guide that provides strategic guidance and a
framework for developing comprehensive, integrated Senate Continuity of
Operations and Continuity of Government plans. The SAA and Secretary of
the Senate worked closely with all affected legislative branch agencies
to ensure the plans, which are part of each office's emergency plan,
are supportable and coordinated. Other initiatives the SAA has been,
and will continue to be, involved in that are designed to meet the need
for strong continuity of operations and continuity of government
planning include:
Senate Office Planning.--The SAA participates in the review and
update of the Senate's Continuity of Operations plans each Congress.
Most Member and Committee offices now have their own Continuity of
Operations plans in place. They have established alternate operating
sites, have laptops and other equipment for these sites, and have
backed up their essential data and other records so the sites are ready
to use. Many offices activated their plans during the ricin incident
and are now improving those plans. The SAA will continue to help
offices prepare, review, and update their internal plans and
procedures.
The SAA's Continuity of Operations planning support was extended to
state offices this past year through a Web-based planning software
application. The application helps Members' state offices create their
plans, and enables Members' Administrative Managers to oversee those
plans to ensure they fit within the office's overall office Continuity
of Operations plan.
Briefing Centers and Alternate Chamber.--The Senate has established
Briefing Centers and Alternate Chamber locations for use in emergency
circumstances. Over the past year, the SAA continued to enhance its
ability to support these locations, as well as Member office and
Committee operations. During this time, two Briefing Centers were
completed. The Centers provide temporary, protected locations where the
Senate can account for membership; where Leadership, Senate Officers,
and the U.S. Capitol Police can communicate with Senators; and where
communications capabilities are available to Senators. A third Briefing
Center is nearing completion.
Two years ago, a primary Alternate Chamber was established on
Capitol Hill. Final modifications to that facility were made this past
year and it is fully operational. A secondary Alternate Chamber
location has also been selected off Capitol Hill. This facility is
available now and final modifications are being made. Work to establish
a second Alternate Chamber site off Capitol Hill will continue this
upcoming year.
Exercise of Emergency Plans.--This past year was the second full
year of an active program that ensures that we regularly rehearse and
evaluate all aspects of our emergency plans. The SAA's exercise program
focuses on evaluating new facilities and capabilities as they become
available. In the first year, the ability to activate, relocate to, and
operate out of our primary Briefing Center and the Capitol Hill
Alternate Chamber location was tested.
This past year, exercises were conducted for using a second
Briefing Center location and the off-site Alternate Chamber. These
exercises included tabletop reviews of all aspects of the plans and
procedures, and full exercises of the facilities. They included the
U.S. Capitol Police Command Center and the Sergeant at Arms and
Secretary of the Senate's Emergency Operation Center. The exercises
also tested the transportation to each facility, support of each
facility, and communications between the facility and the Command and
Operation Centers. The program exercises life-safety responses as well
as emergency operations. A similar protective measures exercise of the
Senate Chamber was also conducted recently.
This upcoming year, the operations of the Emergency Operations
Center will be exercised and a tabletop exercise of the Alternate
Computing Facility will be conducted. In addition, quarterly evacuation
drills and monthly tests of the emergency communications systems will
continue.
The Ricin Incident
The discovery of ricin in the Dirksen Senate Office Building on
February 2, 2004, brought to test the emergency planning work done by
the Senate in the last two years. The response was a collaborative
effort. SAA staff worked with the U.S. Capitol Police, the Committee on
Rules and Administration, the Office of the Secretary, the Office of
the Attending Physician, and numerous other agencies and organizations,
to support Senate operations even though all three Senate Office
Buildings were closed.
The closure of the Senate Office Buildings required the activation
of the SAA Continuity of Operations plan to support Senate, Member, and
Committee operations. In cooperation with the Secretary of the Senate
and Committee for Rules and Administration, the SAA established limited
alternate space and services for Member and Committee operations. By
the morning of February 4, 2004, space and operating capabilities were
available for all Member and Committee offices that needed it. Offices
were able to borrow equipment they needed from the SAA. Information
hotlines and backup systems worked well under the circumstances.
Assistance was also provided to Member offices to transfer their
telephones to other offices to ensure constituents' calls were
answered.
The support of the Committee on Appropriations was instrumental in
implementing the systems and processes that helped the Senate respond
successfully to this ricin event. Because redundant technology was
available, the Senate offices were able to continue to conduct business
even when they were unable to access their offices.
The feedback we received during and after the response to the
incident will help improve our response to future incidents. Of primary
concern is the need to improve notification processes and procedures.
This incident demonstrated that a solid technical infrastructure is in
place to ensure timely notifications, but the processes and procedures
need improvement. We will continue to work with the U.S. Capitol Police
and the Senate community to ensure effective notification in the event
of an emergency.
Following the ricin incident, it was necessary to implement new
mail processing procedures. Over two years ago, the Legislative Branch
Mail Task Force (consisting of representatives from the scientific and
medical communities, the United States Postal Service, security
experts, and agencies within the legislative branch) established a mail
processing system to treat and test all mail coming into the Congress.
The discovery of ricin in the Majority Leader's office in February
mandated the need for additional protective measures in our mail
processing. Science advisors and the Legislative Branch Mail Task Force
recommended that envelopes and packages be opened, examined, and tested
for contaminants at an off-site location. With the approval of the
Senate Leadership, these new mail processing protocols were quickly
implemented.
Overall, the response to the ricin incident is encouraging. The
Senate Office Buildings were reopened within 5 days. The response truly
was a team effort and demonstrated the importance of preparing for
emergencies to ensure continuity of operations.
information technology
This past year has seen significant advances in the area of
information technology in the Senate. The addition of a Chief
Information Officer to the SAA management team has facilitated the
development and delivery of a technology vision, a strategy, and
solutions to support the Senate and enhance its security.
The Senate's information technology infrastructure is used to
complement other security efforts. Information technology is crucial to
security in the Senate and to the Senate's ability to accomplish its
day-to-day activities. With a strong emphasis on providing advanced
technology capabilities and outstanding customer support to the Senate,
the SAA is adopting a comprehensive approach to delivering technology
solutions and services. This approach focuses on evaluating and
implementing effective technology to help the Senate conduct its
business.
The SAA is developing an information technology strategy that will
be implemented in the coming year. The strategy will address the
Senate's need for mobility, flexibility, and redundancy in information
and telecommunications systems and will specifically address the
requirements that:
--Members and staffs need to be informed and have the ability to
track current events in near real-time.
--Members and staffs need to be secure to carry out their duties
under any circumstances.
--Members and staffs need to be able to communicate among themselves
and with constituents and the public.
--Members and staffs need to be able to operate and maintain
Washington, D.C., and state offices.
--Members and staffs must be able to collect, analyze, manipulate,
and present information.
The strategy will include a plan and a technology roadmap for the
next two years. The plan and roadmap will provide guidance to the
Senate on its technology decisions, and a framework for making those
decisions. In conjunction with this strategy, significant work will
continue this coming year on information technology initiatives
relating to security, emerging technology, and customer service.
Several of these critical initiatives are set forth below.
Security Initiatives
The Alternate Computing Facility (ACF).--This year, the Alternate
Computing Facility was added as a major addition to the Senate's
operational capability. Much of the alternate computing facility
infrastructure is complete, including facility fit-out, network
infrastructure, network operating center, and central computing room
facilities. The facility will soon be ready to house backup servers for
interested Members and Committees. A fiber optic ring is now complete
in both directions providing fully redundant connectivity between the
ACF and Capitol Hill. A state-of-the-art storage area network at the
ACF receives up to 15 terabytes of data daily from the Capitol Hill
central computing facilities. The mainframe and server hardware,
telephone equipment, enterprise fax server equipment, and all
associated networks are in place and are being tested. Currently,
installation of a fully redundant set of primary domain controllers to
support the Senate e-mail system is almost complete. The next step is
to complete installation and testing of all the software and
applications running on the hardware infrastructure, upgrade the power
infrastructure, and complete plans to purchase the facility.
Contingency Communications.--The SAA's contingency communications
program involves a number of major multi-year projects. Last year the
Senate's mobile recording studio became operational. Other mobile
communications assets will be delivered over the next few months. We
are working to complete communication systems that integrate
communications across our emergency facilities. Combined, these
projects provide a significant increase in the Senate's ability to
continue to operate under any circumstance.
Telecommunications Improvement and In-building Wireless
Infrastructure.--To enhance security, emergency preparedness, and
customer service, a comprehensive telecommunications improvement plan
is being implemented. Wireless devices, including cellular telephones
and personal digital assistants (such as BlackBerry devices), have
become critical telecommunication infrastructure components supporting
daily Senate operations and emergency notification activities. The in-
building wireless initiative will provide a Senate-owned wireless
infrastructure integrating services from all cellular telephone
carriers, BlackBerry devices, and wireless local area networks (LANs).
Due to this innovative approach, which will lease infrastructure
bandwidth back to the cellular telecommunications carriers, this
program will pay for itself in less than five years while providing
full cellular, BlackBerry, and wireless LAN connectivity across the
entire Senate campus. In addition to the in-building wireless
initiative, an analysis of telecommunications requirements is being
conducted that will lead to a complete overhaul of our voice and data
networks and services over the next several years. The first task in
the analysis phase of this large project is already underway.
Deployable Communications Assets.--Mobility and flexibility are
fundamental to successful continuity of operations and continuity of
government planning and execution. The goal of this office is to make
it possible for Members and their staffs to communicate and process
data from almost anywhere at any time if they have to relocate. A
variety of technologies and capabilities is being developed to provide
mobility and flexibility options. Two state-of-the-art communications
vehicles are being deployed that will allow us to establish the
Senate's information infrastructure almost anywhere. Satellite, radio,
and local area network and wide area network facilities currently are
being integrated in each of these communications vehicles with full
operational capability planned for later this year. Next year's
Continuity of Operations and Continuity of Government exercises will
incorporate these vehicles.
Emergency Operations Coordination Prototype.--To support security
and emergency operations, we are working with the U.S. Capitol Police
to develop a prototype emergency operations coordination system that
will enable officers to update and track individuals electronically
during a Capitol Hill evacuation operation. This system, which features
tablet PC technology and back-end databases with full reporting
capability, is currently in prototype, and will be fully operational
later this year.
Information Technology Security: Defense-in-Depth.--During this
past year, there has been a steep increase in cyber threats, as hostile
entities attempt to attack our systems with viruses, worms, and denial-
of-service attacks. The Senate's infrastructure and data are protected
by continuously upgrading our defense-in-depth capability. The defense-
in-depth approach includes multiple layers of defense that protect the
Senate's information infrastructure at all levels, from the inside out.
It includes an enterprise anti-virus program.
We expect to extend the enterprise anti-virus program to all 12,000
Senate desktop and laptop computers by the end of next year. To date,
this software has been installed on 5,000 Senate computers, protecting
them from viruses, worms, and denial-of-service attacks.
These security efforts have paid off; the Senate has not been
successfully intruded upon from the outside and we have seen only
minimal effects from the most aggressive virus and worm attacks. We are
now working with office system administrators, who are responsible for
the security of their office local area networks, to improve the
Senate's overall security posture and enhance our ability to defend
against intrusions.
Next year, as part of a comprehensive network infrastructure
upgrade, it will be necessary to evaluate and upgrade the information
security infrastructure in the Senate switched network by upgrading
routers and firewalls. Increased intrusion detection systems, software
tools, and services will complete the defense-in-depth approach to
information infrastructure.
Information Technology Security: Policies, Practices, Training, and
Tools.--An effective approach to information security goes beyond
upgrading the information security infrastructure to include evaluating
and applying best practices and information security and assurance
hardware and software tools, and providing information security
training for employees. Through the Information Security Policies and
Practices Working Group, we are working with Members' technology staffs
and the Committee on Rules and Administration to examine and improve
information security practices across the Senate. Because of the
increasing number of attacks the Senate faces, the SAA is also
evaluating and upgrading the skills of our own information security
staff.
Emerging Technologies Initiatives
One major theme that has been embraced in the Senate's information
technology strategy is to identify ways that new and emerging
technologies can support the Senate's priorities. We are already moving
forward on this effort by analyzing trends to discern which emerging
technologies will be most applicable in the Senate environment. Once
promising technologies are identified, the SAA will work with
interested Senate offices to pilot or prototype the technologies and
prove the concepts. Following successful pilots, the technologies can
be rolled out Senate wide.
New Technology and Innovation.--To elevate technology awareness,
expose the Senate to the future of technology, and spur innovation, the
SAA is sponsoring emerging technology events. The first Senate Emerging
Technologies Conference, held in February 2004, brought experts from
industry to the Senate to discuss emerging wireless technologies,
telecommunications trends, knowledge management, and collaboration
tools. The conference was followed by a technology fair highlighting
low-cost applications that we could implement at the Senate in the near
future. More emerging technology events are being planned for fiscal
year 2005.
Process Improvement.--The Sergeant at Arms is creating an
organization to focus on process improvement and innovation from the
perspective of customer service and security. This year, the
organization will perform top-down and bottom-up analyses of
technology-related business processes. It will look for opportunities
to innovate and will implement ways to make the Senate's technology and
business processes more efficient and effective. The group will
document, analyze, and improve processes such as technology project
management, requests for assistance, and the Senate's systems
development life-cycle.
Technology Infusion.--To move emerging technologies into the Senate
environment quickly, the Office of the Sergeant at Arms is
collaborating with Senate offices to develop prototype applications,
consisting of subsets of target functionality. Two such prototypes
currently under development are the Office Emergency Coordinator
tracking system and a knowledge management prototype. The approach is
to think big, start small, and scale quickly.
Customer Service Initiatives
This office is paying special attention to how well it meets the
Senate's technology needs. This effort requires the evaluation and
analysis of all aspects of our information technology solutions and
technology infusion and delivery programs. A survey was conducted last
year that measured customers' satisfaction with technology. The survey
revealed that Members and their staffs want more and better information
about technology programs, a faster process for infusing new
technologies, and an emphasis on looking ``over the bow'' toward
emerging technologies and how the Senate can take advantage of these
technologies in the next three years.
Customer Service, Satisfaction, and Communications.--The first step
taken by the SAA to improve customer service, satisfaction, and
communications was to implement an extensive customer outreach program
that enables us to understand the Senate's requirements better. This
program features communications through monthly information technology
newsletters, quarterly project status reporting to Senate offices,
participation in the Majority Leader's Information Technology Working
Group, joint monthly project and policy meetings with the Committee on
Rules and Administration and the Senate System Administrators
Association leadership, and participation in a Hill-Wide Information
Technology Group. We are also emphasizing customer service by enforcing
stringent service-level agreements with our technology Help Desk
contractor. This program has been extremely successful with sustained
performance levels meeting or exceeding the service-level agreement
(greater than 95 percent based on customer satisfaction surveys) for
the past eight months.
Business Applications.--Based on input and feedback from users, it
was determined that many of the business software applications
supporting Members and their staffs needed to be updated. The Senate
Information Services program will be modernized to provide more
information from various news sources in near real-time and more
comprehensive analysis of that information. The financial management
systems that support the Secretary of the Senate's Disbursing Office
are also being modernized and made Web-capable. We are also exploring
new correspondence tracking and management systems and have added to
the list of available application offerings.
Intelligence over the Net-Web Services.--One major technology focus
is to move applications and processing capability to the Senate's
Intranet. Flexible Web services technologies will allow the placement
of many service-delivery applications to Webster so users can access
them with a Web browser. The goal is for the Senate Intranet to evolve
into a full capability portal providing Senate staff ``one-stop
shopping'' for common business application functionality.
Secure Remote Access Options.--In addition to moving applications
to the Web, this office is aggressively exploring alternate ways for
Senate users to gain secure remote access to Senate information
resources. In particular, biometric capabilities are being explored to
add to the secure networking options already provided.
Network Upgrades and Video Teleconferencing.--To support
flexibility, mobility, and improved customer service, we are expanding
and upgrading the Senate's information networks. Over the next year,
the Capitol Hill network infrastructure upgrade will be complete,
delivering increased communications bandwidth to the desktop to support
the applications of the future. This upgrade, already underway, will
provide 100 megabits per second (Mbps) to the desktop and one gigabit
per second (Gbps) between servers in the network. To improve
communications for Members' state offices, we continuously analyze and
adjust their wide area network connections and increase bandwidth as
required. This flexibility allows us to support sophisticated Web
services over the Internet, as well as the video teleconferencing
program that is currently underway. Under the video teleconferencing
program, a state-of-the-art video teleconferencing terminal will be
installed at each Member's Capitol Hill office and a similar terminal
at the state office of their choice.
Electronic Mail and Office Automation Applications.--The Senate
Messaging Infrastructure is almost complete, with 98 percent of all
offices migrated to Microsoft Exchange and Outlook. The Active
Directory Messaging Architecture program, the successor to the Senate
Messaging Infrastructure program, is currently in the design phase. It
will allow Member and Committee offices to have choices between central
and distributed management of their Exchange servers, a Senate global
address list, and office servers updated from Microsoft NT4 to
Microsoft Windows 2003 technology. In addition, we will continue to
expand and upgrade our BlackBerry system to supplement both the Senate
e-mail system and the emergency notification systems. Moving into the
next year, continued convergence of devices and the widespread use of
combination cell phone and BlackBerry devices are anticipated. This
office is committed to deploying systems that will allow Members more
flexibility in choosing which wireless device to use for receiving
emergency notifications and legislative alerts.
operational support
While security and information technology initiatives are
necessarily at the forefront of the SAA's efforts to serve the Senate
community at this particular time in history, the core value required
to execute these initiatives successfully--a commitment to exceptional
customer service--has always been a cornerstone of the SAA's
operational support. Over the past year, we have seen significant
improvements in the operational aspects of the SAA's support to the
Senate. Some of the achievements and projects outlined below are the
result of better integrating technology into business practices; others
originated from the need to find innovative solutions to challenges
presented by the ricin incident. Regardless of the impetus for these
accomplishments, they all demonstrate the hard work and dedication of
the SAA operational staffs.
Senate Post Office.--The Senate Post Office delivered nearly 19
million safe articles of mail to the Senate community during fiscal
year 2003. It is our understanding that this was accomplished for
approximately $3 million less than the House of Representatives, which
uses an outside contractor to handle similar volume.
One of the security improvements implemented this past year was a
new package and envelope-testing site for couriers, allowing for same-
day delivery of time-sensitive items. Additionally, as set forth
previously in this testimony, the ricin incident in February led to the
adoption of new mail protocols. This was accomplished by leveraging
existing personnel and assets while improving the safety, security, and
cost effectiveness of mail delivery.
Warehouse.--The need for a modern, efficiently designed warehouse
facility and mail processing facility continues and, following the
ricin incident, has become more critical. All mail, packages, and
deliveries to the Senate must be inspected to ensure the safety of the
institution. We believe that locating a new warehouse adjacent to the
U.S. Capitol Police off-site inspection facility will yield
considerable security and operating benefits. The warehouse and mail
processing facilities, together with planned U.S. Capitol Police
initiatives, will ensure the safety and security of Senate assets and
staff. The financial benefits include eliminating an estimated $800,000
in annual recurring costs, including the outsourcing expenses for
package processing that are currently being performed by a contractor.
Current warehouse facilities are geographically dispersed,
environmentally inadequate for document and furniture storage and do
not meet the minimum requirements of the General Services
Administration. A new facility will correct these problems and enable
volume discounts for Secretary of the Senate and SAA purchases. It will
give a longer useful life to furniture and fixtures warehoused and
provide specialized storage to meet the needs of the Senate Curator and
Librarian. A new warehouse facility will ultimately benefit the whole
Senate community through increased efficiency, enhanced security, and
improved organization.
Capitol Facilities.--The Capitol Facilities staff continues to work
around the clock to ensure that the environment within the Capitol is
clean and professional. With a new management team and a fresh look at
key processes, the appearance of the Capitol has significantly
improved. Among the staff's many accomplishments this past year is its
successful relocation of the Secretary of the Senate's Capitol staff
from basement offices, which were disrupted by Capitol Visitor Center
construction, to newly developed fourth-floor office space. This move
was done without interrupting the Secretary of the Senate's ability to
support the legislative process.
Printing, Graphics, and Direct Mail.--The innovations in this
operational area resulted in substantial cost savings to its customers.
Specifically, over $1.8 million was saved through the staff's work with
Member offices on ways to address letters to ensure discounted postage
rates are received as often as possible. The amount of processed mail
that qualified for discounted postage this past year was 23 percent
higher than in fiscal year 2002.
The use of technology in this area has enhanced customer service.
Over 2.2 million documents were produced through the SAA's online
ordering service, a 427 percent increase over fiscal year 2002, when
the service was first implemented. Online ordering reduces errors and
provides convenience and labor savings by enabling Senate offices to
order printing services from their desktops.
This past year, automation also resulted in a significant increase
in the Senate's ability to archive documents. By fully automating the
process, the SAA was able to archive over two million documents for the
Senate. This represents a 218 percent increase over the previous year
with no additional staff.
Photo Studio.--The Senate Photo Studio completed its transition
from film to high-resolution digital photography and its conversion to
digital photo printing processes this past year. Photography and photo
printing services are now being performed digitally, eliminating some
chemical processes and bringing significant improvements in quality and
delivery of products to our customers.
The shift to a digital operation allows staff to view photographs
taken by the Senate Photo Studio immediately, on site. It also enables
the Studio to e-mail high-resolution images to Senate offices, and
allows offices to view images and download them. These enhancements
have been received well by customers.
Senate Recording Studio.--The Senate Recording Studio remains a
leader in the use of technology. Last year, the Recording Studio
initiated a project to upgrade and install multimedia equipment in
Committee hearing rooms, including digital signal processing, audio
systems, and broadcast quality robotic camera systems. This project
will continue this year.
The audio upgrades will improve speech intelligibility and provide
software-based systems that can be reconfigured based on an individual
Committee's needs. The upgrades also include diagnostic monitoring,
which enables staff to detect and resolve problems before the problems
become disruptive. For instance, if a Member is speaking at a
relatively low volume, the system can more effectively raise the volume
of that microphone. If a Member who is about to speak does not turn on
the microphone, the Committee clerk can remotely turn it on from a
computer. Even if the main electronics fail, a backup system will take
over within minutes. Additionally, the system provides networking that
allows the audio to be automatically routed from one hearing room to
other hearing rooms for overflow purposes.
The video upgrades will include the addition of broadcast-quality
television cameras. These cameras will be installed on robotic systems
and can be controlled remotely from the Recording Studio. The upgrades
also include cabinetry so the cameras can be concealed when not in use.
Once this project is completed, the Recording Studio will be able to
meet the demand for the broadcast of Committee hearings and
simultaneously maintain production capabilities in the television
studios.
The Senate has had the ability to search Chamber proceedings by
text and listen to audio playback from desktop computers for years. In
fact, the Senate was a pioneer in this area, and accomplished it in the
early years of computer browsers. The next major advance will be the
replacement of the audio and text browsing systems this summer with a
state-of-the-art audio/text/video browsing system. This will enable
Senate staff to search and play back Chamber proceedings and news
programming from any computer on the Senate LAN.
This system is the result of a modernization of the Senate
Recording Studio's technical plant that incorporates technology so new
that it is operational in only a handful of facilities in the country.
This new technology will enable the Recording Studio to record, edit,
and play media without ever using tape machines, while simultaneously
making the media available for online searching and streaming. In the
near future, the Recording Studio plans to add Senate hearings and
other media to the system.
Education and Training.--In 2003, the Senate's Joint Office of
Education and Training offered 694 classes, with 6,916 Senate employees
participating. Of the total number of classes offered, 309 were
technical training, with 1,730 students participating. The registration
desk handled 15,390 requests for training and documentation. An
additional 1,126 staff received coaching on various software packages
and other computer-related issues. Training was provided to almost the
entire Senate community as the new Senate Messaging Infrastructure was
implemented.
Over 350 professional development classes were offered last year
with a total attendance of 5,117 students. Managers and supervisors are
encouraged to request customized training for their offices. As a
result, the staff of the Joint Office of Education and Training worked
on more than 40 occasions with teams on issues related to team
performance, communication, and conflict resolution. Over 1,300 Senate
staff also took advantage of the 18 health events sponsored by this
office.
A ``State Training Fair,'' which was first available in March 2000,
was offered three times this past year to 134 state staff members.
Forty-two senior leaders in state offices also participated in the
first State Directors Forum. In addition, state offices continue to be
offered ``Virtual Classrooms,'' an Internet-based training library of
over 300 courses. To date, 164 state office staff, representing 59
Senators, have used the virtual classrooms.
The Joint Office of Education and Training ensures that the
training designed for Senate staff meets their needs. This upcoming
year particular attention will be paid to providing training to
increase the Senate's awareness of information technology security.
Specifically, an IT Security Awareness program for Senate staff is
being developed and a course on reviewing and configuring security
settings on Windows servers is ready for delivery. Existing computer
security classes and documentation are being revamped, and IT security
issues will be included as an integral part of our system
administration classes and other classes. System Administrators will be
able to receive training to maintain and enhance their skills,
including new, self-paced training with mentoring for those who would
benefit from more instruction and personal guidance.
Support to Other Organizations.--In addition to the support the SAA
provides the Senate, we also provide significant support to
organizations outside the Senate. In fiscal year 2003, the SAA
performed services for other organizations costing over $3 million
without reimbursement. Most of these services support the U.S. Capitol
Police and the Architect of the Capitol. However, support is also
provided on occasion to the House of Representatives, and to liaison
offices and other organizations located in the Senate Office Buildings.
These services include printing and graphics products, maintenance of
radio and network systems, telephone services (some of which are
reimbursed), and computer repair and installation.
conclusion
The staff of the SAA has done tremendous work to keep the Senate
safe, secure, and operating efficiently. The accomplishments and vision
of this office would not be possible without the active, ongoing
support of this Committee and the Committee on Rules and
Administration. We thank you for your support and for the opportunity
to present this testimony and answer questions.
From security to technology to operational support, we are
dedicated to making sure that our products and services support the
Senate's mission. The appendix accompanying this testimony elaborates
the specific components of our fiscal year 2005 budget request.
______
Attachment I
Financial Plan for Fiscal Year 2005
office of the sergeant at arms--united states senate
executive summary
[Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS Fiscal Year 2005 vs.
-------------------------- Fiscal Year 2004
Fiscal Year --------------------------
Fiscal Year 2005 Percent
2004 Budget Request Amount Incr/Decr
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Operations & Maintenance:
Salaries............................................... $45,789 $50,635 $4,846 10.6
Expenses............................................... $46,581 $55,585 $9,004 19.3
----------------------------------------------------
Total General Operations & Maintenance............... $92,370 $106,220 $13,850 15.0
====================================================
Mandated Allowances & Allotments........................... $56,398 $58,129 $1,731 3.1
Capital Investment......................................... $27,570 $18,062 ($9,508) -34.5
Nondiscretionary Items..................................... $4,694 $4,290 ($404) -8.6
----------------------------------------------------
TOTAL................................................ $181,032 $186,701 $5,669 3.1
====================================================
Staffing................................................... 845 860 15 1.8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To ensure that we provide the highest levels and quality of
security, support services and equipment, we submit a fiscal year 2005
budget request of $186,701,000, an increase of $5,669,000 or 3.1
percent compared to fiscal year 2004. The salary budget request is
$50,635,000, an increase of $4,846,000 or 10.6 percent, and the expense
budget request is $136,066,000, an increase of $823,000 or 0.6 percent.
The staffing request is 860, an increase of 15 FTEs.
For the third consecutive year, we have increased funds for
security initiatives. The fiscal year 2005 budget request for security
is $17,698,000, an increase of $1,588,000 or 9.8 percent compared to
fiscal year 2004. The most significant aspects of the total security
request are funding security upgrades for Member state offices
($3,650,000 in expenses); the Alternate Computing Facility (ACF)
($1,172,000 in salaries for 17 FTEs and $2,166,000 in expenses);
enhanced communication services ($2,300,000 in expenses); personnel and
operating expenses requested for the Office of Security and Emergency
Preparedness ($1,074,000 in salaries for 12 FTEs and $2,166,000 in
expenses); secure mail and package processing protocols ($694,000 in
salaries for 19 FTEs and $2,165,000 in expenses); and network security
($305,000 in salaries for 4 FTEs and $1,704,000 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
$50,635,000, an increase of $4,846,000 or 10.6 percent compared to
fiscal year 2004. The salary budget increase is due to the addition of
15 FTEs, a 3.9 percent COLA, and merit funding. 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 $55,585,000, an increase of $9,004,000 or
19.3 percent compared to fiscal year 2004. Major factors contributing
to the increase are price adjustments and annual escalations in the IT
Support contracts, $2,583,000; increased cost of expanded intrusion
detection monitoring services and software, $1,105,000; implementation
of a new real-time news service and renegotiation of all other Senate
Information Services (SIS) contracts, $860,000; management consultants
and services required for security operations and planning and
emergency preparedness, $666,000; replacement of existing enterprise
servers, $565,000; replacement of wiring in the Capitol, $500,000;
increased hardware maintenance and licenses for the ACF, $310,000;
procurement of furnishings, carpeting, and window treatments for the
Senate wing of the Capitol, $238,000; support agreements for word
processing and virus software, $202,000; and increased mainframe
software maintenance, $181,000.
The mandated allowances and allotments budget request is
$58,129,000, an increase of $1,731,000 or 3.1 percent compared to
fiscal year 2004. Major factors contributing to the increase are
projected increases in commercial and federal office rents, $953,000,
and maintenance and monitoring of previously installed security systems
and new security installations in offices established following the
2004 elections, $906,000. A decrease of $294,000 in office equipment
purchases in Washington D.C. and state offices partially offsets these
increases.
The capital investment budget request is $18,062,000, a decrease of
$9,508,000 or 34.5 percent compared to fiscal year 2004.
Major factors contributing to this budget request are completing
the procurement of the Mail Processing Facility/Warehouse, $7,200,000;
upgrading Senate data networks and related management systems,
$2,952,000; initial design and equipment purchases for the replacement
of the Capitol Hill telephone system, $2,800,000; procurement of
furnishings and equipment for the Senate side of the Capitol Visitor's
Center (CVC), $2,500,000; workflow technology hardware and software,
$400,000; backup document archiving system at the ACF, $350,000;
emergency backup storage for Members at the ACF, $325,000; upgrading
mail processing equipment, $310,000; and testing and evaluating
telecommunications equipment and products, $250,000. Funds also are
requested for several smaller printing and video projects.
Funding is no longer required for relocation of the Recording
Studio in conjunction with the CVC Project and completion of Phases I,
II and III for the Digital Technology Migration Project, completion of
CMS projects, acquisition of the work-order system, acquisition of an
ID laser printing system, acquisition of a mail sorter, and completion
of the upgrade to the video conferencing project.
The nondiscretionary items budget request is $4,290,000, a decrease
of $404,000 or 8.6 percent compared to fiscal year 2004. Major factors
contributing to this budget request are contract maintenance for the
Financial Management Information System (FMIS), $2,700,000;
enhancements to the Legislative Information System (LIS), $1,220,000;
and requirements definition for replacement of the Senate Payroll
System, $370,000.
______
Attachment II
Fiscal Year 2005 Budget Request by Department
The following is a summary of the SAA's fiscal year 2005 budget
request on an organizational basis.
[Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS Fiscal Year 2005 vs.
-------------------------- Fiscal Year 2004
Department Fiscal Year --------------------------
Fiscal Year 2005 Percent
2004 Budget Request Amount Incr/Decr
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Capitol Division........................................... $10,765 $13,400 $2,635 24.5
Operations................................................. $43,473 $37,608 ($5,865) -13.5
Chief Information Officer.................................. $91,781 $99,074 $7,293 7.9
Office Support............................................. $29,230 $30,261 $1,031 3.5
Staff Offices.............................................. $5,783 $6,358 $575 9.9
----------------------------------------------------
TOTAL................................................ $181,032 $186,701 $5,669 3.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Each department's budget is presented and analyzed in detail
beginning on the next page.
capitol division
[Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS Fiscal Year 2005 vs.
-------------------------- Fiscal Year 2004
Capitol Division Fiscal Year -------------------------
Fiscal Year 2005 Percent
2004 Budget Request Amount Incr/Decr
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Operations & Maintenance:
Salaries................................................ $6,355 $7,317 $962 15.1
Expenses................................................ $1,666 $2,433 $767 46.0
---------------------------------------------------
Total General Operations & Maintenance................ $8,021 $9,750 $1,729 21.6
===================================================
Mandated Allowances & Allotments............................ $2,744 $3,650 $906 33.0
Capital Investment.......................................... $0 $0 $0 0.0
Nondiscretionary Items...................................... $0 $0 $0 0.0
---------------------------------------------------
TOTAL................................................. $10,765 $13,400 $2,635 24.5
===================================================
Staffing.................................................... 143 145 2 1.4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Capitol Division consists of the Executive Office, Media Galleries and the Office of Security and Emergency
Preparedness.
The general operations and maintenance salaries budget request is
$7,317,000, an increase of $962,000 or 15.1 percent. The salary budget
increase is due to the addition of two FTEs, an expected 3.9 percent
COLA, and merit funding for fiscal year 2005. The Office of Security
and Emergency Preparedness requires two additional FTEs to direct,
develop and monitor the processes and procedures needed to ensure
security for the Senate and to work on the Continuity of Operations
Plan.
The general operations and maintenance expenses budget request is
$2,433,000, an increase of $767,000 or 46.0 percent, primarily for
increased management consulting services for security initiatives.
The mandated allowances and allotments budget request for state
office security initiatives is $3,650,000, an increase of $906,000 or
33.0 percent. Funding is required for the maintenance and monitoring of
previously installed security systems and new security installations in
offices established following the 2004 elections and consists of three-
year funds.
operations
[Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS Fiscal Year 2005 vs.
-------------------------- Fiscal Year 2004
Operations Fiscal Year --------------------------
Fiscal Year 2005 Percent
2004 Budget Request Amount Incr/Decr
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Operations & Maintenance:
Salaries............................................... $16,349 $17,817 $1,468 9.0
Expenses............................................... $7,992 $8,816 $824 10.3
----------------------------------------------------
Total General Operations & Maintenance............... $24,341 $26,633 $2,292 9.4
====================================================
Mandated Allowances & Allotments........................... $0 $165 $165 ...........
Capital Investment......................................... $19,132 $10,810 ($8,322) -43.5
Nondiscretionary Items..................................... $0 $0 $0 0.0
----------------------------------------------------
TOTAL................................................ $43,473 $37,608 ($5,865) -13.5
====================================================
Staffing................................................... 363 364 1 0.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Operations Division consists of the Central Operations Group (Printing, Graphics and Direct Mail, Parking
Office, Director/Management, ID Office, Photo Studio, and Hair Care Services), Operations Administrative
Services, Recording Studio, Post Office, and Facilities.
The general operations and maintenance salaries budget request is
$17,817,000, an increase of $1,468,000 or 9.0 percent. The salary
budget increase is due to the addition of one FTE to provide
administrative support, an expected 3.9 percent COLA, and merit funding
for fiscal year 2005.
The general operations and maintenance expenses budget request is
$8,816,000, an increase of $824,000 or 10.3 percent. Major factors
contributing to the increase are maintenance and procurement of
furnishings, carpeting and window treatments for the Senate wing in the
Capitol building, $238,000; increased warehouse rent and operating
expenses, $120,000; software customizations and interfaces for the
work-order system purchased in fiscal year 2004, $100,000; increased
screening costs for more secure package processing, $100,000;
replacement of miscellaneous printing/mailing equipment, $90,000; and
maintenance on software and production equipment, $55,000.
The mandated allowances and allotments budget request is $165,000
to furnish Capitol offices. The capital investment budget request is
$10,810,000, a decrease of $8,322,000 or 43.5 percent.
Major factors contributing to this budget request are completion of
the procurement of the Mail Processing Facility/Warehouse, $7,200,000;
procurement of furnishings and equipment for the Senate side of the
CVC, $2,500,000; purchase of a Data Storage Server to provide emergency
archival backup services for Member offices at the ACF, $350,000;
upgrades to and replacement of outdated mailing equipment, $310,000;
replacement of an outdated color printer, $200,000; and upgrades to and
enhancement of the Photo Browser database, $200,000.
Funding is no longer required for relocation of the Recording
Studio in conjunction with the CVC Project and completion of Phases I,
II and III for the Digital Technology Migration Project, upgrades to
the Senate Chamber Audio System, acquisition of the work-order system,
acquisition of an ID laser printing system, and acquisition of a mail
sorter for the Post Office.
Funding for the Mail Processing Facility/Warehouse, $7,200,000, and
the Facilities CVC project, $2,500,000, consists of three-year funds.
chief information officer
[Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS Fiscal Year 2005 vs.
-------------------------- Fiscal Year 2004
Chief Information Officer Fiscal Year --------------------------
Fiscal Year 2005 Percent
2004 Budget Request Amount Incr/Decr
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Operations & Maintenance:
Salaries............................................... $16,498 $18,395 $1,897 11.5
Expenses............................................... $35,795 $43,074 $7,279 20.3
----------------------------------------------------
Total General Operations & Maintenance............... $52,293 $61,469 $9,176 17.5
====================================================
Mandated Allowances & Allotments........................... $26,356 $26,063 ($293) -1.1
Capital Investment......................................... $8,438 $7,252 ($1,186) -14.1
Nondiscretionary Items..................................... $4,694 $4,290 ($404) -8.6
----------------------------------------------------
TOTAL................................................ $91,781 $99,074 $7,293 7.9
====================================================
Staffing................................................... 249 254 5 2.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Chief Information Officer Division consists of IT Support Services, Technology Development Services,
Administrative Services, Process Management and Innovation, and Information Technology.
The general operations and maintenance salaries budget request is
$18,395,000, an increase of $1,897,000 or 11.5 percent. The salary
budget increase is due to the addition of five FTEs, an expected 3.9
percent COLA, and merit funding for fiscal year 2005. IT Support
Services requires three new FTEs to serve as network engineers to
accommodate increased workload for emergency preparedness and
telecommunication systems at alternate locations. Technology
Development Services requires one FTE to serve as a senior software
specialist to assist with maintenance and enhancements to the Contract
Administration System and other administrative systems. Administrative
Services requires one FTE to draft correspondence, proof documents, and
provide executive-level assistance to the Technical Writer, the
Assistant Sergeant at Arms for Security and Emergency Preparedness, the
Assistant Sergeant at Arms and Chief Information Officer, and Special
Projects.
The general operations and maintenance expense budget request is
$43,074,000, an increase of $7,279,000 or 20.3 percent. Major factors
contributing to this increase are price adjustments and annual
escalations in the IT support contract, $2,583,000; increased cost of
expanded intrusion detection monitoring services and software,
$1,105,000; implementation of a new real-time news service and
renegotiation of all other SIS contracts, $860,000; replacement of
existing enterprise servers, $565,000; replacement of wiring in the
Capitol, $500,000; increased hardware maintenance and licenses for the
ACF, $310,000; support agreements for word processing and anti-virus
software, $202,000; increased professional services for threat
assessments and disaster recovery improvements, $190,000; increased
mainframe software maintenance, $181,000; and additional purchases of
data communication equipment, $172,000.
The mandated allowances and allotments budget request is
$26,063,000, a decrease of $293,000 or 1.1 percent. Major factors
contributing to this budget request are voice and data communications
for Washington D.C. and state offices, $17,937,000; procurement and
maintenance of Members' constituent mail systems, $4,255,000;
procurement and maintenance of office equipment for Washington D.C. and
state offices, $3,181,000; and acquisition of the Appropriations
Analysis and Reporting System, $400,000. Reduced purchases of office
equipment, primarily photocopiers, for Washington D.C. and state
offices results in the lower budget request for fiscal year 2005.
Funding for procurement and maintenance of Members' constituent mail
systems, $4,255,000, consists of five-year funds.
The capital investment budget request is $7,252,000, a decrease of
$1,186,000 or 14.1 percent. Major factors contributing to this budget
request are upgrade of the data network, $2,952,000; initial design and
equipment purchases for the replacement of the Capitol Hill telephone
system, $2,800,000; and purchase of data storage servers to provide
emergency backup for Member offices at the ACF, $325,000. Reduced
funding needs for the Asset Management Upgrade Project as it moves into
the maintenance phase, several CMS-related projects, the Public Key
Infrastructure project, the Wireless PDA project, the Enterprise
Storage Area Network project, and the Application Server Provider
project result in the lower budget request for fiscal year 2005.
The nondiscretionary items budget request is $4,290,000, a decrease
of $404,000 or 8.6 percent. Major factors contributing to this budget
request are contract maintenance for the Financial Management
Information System (FMIS), $2,700,000; enhancements to the Legislative
Information System (LIS), $1,220,000; and requirements definition for
replacement of the Senate Payroll System, $370,000.
office support services
[Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS Fiscal Year 2005 vs.
-------------------------- Fiscal Year 2004
Office Support Services Fiscal Year --------------------------
Fiscal Year 2005 Percent
2004 Budget Request Amount Incr/Decr
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Operations & Maintenance:
Salaries............................................... $1,895 $1,995 $100 5.3
Expenses............................................... $37 $15 ($22) -59.5
----------------------------------------------------
Total General Operations & Maintenance............... $1,932 $2,010 $78 4.0
====================================================
Mandated Allowances & Allotments........................... $27,298 $28,251 $953 3.5
Capital Investment......................................... $0 $0 $0 0.0
Nondiscretionary Items..................................... $0 $0 $0 0.0
----------------------------------------------------
TOTAL................................................ $29,230 $30,261 $1,031 3.5
====================================================
Staffing................................................... 28 28 0 0.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Office Support Services Department consists of the Customer Support, Help and IT Request Processing, State
Office Liaison, and Director branches.
The general operations and maintenance salaries budget request is
$1,995,000, an increase of $100,000 or 5.3 percent. The salary budget
increase is due to an expected 3.9 percent COLA and merit funding for
fiscal year 2005.
The general operations and maintenance expenses budget request is
$15,000, a decrease of $22,000 or 59.5 percent, resulting from a
reduction in travel costs and office supplies.
The mandated allowances and allotments budget request is
$28,251,000, an increase of $953,000 or 3.5 percent, resulting from
projected increases in commercial and federal office rents. Funding to
purchase computer equipment for Members, Committees, Officers, and
Leadership, $10,315,000, consists of three-year funds.
staff offices
[Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS Fiscal Year 2005 vs.
-------------------------- Fiscal Year 2004
Staff Offices Fiscal Year -------------------------
Fiscal Year 2005 Percent
2004 Budget Request Amount Incr/Decr
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Operations & Maintenance:
Salaries................................................ $4,692 $5,111 $419 8.9
Expenses................................................ $1,091 $1,247 $156 14.3
---------------------------------------------------
Total General Operations & Maintenance................ $5,783 $6,358 $575 9.9
===================================================
Mandated Allowances & Allotments............................ $0 $0 $0 0.0
Capital Investment.......................................... $0 $0 $0 0.0
Nondiscretionary Items...................................... $0 $0 $0 0.0
---------------------------------------------------
TOTAL................................................. $5,783 $6,358 $575 9.9
===================================================
Staffing.................................................... 68 69 1 1.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Staff Offices Division consists of Education and Training, Financial Management, Human Resources, and
Special Projects.
The general operations and maintenance salaries budget request is
$5,111,000, an increase of $419,000 or 8.9 percent. The salary budget
increase is due to the addition of one FTE to perform compensation and
classification duties, an expected 3.9 percent COLA, and merit funding
for fiscal year 2005.
The general operations and maintenance expenses budget request is
$1,247,000, an increase of $156,000 or 14.3 percent, primarily from
increased professional services operating expenses and purchase of
equipment and software for training programs.
EFFECT OF BUDGETARY FREEZE
Senator Campbell. Thank you, Mr. Pickle. I'm going to ask
you what I've asked everyone who's testified before this
committee this year, and that is, how would you manage if we
had a freeze, and have you prioritized your budget?
Mr. Pickle. I'd really have to study it but I would say
offhand the first thing that we would not touch would be
security and emergency preparedness. Then we would look and
prioritize, along with the committee's assistance, and work on
those areas where we could make cuts. But certainly the
security and emergency preparedness would be untouchable for
me.
STATUS OF WAREHOUSE
Senator Campbell. Good answer. Now, last year we provided
$6.3 million for design and land purchase for a new warehouse.
Your budget request for 2005 includes an additional $7.2
million for this same project. What's the status of that
warehouse project now?
Mr. Pickle. The actual design of the project is about two-
thirds complete. But this year's ricin attack has put us back a
little bit. And let me explain that. We all agree that a
warehouse is very important. We're using three very obsolete
facilities--they're spread out around the metropolitan area--
and for many, many reasons we need to replace those three
facilities with one. The ricin attack caused us to make some
very fundamental changes here on the Hill in regard to mail
processing. As you probably realize, we are now examining all
mail before it comes on campus. What we are looking to do is,
we want a partnership with the police department, and we're
looking for one footprint, or one piece of land, where we can
have separate facilities--a warehouse, a mail processing center
and the police department's off-site inspection center. We're
moving toward it, and the reality is that money that's been
appropriated is a good start, but I truly believe we're going
to need significantly more money to do this the right way.
Senator Campbell. So this $7.2 million won't be enough to
complete the project? Is that correct?
Mr. Pickle. No, it will not. It would be substantially more
than that.
Senator Campbell. Is it something that could be deferred in
view of budgetary constraints or is that considered a really
high priority?
Mr. Pickle. I think it's a high priority for several
reasons. We have personnel who are now opening this mail off-
site in very primitive conditions. We're making them safe, they
are safe.
Senator Campbell. What is a primitive condition?
Mr. Pickle. When I say primitive, we are remodeling a
current warehouse facility; it's a very close-in facility. Now,
where it's safe, and we have the negative airflow and we have
all the precautions that we're taking to make them safe, it's
just not a very efficient operation. There are several
different processes, which I won't go into here in this open
session, but there's several different processes and it is a
very, very labor-intensive process.
Senator Campbell. Well, the ricin scare was after we
provided the $6.3 million. Have you had to do design changes
that you hadn't expected?
Mr. Pickle. Yes, we have because the ricin scare forced us
to look at the way we handled mail and it's caused us to do a
re-engineering of the actual process. But the fundamental
design changes whereby walls are here and interior walls are
here, that hasn't changed too significantly.
STAFFING LEVELS
Senator Campbell. I see. Your budget also includes 15
additional staff over the fiscal year 2004 authorized level.
This committee understands that there are about 50 vacancies,
excluding patronage positions. Why do you have so many
unfulfilled positions and why are you requesting additional
ones when you haven't filled the other 50?
Mr. Pickle. Well, that was my question, too. It was my
question last year and I think it was your question last year.
And I thought I had a good answer last year and I'm going to
try to give you a better one this year. What we have found is,
we have an attrition rate of maybe 3 or 4 percent a year. We
constantly have people who are leaving for one reason or
another. We have also been given additional positions by this
committee over the last several years which we are trying very
aggressively to fill. So I guess what I'm saying is, as we hire
one person we may have one vacancy occur. But the other part of
that, and this is an important part, we have many applicants
for these positions but we still continue to insist on hiring
only the best people we can find. And if we don't find the
right person then we won't fill that person and we will
readvertise it. But I agree it's imperative that we become
fully staffed. We are not there yet and I do not think, based
on what I found out, that we are any different than any other
organization, private or governmental, whereby you ever reach
full staffing levels.
Senator Campbell. So with the 50 vacancies, are our service
levels degraded any place in particular?
Mr. Pickle. I think it's across the board but one of the
areas that we're increasing dramatically this year, and it's
not reflected in our initial budget request, is we've added 12
positions to the post office for mail handlers, and this is for
those personnel who will examine mail.
NEW TELEPHONE SYSTEM
Senator Campbell. Your budget includes $2.8 million for the
design of a new Capitol Hill telephone system. Why is that
system needed and when would funding be required for the system
itself?
Mr. Pickle. It's my understanding the last major
telecommunications upgrade took place in the late 80's. What
this $2.8 million does for us is it gives us about $800,000 to
do the actual consulting work, the research, the developmental
work, looking at the architecture we have or will need. The
other $2 million is a number that we believe will be sufficient
this year to start buying additional equipment, phone sets. But
you are right and I think where you're going, the long-term
cost will be much more but we can't----
Senator Campbell. Do you have an estimate about that long-
term cost?
Mr. Pickle. The long-term cost I do not know; we won't know
until we complete the consulting work. That's part of this
funding.
NEW MAIL HANDLING PROTOCOLS
Senator Campbell. For whatever you can say in a public
forum here, what's the status of the new mail handling
protocols? What's been put in place following the ricin
incident?
Mr. Pickle. Let me talk in general terms if I may. Mail
coming to the Senate continues to be irradiated at a postal
facility in the Northeast part of this country. It's then
delivered here to Washington where it goes to a mail examining
center. The mail is examined in a particular process. It then
goes to another center where it's actually opened, physically
opened, and each individual letter is opened and examined for
any type of substance. It's then quarantined until the tests
come back negative. It is then delivered to the Senate post
office, where the post office then delivers it to the
individual committee or Member's office. This process,
unfortunately, adds about 24 hours to the current mail delivery
process. We're looking at postmark to delivery about 8 to 10
days. Now, having said that, we still have a backlog because,
as you remember, on February 3, when we had the ricin attack,
we stopped delivery of mail for approximately 10 days here on
the Senate side. We're trying to go through all that mail that
is backed up and clean it out of the system and get it
delivered. So we still have a backlog of just under 2 weeks of
mail that hasn't been caught up with.
Senator Campbell. About 2 weeks?
Mr. Pickle. About 2 weeks' worth.
EFFECTS OF IRRADIATION
Senator Campbell. One last little question. I don't know if
this happened to all the other Senators or just me but this is
my Senate card, and it's all faded and flat. The raised
numbers, that go through the irradiation machine, they're
perfectly flat so the electronic tape, this magnetic tape on
the back still works but the front doesn't. I was told that
that's what irradiation does to them. Is that just my card or
do they all come out like that?
Mr. Pickle. No, if the irradiation level is high enough it
will, the term that's used, ``cook'' something and that heat
could, in fact, flatten those out.
Senator Campbell. Is there anything on the drawing board
that won't do that to cards?
Mr. Pickle. Well, I'm surprised that happened. We promised
about 1 year ago that we would reduce those levels considerably
so as to prevent that. But we will look into that, certainly.
Senator Campbell. Okay, I have no further questions.
Senator Durbin.
JUDICIARY COMMITTEE PROBE
Senator Durbin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Pickle, again
let me thank you and all those who helped you with the
investigation on the computer break-in, computer theft. I know
it was an extraordinary commitment on your part and the people
who worked with you, with the Capitol Police as well as the
Secret Service. I thank you for that.
Mr. Pickle. Thank you.
Senator Durbin. I'd like to ask you a few follow-up
questions. You're aware of the fact that when the Senate
Judiciary Committee finished a number of letters were sent to
the Attorney General.
Mr. Pickle. Yes, sir.
Senator Durbin. Different letters. Some of us signed both.
Mr. Pickle. Yes.
Senator Durbin. I think the message that we were sending to
the Attorney General's Office was our hope that this would be
investigated in a totally above-board, non-partisan fashion.
And your investigation was to determine whether or not there
was any criminal wrongdoing and whether this investigation
should be pursued. I'd like to ask you a few questions relevant
to that. I understand on Wednesday, March 17, you delivered a
copy of the report to the Justice Department. First of all, I
realize Attorney General Ashcroft has been out as he's
recuperating from surgery and we all wish him well in that
regard; Deputy Attorney General Jim Comey is in charge of the
Department. Did you meet with Mr. Comey with this referral?
Mr. Pickle. No, we made initial contact with Mr. Comey's
office and his designee met with us, a Mr. Chris Ray.
Senator Durbin. The Assistant Attorney for the Criminal
Division?
Mr. Pickle. Criminal, yes.
Senator Durbin. Did anyone, Mr. Ray or anyone at the
Justice Department, tell you what they intended to do with the
report?
Mr. Pickle. I believe the quote was that we intend to take
a very thorough, professional review of this and we will
contact the committee.
Senator Durbin. Did they give you any timeframe within
which they would respond to the referral?
Mr. Pickle. No, not at all.
Senator Durbin. Did you ask them for a response?
Mr. Pickle. No, we did not, sir.
Senator Durbin. Was Mr. William Ascella--I hope I'm
pronouncing it correctly--the Department's Assistant Attorney
General for Legislative Affairs, at the meeting as well?
Mr. Pickle. Yes he was.
Senator Durbin. Did you raise with him the outstanding
issue you had with the Department of Justice Legislative
Affairs Office which you referred to in your report footnote
seven, and I quote, ``As to the time of this report is being
completed, the Department of Justice still has under
consideration investigators' request to interview the employee
who Mr. Blank reported having contacts with.''
Mr. Pickle. Yes, we raised that issue.
Senator Durbin. If so, what did Mr. Ascella--I hope that's
correct--reply?
Mr. Pickle. I along with my counsel, Lynne Halbrooks, who
is with me, raised that issue along with several other issues
we thought were important but there was no comment to those.
Senator Durbin. Based on your investigation do you feel
that there is any danger if the investigation, complete
investigation of this matter is not finished in a timely
fashion?
Mr. Pickle. I'm going to look at it as a criminal
investigator would. I have no concerns that any evidence will
be destroyed but of course any investigation you get into you
want to do it in a very timely manner; memories are fresh,
documents cannot be destroyed that may not be in possession,
and people can still be located. So I would hope that it would
be investigated soon if it's going to be investigated at all.
Senator Durbin. Thank you very much, I agree with that. And
I might also add for the record that some groups continue to
buy newspaper advertising that attacks the Senators who had
their files broken into instead of going after those who were
guilty of the theft.
GAO COMPUTER SECURITY REVIEW
Let me ask you also, during your investigation you came to
realize that all of the Senate committees' systems were set up
in essentially similar ways, with similar vulnerabilities in
some places as those exploited in the Senate Judiciary
Committee. On February 20, 2004, Senators Hatch and Leahy sent
a joint letter to David Walker, Comptroller General, asking the
GAO to perform a comprehensive control study to assess the
sufficiency of our committee's computer security and to
recommend policies and practices for the committee to adopt.
Are you working with the GAO on this matter?
Mr. Pickle. We have had only a conversation over the phone
with them. They're starting to make inquiries now and they're
starting to come in and begin their review but I don't know at
what stage that is.
Senator Durbin. Do you plan on working with the GAO in this
study?
Mr. Pickle. We're going to be helpful but I want to direct
them to the committee and work with staff directors there. And
I have to be cautious about this; I want to make sure that
whatever we do does not jeopardize the evidence that we still
have in custody, the servers, the hard drives and the other
backup tapes that we seized. So it may be the GAO may take a
step back and wait for this to be complete before they come in.
Senator Durbin. So it's possible the GAO analysis and
recommendations about how to make all the computers safe on
Capitol Hill may be waiting Department of Justice action at
your investigation.
Mr. Pickle. It's possible but I think they would have to
look and actually meet with the staff directors and meet with
the systems administrators. And once they get a feel of the
architecture and what currently exists they can probably then
make that decision but I wouldn't want them to be premature and
just jump in without having a good view of that land in front
of them.
Senator Durbin. Well, I certainly hope Department of
Justice deals with this in a timely fashion to preserve
evidence and to make certain that we have a good, complete
investigation. You took it as far as you could, I understand
that, did a fine job with the Secret Service but only
Department of Justice can finish this investigation. Doing it
in a timely fashion will finally bring us to a conclusion in
that regard one way or the other and also set the stage for
looking at other computer facilities on the Hill to make
certain that they're not vulnerable to the same type of theft.
SENATE COMPUTING TECHNOLOGY
At one of the earlier hearings I expressed concern about
the technology----
Mr. Pickle. Yes.
Senator Durbin [continuing]. Available to members of the
United States Senate. Since I share a home with two Members of
the U.S. House of Representatives I often hear about the new
bells and whistles that are being added to their computer
system.
Mr. Pickle. Yes.
Senator Durbin. And I said outloud, and was quoted in the
press, that I wanted to find out why the Senate was always
behind the House and the House and Senate were always behind
the rest of the world when it came to computer technology.
Mr. Pickle. Yes.
Senator Durbin. I've learned, once again, to be careful
what you wish for because Mr. Greg Hanson of your office came
by and absolutely snowed me in a matter of hours, an hour or
so, briefing my staff about everything that he's done in a
short period of time and plans to do to make sure that the
Senate technology is the very best within the limits of our
budget. My office receives about 50,000 e-mails every week,
50,000 a week. And we have to find a way to sort through these
e-mails by source and subject and generate some replies that
are meaningful to the people who contacted us and decide which
ones we're not going to reply to, for instance, those from
outside my State. I'm wondering, the House, I understand, has a
system that's being designed to generate such an automatic
reply and sorting. Do you know if similar plans are in place
for the Senate?
Mr. Pickle. I was unaware of this sorting system or
software that they have. I have talked to Mr. Hanson since his
meeting with you and we are certainly looking at it. I think it
can be supplied on an individual basis but we're looking at
that now to see if that's not something we should offer
everyone.
Senator Durbin. One of the nightmares that Senator Campbell
and I face is to go back to our home States and have someone
say, I sent a letter to your office and I never got a reply.
Or, I sent an e-mail and I never heard from you.
Mr. Pickle. Yes.
Senator Durbin. It's one of the most depressing things that
can happen to an elected official. Now we have a mail system
that is being delayed for security reasons, obviously necessary
security reasons, and an e-mail system that is being
overwhelmed.
Mr. Pickle. Sure.
Senator Durbin. And so I live and dread that going back to
my State I'm going to run into that kind of a situation. So I
certainly encourage you and Mr. Hanson to see if there's a
timely way to deal with that issue.
Mr. Pickle. We will.
SECURITY FOR CAPITOL VISITOR CENTER
Senator Durbin. May I ask you one last question and that
is, can you tell me what conversations you've been involved in,
if any, relative to security at the new Capitol Visitor Center?
Mr. Pickle. The conversations relative to security have
been few and far between as it relates to the CVC. In other
words, we're at a stage now where most of the discussions have
to do with operational aspects of the center. Initially we did
have a number of conversations; I know the police department
participates in these discussions actively with the folks
involved in coordinating this effort. Obviously security is
paramount there; it's one of the key reasons why we have that
center. But I believe from what I heard at a meeting last week
that those needs are being addressed and we want to make sure
they are addressed.
Senator Durbin. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Pickle, Mr.
Chairman.
Senator Campbell. Senator when you said 50,000 e-mails a
week, I haven't been here as long as many of my colleagues but
I tell you, when I first got in office just 22 years ago there
were no e-mails. There were no cells phones, there were no
Blackberries and those days are gone forever. I often think
when I see some of my senior colleagues like Senator Stevens
who's with us today, the changes he's seen in technology, what
there was or wasn't when he got here but I guess I better not
go there.
I'll yield to Senator Stevens now for any questions.
Senator Stevens. Pocahontas had just left if that tells you
anything.
Senator Campbell. That's been awhile.
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS SECURITY
Senator Stevens. I really don't have any questions but I
came by, Mr. Pickle, because I think Senator Bennett has
pursued the concept of a police force for the Library of
Congress. I happen to be Chairman of the Joint Committee on the
Library of Congress. We still have some real misunderstandings
about the concept of integrating the police force, Capitol
Police Force, with the police, staff of the Library of
Congress. And I've got a bunch of questions that I was going to
ask but I think what I'm going to do instead is ask if you and
Dr. Billington would meet us, members of the subcommittee,
whoever wants to come and see if we can't work this out.
Security of the Capitol comes first but there is, really, a
history of the police force over there that they've had
different duties in the past and I think we have to work some
sort of a transition to meet their needs at the same time with
the new complex that we've got being built in terms of the new
facilities, the visitor facilities, and the connections that
will lead to the Library there. I do believe we have to
integrate the police force of Capitol Hill. I would like to
make sure that the transition is done in a way that doesn't
upset the current needs of the Library while at the same time
meeting the transitional needs of the Capitol Police. I think
that's going to be worked out in a conference with all
concerned if you're willing to do that. I know, Mr. Chairman,
you've been involved in that and of course it was initially
started by Senator Bennett. We watched it but I do get comments
from the librarian and from the Library of Congress personnel
and it's just better if we work it out on a consensus basis and
get some specifics about the transition and how we achieve the
goals both of the Capitol Police and the Library. So I hope
you'd be willing to do that sometime after Easter, just sit
down and work it out.
Mr. Pickle. Be happy to, sir. Thank you.
Senator Stevens. Thank you.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
Senator Campbell. Thank you, Bill. There may be additional
questions in writing from other members who are not here. Thank
you for your appearance.
Mr. Pickle. Thank you.
[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. It is our understanding that the Sergeant at Arms offers
cellular phone/BlackBerry combination devices from both Cingular and
Verizon; and that only the devices provided by Cingular have the
capability to receive the emergency alerts from your office and the
Capitol Police. Given that you offer the Verizon BlackBerry and that
most Senate cellular accounts are on the Verizon network, what is your
plan to enable the Verizon BlackBerrys to receive the emergency alerts?
Answer. Although all of the major wireless carriers offer their own
version of RIM's BlackBerry, the SAA only fully supports the original
BlackBerry 950 and 957 devices which use the Cingular nationwide
Mobitex ``data only'' network. This is because these are the only
devices that provide the alert capabilities used by the Capitol Police
and the Senate Cloakrooms.
We are aggressively exploring a device- and carrier-agnostic
solution that offers maximum flexibility and reduces our dependencies
as they relate to device manufacturers and wireless network providers.
In parallel, we have provided all carriers offering the converged
BlackBerry devices our specific console-to-device and device-to-device
broadcast messaging requirements that we rely upon for USCP Emergency
Alerts and Cloakroom Vote Alerts. We have asked them to develop similar
if not more capable solutions to meet our emergency messaging needs and
hope that all carriers will soon be able to meet our requirements.
We are currently testing a beta version of software that runs on
Cingular's converged cellular phone/BlackBerry, model 7280, and
provides the alert capabilities we currently have on the RIM BlackBerry
models 950 and 957. We expect the final version of the software to be
released in the April-June 2004 timeframe, at which time it will become
the first fully supported converged cellular phone/BlackBerry device
that receives our alerts and works with the Senate's e-mail system.
We are also expecting to receive a beta version of the device- and
carrier-agnostic solution by the end of May 2004. Since we have not
seen the solution yet, we cannot say how long it will take to bring it
into production if it meets our needs, but we are hopeful that it can
be done by the end of the summer 2004.
We also expect that the technology will continue toward the
convergence of multiple functions into a single device. Although this
is a benefit to many, you should consider the consequences of having
all of your communications capabilities on one device that relies on a
single communications path for all of your normal and emergency
communications.
Finally, to clarify an assertion in the question, we assist Members
and their staff in ordering cellular phones or cellular phone and
BlackBerry combination devices from whatever carrier they believe best
meets their needs. In addition to Cingular and Verizon, we also order
devices and service from AT&T and other cellular carriers.
Question. In the wake of the recent ricin incident, is the Senate
considering scanning and digitizing mail like the House of
Representatives is doing?
Answer. As you know, the ricin incident caused us to change our
mail inspection, sorting, and delivery processes. Now, prior to
delivery to Senate offices, we open, inspect and test, at offsite
locations, all mail addressed to the Senate. These significant changes
have made us less vulnerable to such threats in the future.
In addition to the changes we've already made, we are investigating
the possibility of digitizing mail and the ramifications on Senate
operations. The House has a pilot program which has met with some
limited success, based on low volumes of mail. As part of our always
ongoing effort to leverage technology to improve efficiency and
effectiveness at the Senate, we have implemented sophisticated document
scanning and archiving capability in our Printing Graphics & Direct
Mail (PG&DM) organization. We are currently evaluating the House
initiative along with looking at ways to utilize the technology we have
to address the problem of digitizing and distributing Senate mail.
Factors to be considered:
--The extremely high volume of Senate mail
--The impact irradiation has on document imaging legibility
--The sensitive nature of some of the Senate mail
--The importance, in some cases, of preserving and delivering paper
artifacts
--The delay that scanning and digitizing might introduce into our
mail processes--it takes about 3.5 minutes per letter and we
average 32,000 first class letters every day
--Delivery modes and media
--The potential effect of transmitting digitized mail files across
our network infrastructure
--The additional cost in terms of personnel and infrastructure
upgrades to accommodate digitizing mail
--Procedures, processes, and locations for storing paper mail
artifacts after digitization
--Privacy and security issues.
As we conduct this analysis, we will continue to explore new ways
and new technologies to make Senate mail delivery more efficient,
effective and secure.
Question. Please give us an idea of the volume of message traffic
that passes through our networks and the degree to which our website is
visited.
A Typical Monday
Web Services Statistics (Webster, Senate.gov, LIS & Senate
Newswire)--
--Total unique visits: 99,420
--Total data sent to the public: 26,074,442,795 bytes
Electronic Mail--
--Inbound: 281,795 messages
--Outbound: 163,609 messages
--TOTAL: 445,404 messages
Daily Viruses Report--
--Mail Gateway viruses found: 39,795
--Server viruses found: 3,664
Question. Please give us an idea of the number of support calls
your information systems help desk and your telecommunications services
organizations process.
Computer Support:
Computer trouble calls resolved annually--Approx. 18,000
Orders and installations annually--Approx. 4,000
Helpdesk has met or exceeded service level agreement (SLA) every
month since May 2003 (95 percent work accomplished on time and 95
percent of customer satisfaction ratings either ``very satisfactory''
or ``excellent''
Telecommunications Support (fiscal year 2003)
Capitol Exchange calls answered--1,805,818
Telecomm helpdesk (programming) telephones programmed--10,213
Telecomm Coordinators--20,189 task orders accomplished
Info Exchange--2,520,168 pages processed
Question. Why is parking around the Capitol complex at such a
premium?
Answer. Nearly 400 parking spaces have been lost since the CVC
project began. During that same period of time, Members, Offices, and
Committees have issued or requested 445 unreserved parking permits, and
the USCP has petitioned for another 400 unreserved permits to
accommodate new recruits. Currently, over 2,000 unreserved permits
exist for 1,042 unreserved parking spaces.
Historically, Members, Offices, and Committees have been allowed to
request unreserved parking permits as needed. Even when the CVC is
completed, there will be less space for parking; perhaps now is a good
time to limit the number of unreserved parking permits that each
Member, Office, and Committee can issue as has been done with the AOC
and the USCP.
The USCP has exhausted its allocation and is looking for additional
parking. A recent contract with the Fairchild Building will yield at
least 100 spaces to the USCP, and parking lots adjacent to the
Fairchild Building have been noted by the AOC.
The USCP and the Parking Office are collaborating to step up
enforcement. The AOC can help recover approximately 150 slots by
seeking work sites off of Senate parking lots. The Parking Office is
aggressively seeking ways to squeeze more spaces from existing lots and
streets, including ``short stacking'' lots when demand for parking is
high. Increased use of Metro Subsidy will help alleviate parking
pressures as well.
There has been discussion of building a garage on the Senate
campus. A garage would certainly alleviate many problems and pressures
associated with parking.
Question. What is being done to alleviate the lengthy lines to
enter Senate buildings?
Answer. Several options are under evaluation by the U.S. Capitol
Police. Those options include:
--Designating certain entrances as ``Staff Only'' entrances between
the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m.
--Directing visitors to locations that do not impede staff entrances.
--Providing additional officers at the Hart Building C Street
entrance to assist and conduct hand searches of staff bags.
--Exploring additional X-ray machines at locations that can support
them.
We plan to meet with the Committee on Rules and Administration to
discuss these options prior to any implementation.
CAPITOL POLICE BOARD
STATEMENT OF W. WILSON LIVINGOOD, CHAIRMAN, CAPITOL
POLICE BOARD
ACCOMPANIED BY:
HON. WILLIAM H. PICKLE, SENATE SERGEANT AT ARMS AND BOARD
MEMBER
HON. ALAN M. HANTMAN, ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL
TERRANCE W. GAINER, CHIEF, U.S. CAPITOL POLICE
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL
Senator Campbell. We now move to panel two, the House
Sergeant at Arms, Bill Livingood, accompanied by board members
Bill Pickle and Architect of the Capitol Alan Hantman. And
Chief of Police Terrance Gainer. And as with the first panel if
you'd like to abbreviate your comments that will be fine since
we've already read your written statement. And I understand Mr.
Alan Hantman is also here, a member of the Police Force, too.
Go ahead and start, Mr. Livingood.
LOC POLICE MERGER MEETING
Senator Stevens. Mr. Chairman, could I just interrupt and
ask if I may ask questions of these gentlemen? You heard my
question to Mr. Pickle, are you willing to have such a meeting,
Chief Gainer?
Chief Gainer. Yes, Senator.
Senator Stevens. Does that meet with your approval, Mr.
Livingood?
Mr. Livingood. Yes sir.
Senator Stevens. Thank you very much.
STATEMENT OF WILSON LIVINGOOD
Mr. Livingood. Mr. Chairman and Senator Durbin, I'm honored
to appear before you today to discuss the United States Capitol
Police fiscal year 2005 budget request. The Capitol Board
members, Mr. Pickle and Mr. Hantman, are here with me and Chief
Gainer is accompanying us today.
With your permission I am just going to provide you with a
short summary of my budget request remarks and provide the
balance in my testimony for the record.
Senator Campbell. That's fine.
Mr. Livingood. World events and the continuing threat to
our security here at home have driven an increased Capitol
complex security. It is a very difficult job to maintain a
legislative complex open to the public while at the same time
ensuring the safety of the Congress, staff and visitors against
increased dangers. The news media provides daily testimony of
the terrors and political agendas of extremist groups. In
today's environment the Capitol Police walk a very fine line
and have a challenging mission--maintaining the tradition of
open Government that we revere and demand while providing the
maximum degree of safety and security. To accomplish this
mission the Chief and the Department have developed an
excellent strategic plan, one designed to meet not only the
current needs but the future needs of the Congress.
The budget before you today is a funding requirement based
on this strategic plan. We ask your support and approval in
carrying out this strategic plan which strengthens our
vigilance, resilience by augmenting abilities in assessing
threats, preventing unlawful acts, responding to incidents and
supporting the general operations of the Capitol Police.
PREPARED STATEMENT
In closing, I would like to thank the Committee for the
ongoing support of the men and women of the Capitol Police and
their continued and diligent efforts to develop a better
security plan and operations, response forces and law
enforcement capabilities. I'd also like to extend a personal
word of thanks to the men and women of the Capitol Police and
the entire Board joins me in this, in that every day they
provide the highest possible degree of professionalism,
commitment and service to the United States Congress. And I am
proud to represent them today as is the rest of the Board
before you. Thank you.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Wilson Livingood
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I am honored to
appear before you today to discuss the United States Capitol Police
fiscal year 2005 budget request. Capitol Police Board members, William
Pickle, Senate Sergeant at Arms, Alan Hantman, Architect of the
Capitol, and Terrance Gainer, Chief of Police accompany me today.
Mr. Chairman, I would first like to thank the Committee for their
ongoing support of the men and women of the Capitol Police and their
continued and diligent efforts to develop better security operations,
response forces, and law enforcement capabilities.
World events and security threats here at home have driven
increased Capitol complex security. It is a difficult job to maintain a
legislative complex open to the public, while at the same time ensuring
the safety of the Congress, staff, and visitors against increased
dangers. The news media provides daily testimony of the terrors and
political agendas of extremist groups. In today's environment, the
Capitol Police walk a fine line--maintaining the tradition of open
government that we revere and demand, while providing the maximum
degree of safety and security. At times in the past year, the national
threat level has been elevated in response to the potential for
domestic terrorist activity. We have mirrored this response with our
own Capitol-specific threat levels. Indeed, the Capitol--much like the
White House--is both a working building and a monument, and therefore
currently remains at an elevated threat level. It is clear from our
history that the Capitol is a tempting target for terrorists and those
who seek to disrupt the legislative process or strike a symbolic blow
against the United States. We also know that terrorists choose targets
based on certain criteria, such as symbolism, mass casualties, and high
likelihood of success. It is our responsibility to take every prudent
precaution that we can to remove the terrorists' likelihood of success
with regard to the Capitol, the Senate and House office buildings, and
for those who work and visit within the Capitol complex.
The Chief and his staff have been very diligent this past year in
appraising the effectiveness of police operations. They have developed
an excellent strategic plan that is designed to meet the current and
future needs of Congress. The budget before you today is the funding
requirement based on this Strategic Plan. We ask your support and
approval in carrying out this plan, which strengthens our vigilance and
resilience by augmenting abilities in assessing threats, providing
effective security, preventing unlawful acts, responding to incidents,
and supporting the general operations of the Capitol Police. We cannot
undo an incident like a suicide or truck bombing as seen abroad, and
should act responsibly to prevent these incidents. Related to the issue
of sufficient force strength and sufficient police facilities, recent
Capitol Police growth and requested staffing levels have and will
strain facility requirements; we ask for your continued support in
solving these issues.
In prior appropriations, this Committee funded, and the Capitol
Police are putting into action, a Hazardous Materials Response Team.
Most recently, this forethought and action paid off. I would like to
publicly commend the Chief and his dedicated staff for a stellar job in
handling the ricin incident. The Capitol Police trained, prepared, and
were ready for this type of incident. Being prepared requires gathering
intelligence, training, and adapting operations commensurate with
needs. For example, the discovery of ricin in Senate mail has prompted
a complete review of all mail protocols for both the Senate and the
House. We are constantly reviewing and enhancing existing emergency
plans, protocols and procedures. Regarding preparations, there is a
renewed focus on training. In the past year, Congressional staffs have
been introduced to the protocols relating to evacuation and shelter in
place procedures, as well continued practice with the escape hoods.
The Capitol Police are to be applauded for their efforts since we
last met. Preparing for incidents and preempting threats has been a
crucial focus under the Chief's leadership, and so the Department is
constantly assessing its abilities and strengthening its skills. Recent
Capitol Police accomplishments include: an in depth analysis of
staffing, the development of a new strategic plan, core infrastructure
systems replacement, an increase in employee training, better morale,
and continued implementation of hazardous materials response
capabilities. The Department's infrastructure is being shored up with
an inside-out-approach that is challenging the whole of the
organization to perform at a higher level.
This transformation effort, which includes additional operational
and administrative staffing resources and new security and information
systems, is a thoughtful multi-year undertaking extending into the 2005
fiscal year and relies on the budget request before you today. This
budget ties the planning and transformational efforts of the Department
to the requested means necessary to support this effort. Every line
item in this budget is purpose-built to support one of the four major
goals of the Department and the supporting strategic objectives. This
is a tightly engineered budget, formulated with the best efforts of
many highly trained men and women dedicated to the mission of the
Department to protect Congress, its Members, staff, visitors and, in
whole, the Legislative process from harm or interruption.
Mr. Chairman, on behalf of the Capitol Police Board, I would like
to thank you for this opportunity to appear before you today, and for
your consideration of this budget request. Every day, the men and women
of the U.S. Capitol Police face a huge challenge: to provide the
maximum degree of safety and security while allowing the Capitol,
Senate and House Office Buildings to remain open and accessible to the
general public. And every day they succeed. I am honored to be
associated with the men and women of the U.S. Capitol Police.
Chief Gainer will address more specific operations and plans for
the coming fiscal year.
Senator Campbell. Thank you, Mr. Livingood. Chief Gainer.
STATEMENT OF CHIEF TERRANCE W. GAINER
Chief Gainer. Thank you Senator, and I too will submit my
testimony for the record and summarize it.
I'd like to put a little context to our budget request and
reiterate what the chairman just mentioned, that the fight
against terrorism led by the United States and its coalition
partners continues. We know through speeches, tapes and other
terrorist propaganda the leadership of Al Queda has stated
their intent to strike another blow on America. This rhetoric
and their actions has given some insight into potential
targets. The United States Capitol and all it stands for is
clearly one of those targets.
It is human nature to be optimistic but recent events have
reinforced what intelligence has discovered over the years,
that terrorist organizations have the means and methods to
strike whenever and wherever. Intelligence and security experts
both inside and outside government have stated that the United
States Capitol remains a primary target. It is not really a
question of if but a question of when we could expect a strike.
What is known is that vehicle bombs, suicide bombers and
improvised explosive devices are the weapons of choice and easy
to execute.
We have not limited our preventive measures to these
traditional threats. As you know, 9/11 introduced a new method
and means of carrying out an attack, since then we have
increased our intelligence capability and the Department has
personnel detailed to other Federal agencies to further
facilitate that capability. We have people at Homeland
Security, FBI, State Department, CIA, as well as some local
departments. We have undertaken a number of projects to
continue emergency outreach and notification. While many of you
know of the emergency annunciators you may not know that we
have over 3,600 of these units deployed through the entire
Capitol system. In addition, we have developed a project to
deploy a complex-wide public address system. This project will
provide the critical means to send out emergency notifications
to all public spaces, evacuation and assembly areas, parking
garages and other areas. We expect this project to be completed
in December of this year; we're on target to reach that
objective.
We are, however, vulnerable around this Capitol. As the
committee is aware, there have been a number of studies done
over the years; they have all commented on our openness to the
largest vulnerability, in particular there have been five
studies by various security experts that have recommended the
installation of a fence around the Capitol square. Even a
recent staffing analysis conducted by the General Accounting
Office in February 2004, included the installation of a fence,
as a recommended option. This latest recommendation goes a step
further and recommends a fence around all the office buildings,
and I quote from that report. ``An aesthetically pleasing
perimeter security fence could be constructed around the
Capitol Building grounds. This would markedly increase security
within and around the Capitol Building, Members, staff and
visitors.'' The recommendation of a fence has been discussed
for many years and was originally proposed in a 1985 document
called the ``Whip's Plan''. While the decision on the fence
will not be decided here, the impact from the lack of it is
felt every day and is shown in the numbers of required
personnel in our budget. We are constantly required to increase
the use of manpower and technology to keep this legislative
branch safe and secure while ensuring continuous operations
during these evolving threats, as well as maintaining an open
and free Capitol.
It is the men and women of this Department who selflessly
provide the first line of defense to protect this institution.
Most Federal agencies have layers of defense to prevent
attacks. The success of a terrorist attack on one of our
buildings, once initiated, will be deterred by that officer
standing at the entrance of the building. While the use of
technology aids in detection and deterrence, it was a police
officer that prevented Russell Weston from continuing through
the Capitol. And it was police officers who first responded to
both the anthrax and ricin.
Accordingly, our budget request of $291.6 million
represents a reasonable, necessary and balanced plan to
directly assess the threats of today and proposes the use of
resources to ensure the protection of the Congress, its
Members, staff and visitors in the process. The implementation
of our strategic plan, which this budget supports, is a prudent
plan to help ensure the safety of our Capitol. The budget
request represents a 33 percent increase over the fiscal year
2004 net appropriation. It's a lot. However, when the $12.7
million from the fiscal year 2003 supplemental, which as
directed by the committees was used to support fiscal year 2004
operational needs is taken into consideration, the requested
increase is $59.1 million or 25 percent and is still
significant.
This increase provides $12.7 million for 6 months' funding
for 213 sworn and 155 civilian additional positions. In the
personnel area $5.5 million is requested for a sworn pay scale
adjustment; $3.3 million for a 6-month annualization of the 75
civilian positions provided in fiscal year 2004 and $12.2
million for the cost of living adjustments, rate increases and
health benefits.
Other significant increases include $3.1 million for the
Inauguration; $8.1 million for the replacement of escape hoods;
$3 million for a new accounting system; $2.7 million for
security at the new legislative branch alternate computer
facility and $1.8 million for wireless data interoperability
infrastructure. But I need to point out this is not just a wish
list of our managers. We have a zero-base budget process.
Originally, the general expense requests totaled over $100
million, which were reduced by some 40 percent to the $59.9
million included in this budget.
As with any organization we realize there is always room
for improvement. We will continue to strive to strengthen and
augment our prevention and response capabilities, to review the
current environment, to improve the coordination with our
congressional community, to emphasize training of all our
employees and to have substantially filled all authorized
civilian positions by the end of this fiscal year, and to make
progress with our business systems' modernizations.
And finally, although facilities are the responsibilities
of the Architect of the Capitol they certainly are critical to
our operations. In February 2004 the Architect of the Capitol
leased approximately 100,000 square feet of space at 499 South
Capitol Street SE, the Fairchild Building, as an interim space
solution. This facility will go a long way to alleviate our
space constraints at our headquarters building when we move in
there.
As the Chief of the Capitol Police I take great pride in
the many years of service that this Department has provided to
the Congress. Building on that legacy, we at the Capitol Police
look forward to continuing to safeguard the Congress, its staff
and visitors. And we look forward to working with the Congress
and this committee to see what we can do with our budget.
PREPARED STATEMENT
And finally, Senator, I might say on behalf of the men and
women, as we wind toward the conclusion of your particular
career, thank you for your support of the men and women of the
Capitol Police. Your kindness to our officers and the people
who support them is well recognized. Your help in getting our
Harleys is lauded by all those riders and now the horses that
recently visited our Capitol and will be out galloping come
this May, we definitely owe a debt of gratitude to you. Thank
you.
[The statement follows:]
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 2005 budget request.
I would like to thank the Committee for their continued support of
the Capitol Police and our efforts to provide world-class security and
law enforcement services to the Congress. As the foremost symbol of
American representative democracy, the Congress, its Members,
employees, visitors, as well as public buildings and operations are a
highly visible target for individuals and organizations intent on
causing harm to the United States and disrupting the legislative
operations of our government. We are the first line of defense and we
take our job very seriously.
Expansion, as well as consistently fine tuning how we currently
operate, is imperative to ensuring that we continue to provide the
safest and most secure environment to enable Congress to fulfill its
Constitutional responsibilities, and to protect those who work and
visit the Capitol complex. We face a daunting task, and a high
workload.
During fiscal year 2003, the Uniformed Services Bureau greeted and
screened over 7.4 million staff and visitors, the K-9 unit conducted
more than 40,000 explosive detection sweeps, the offsite delivery
center conducted 19,081 vehicle and cargo inspections, the Construction
Security Division conducted 85,870 vehicle inspections in calendar year
2003, we made 553 misdemeanor and felony arrests and 982 traffic
arrests, 87 weapons and contraband items were confiscated, and the
Hazardous Devices section conducted over 2,000 bomb searches and
responded to over 430 suspicious package calls. Our specialized units
also responded to the recent Ricin incident. The Department used our
Hazardous Incident Response Division teams and our recently specially
trained officers for the initial response. This incident quickly grew
to include numerous federal and military agencies involved in the
resolution. The Department's incident management team seamlessly joined
our federal partners to successfully manage this biological threat. Our
capabilities in this area have greatly improved since the 2001 Anthrax
attack.
The fight against terrorism led by the United States and its
coalition partners continues. Recent events in Europe, Russia,
Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel and specifically the Madrid bombings
illustrate that the global war on terrorism has not diminished. As the
leader of this endeavor, the United States is the number one target of
al-Qa'ida, its surrogates, and other Islamic radicals. In speeches,
tapes and other terrorist propaganda, the leadership of al-Qa'ida has
stated their intent to strike another blow on our homeland. This
rhetoric and their actions, have given some insight into potential
targets. The United States Capitol and all it stands for, is clearly
one of those targets.
It is human nature to be optimistic, but recent events have
reinforced what intelligence information has told us for years, that
terrorist organizations have the means and the methods to strike
whenever and wherever. Intelligence and Security experts both inside
and outside government have stated the U.S. Capitol remains a primary
target. It is really not a question of if, but when the United States
Capitol Police will again be called to respond to another terrorist
attack. What is known is that vehicle bombs, homicide bombers, and
improvised explosive devices are the weapons of choice and easy to
execute. The Department continues to take unprecedented steps to
counter these threats and is considered a leader in many areas among
federal and private institutions.
For example, we recently developed and distributed a comprehensive
procedure for officers responding to a homicide bomber. One of the
first in the nation to address this threat, we have developed with
support from this Committee, a design for a comprehensive Truck
Interdiction Program. This project will use the latest, leading edge
technology to detect and interdict a threat before it reaches our
doorstep. We have deployed the latest in explosive detection equipment
at all our buildings and have increased the number of our K-9 explosive
teams.
But we have not limited our preventive measures to just traditional
threats. As you well know, 9/11 introduced a new method and means of
carrying out an attack. We have increased out Intelligence capability
and the Department has personnel detailed to other federal agencies to
further enhance that capability. The Capitol Police has personnel
working as liaisons at major operations centers and have partnerships
with the Department of Homeland Security, FBI, and others. Because of
all these enhancements, the Capitol Police is able to respond to
potential threats in a real-time manner.
But we have not solely focused our notification efforts internally.
We have taken a number of steps to provide information to the
Congressional Community. The recent Ricin incident illustrated the
benefit of having a fully functioning Capitol Police Command Center.
The newly upgraded Center provided operational workspace for the
Capitol Police Incident Command, as well as response elements from the
Executive Branch, the Senate, the House, the Architect of the Capitol,
the Sergeant at Arms Offices, the Office of the Attending Physician and
many others. Those that remember our capabilities after 9/11 and the
Anthrax attack saw a drastic change in our capabilities, which were
fully used during this incident.
We have undertaken a number of projects to continue emergency
outreach and notification. While many of you now know of the emergency
annunciators, you may not know that there are over 3,600 of these units
deployed and the entire system is maintained and operated by the United
States Capitol Police. In addition, we developed a project to deploy a
complex wide Public Address System. This project will provide the
critical means to send out emergency notifications to all public
spaces, evacuation assembly areas, parking garages and other areas. We
expect that this project will be completed by December 2004. We are on
target to meet this objective.
As the Committee is aware, there have been a number of studies done
over the years. They all have all commented that our openness is the
largest vulnerability. In particular, there have been five studies by
various security experts that have recommended the installation of a
fence around Capitol Square. Even a recent staffing analysis, conducted
by the General Accounting Office in February 2004 included the
recommendation of the installation of a fence. This latest
recommendation goes a step further and recommends a fence around the
office buildings as well. And I quote ``An aesthetically pleasing
perimeter security fence could be constructed around the Capitol
Building grounds. This would markedly increase security within and
around the Capitol Building Members, staff, and visitors.''
The recommendation of the fence has been discussed for many years
and was originally proposed in a 1985 document called the Whip's Plan.
While the decision of the fence will not be decided here, the impact
from the lack of it is felt everyday and is shown in the numbers of
required personnel and our budget. We are constantly required to
increase the use of manpower and technology to keep the Legislative
Branch, safe, secure, and while ensuring continuous operations during
these evolving threats, as well as maintaining an open and free
Capitol.
It is the men and women of this Police Department who selflessly
provide the first line of defense to protect this institution. Most
federal agencies have layers of defense to prevent attacks. The success
of a terrorist attack at one of our buildings, once initiated, will be
determined by that officer standing at the entrance of the building.
While the use of technology aids in detection and deterrence, it was a
police officer that prevented Russell Weston from continuing through
the Capitol; and it was police officers that first responded to both
the Anthrax and Ricin attacks.
With any organization, we can and need to make improvements, and we
actively engage in self-assessments and critical reviews at the
conclusion of each project and incident to determine what went right
and what can be improved and to incorporate those lessons learned into
the fabric of our operations. This mechanism allows us to gauge our
success in a positive manner. For example, we are implementing a
process of self-testing where random, unannounced contraband will be
introduced to test our detection and response capabilities. This self-
assessment program, and the proper use of results, will strengthen our
portals and provide a safer environment for all who work 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, and we recognize continuous
improvement and flexibility are key to maintaining our professional
edge. The USCP is a stronger and better-organized agency than it was
the last time we met. We have completed a new five-year strategic plan,
a performance plan, an annual report and have completed an in-house
staffing analysis to provide a road map for improvements and practical
strategies for achievement of our mission and goals. The staffing
analysis provides a basis for discussion of our manpower needs and
continues to be reviewed by the General Accounting Office (GAO).
Accordingly, we used the staffing analysis as the basis of our fiscal
year 2005 personnel request. However, the GAO review and our ability to
stand up to their scrutiny will provide this Committee, and our other
oversight committees, with information with which to make decisions. I
welcome the review and input we are receiving related to this effort.
We welcome the input of our stakeholders and appreciate the input
of the GAO. We worked closely with the GAO in developing our new
strategic plan. The mission, vision, values, and goals established in
the strategic plan serves as a management tool to guide the USCP as we
carry out our mission each day and continue preparing for the future.
We have linked both our staffing request and all of our general expense
items to the strategic plan. In addition, performance appraisals for 30
of our top managers are directly tied to the strategic plan that has
become a working document in the Department as Lieutenants and above
and civilian equivalents recently underwent training to ensure an
understanding of the function and effect of the strategic plan.
Our budget request of $291.6 million represents a reasonable,
necessary and balanced plan to directly address the threats of today
and proposes the use of resources to ensure the protection of Congress,
its Members, staff, visitors, and the legislative process into the
future. The implementation of the USCP strategic plan, which this
budget supports, is a prudent plan to help ensure the safety of the
Capitol community and the uninterrupted continuation of Congressional
operations.
The budget request of $291.6 million represents a 33 percent
increase over the fiscal year 2004 net appropriation. However, when the
$12.7 million from the fiscal year 2003 supplemental, which as directed
by the Committees was used to support fiscal year 2004 operational
needs, is taken into consideration the requested increase is $59.1
million or 25 percent. This increase provides $12.7 million for six
months' funding for 213 sworn and 155 civilian additional positions. In
the personnel area, $5.5 million is requested for a sworn pay scale
adjustment, $3.3 million for the six-month annualization of the 75
civilian positions provided in fiscal year 2004, and $12.2 million for
the COLA adjustments, and within grade, and health benefit increases.
Other significant increases include $3.1 million for the Inauguration,
$8.1 million for the replacement of escape hoods, $3 million for a new
accounting system, $2.7 million for security at the new Legislative
Branch alternate computer facility, and $1.8 for wireless data
interoperability infrastructure.
Mr. Chairman, I want you to know that we are aware of the funding
constraints that this Committee may face. In that light, we have
developed a detailed prioritization of the entire budget request. We
will, of course, work with the Committee to meet any funding challenges
the Committee faces and to assure that the most critical resources we
require are provided to ensure the protection of the Congress and the
legislative processes. I should point out that our budget request is
not a ``wish list'' of our managers. We internally reviewed general
expense requests that totaled over $100.4 million and reduced that
amount by $40.5 million to the $59.9 million included in the fiscal
year 2005 budget request.
As with any organization, we realize there is always room for
improvement. We will continue to strive to strengthen and augment both
our prevention and response capabilities. We continue to review the
current environment, our policies and practices, and the resources and
tools available to the USCP to ensure that the level of Congressional
protection is the best it can be. We continue to improve the
coordination within our Congressional community and with other law
enforcement entities. We are continuing to emphasize training of all of
our employees. In fiscal year 2003, USCP employees participated in over
136,000 hours of training.
Training continues to be integral to the U.S. Capitol Police. This
past January marked the beginning of our new Diversity Training
Program. All Department employees will receive 8 hours of training
designed by specialists in Diversity issues. The feedback on this
training has been overwhelmingly positive.
On that note, I would like to report on the Department's effort to
recruit under-represented groups. In fiscal year 2004, the Office of
Human Resources initiated a targeted recruiting campaign that focuses
on recruiting activities in under-represented groups, while maintaining
our posture in the female and African-American arenas. These activities
include job fairs, educational institutions, professional
organizations, and publications that will result in an increase in our
targeted candidate pools. OHR has received input from several
congressional offices/groups in this endeavor.
I would like to point out that per Department of Justice
statistics, in June 2002, the USCP had the second highest percentage of
black police officers of all federal law enforcement. We recently
promoted approximately 40 supervisors to the rank of sergeant and
lieutenant. This group of supervisors reflects a very diverse group of
individuals who will lead the Department into the future.
We continue to make progress on our administrative and support
side. We got off to a slow start on hiring the additional civilian
staff that has been recently provided. To get this back on track, a new
Human Resources director was hired in August 2003. Since that time, we
have made a concerted effort to assess existing staff competencies and
reposition them accordingly as well as hire experienced and seasoned
individuals into key leadership positions. We have also procured
significant contract support to ``jump-start'' work in functional areas
identified by GAO as requiring improvement such as policy development,
workforce planning, performance management, and time and attendance
systems. In order to ensure that we keep our improvement efforts on
track, we have linked key HR activities to the agency's strategic plan
and developed corresponding performance measures.
We are committed to having substantially filled all authorized
civilian positions by September 30, 2004. We are developing an internal
Investment Review Board (IRB) process to review and prioritize major
resource requirements. In our Information Technology area, we continue
to make progress with our business systems modernization. We are in the
process of hiring an Information Security Officer and have contracted
for an IT Security Assessment to ensure the appropriate security of our
systems.
Although facilities are the responsibility of the Architect of the
Capitol (AOC), they are critical to our operations. In February 2004,
the AOC leased approximately 100,000 square feet of space at 499 South
Capitol Street S.E. as an interim space solution. This facility will go
a long way to alleviate space constraints at our Headquarters building.
Most of our administrative functions and the Capitol and House
Divisions will be housed in the new facility. I would like to thank the
Architect for his continued support, and go on record that I fully
support the funding he has included in his budget for the acquisition
of a new off-site delivery facility and for the maintenance of our
existing facilities. Again, we will work with the Committee and the AOC
on what our most urgent priorities are, and what can realistically be
funded within the limited resources available to the Committee.
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 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 address any questions you
may have.
SECURITY FENCE
Senator Campbell. Thank you, Chief. I'm just leaving here,
I'm not finishing a career. I'm going to climb a few mountains
somewhere else. I've enjoyed working you, the Capitol Police
and Bill with your Department, too. I look forward to coming
back someday though and hope there's somebody that's going to
really take a particular personal interest in the Capitol
Police as it has been mine. Maybe you have to have been a
policeman or a sheriff's deputy to have that kind of an
interest. I don't know, but it was right when I first got here
I wanted to make that one of my priorities and finally I was in
a position where I could help a little bit.
Let me ask you a few questions, here. First of all, you
mentioned this fence. I tell you, I think most Americans would
just rebel at the thought of their Capitol being fenced.
There's got to be, in this high-tech way we operate now,
methods of doing things without a big ugly fence around this
place. I know that in some cases there are types of bushes and
plants and things that can be planted that are just almost
impregnable. I mean, you almost can't get through them. My wife
has rose bushes around our house and if we don't trim them back
every year you can't even get through the front door of our
house, for obvious reasons; you just cut yourself to ribbons
with those thorns. So I hope whoever's making the decisions on
that thinks of some more aesthetically pleasing way of
surrounding this place rather than a wall or a fence. I think
that really flies in the face of what Americans want in their
Capitol. You know the openness that we've always expected of
our Capitol sends such a wonderful message to the world, we
have to find that balance, between security and not looking
like we're in a siege or something. And I know that there are
brighter minds than mine working on that or will be working on
that but I hope they think about that.
BUDGET FREEZE
We've been asking all the agencies and you heard me ask the
one that was on the table before you about what happens if we
cannot provide a lot of the money that they're asking for and
your significant increase includes 358 additional staff. If we
cannot reach that and we have to freeze your budget at last
year's level, do you have your budget prioritized to the
absolute must-haves and the things that could slide for a year
and things of that nature?
Chief Gainer. Senator, we sure do but to freeze at the
number last year would dramatically require the reduction in
force of sworn personnel.
OVERTIME HOURS
Senator Campbell. What are the shifts that the officers are
working now? During the big anthrax scare and some other times
they were working literally every day and 12-hour days and
longer. What's the normal shifts they're putting in now?
Chief Gainer. As a rule they're on an 8-hour schedule. But
I also should say a large portion of the Department probably
works another 8-hour day, one of their days off. So almost
everyone is working some amount of overtime and fortunately
they volunteer for it, as a rule.
Senator Campbell. You manage to staff enough just with
volunteers, too? Have you had to force any officers to work the
days off?
Chief Gainer. On occasion, Senator, there are probably some
unhappy families.
STAFFING JUSTIFICATION
Senator Campbell. You're requesting a total of 2,361 staff
for fiscal year 2005, consistent with your staffing analysis
put together last year. At the request of Congress the General
Accounting Office has contracted for an analysis of the Capitol
Police staffing plans. That contractor in its February report
indicated that there was insufficient justification, such as a
shortage of workload data, for roughly 300 new positions, of
which 186 would be in the Uniformed Service Bureau. What is
your reaction to that analysis?
Chief Gainer. Well, we worked very closely with the GAO and
their contractor, SAIC, who did that report for them. And I
think overall it's a mixed reaction. They used a red, yellow,
green light system. There were quite a few of the positions
where they felt that we provided sufficient justification and
information for them to make a decision, and then there were
relatively few red lights, to use their parlance, where they
felt there was not the justification or sufficient support. In
the area of their yellow lights there were quite a few; we
supplied them additional information, we're responding to their
report in writing and we're working with the Board to further
clarify what justification is needed.
HIRING OF FISCAL YEAR 2004 NEW CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES
Senator Campbell. We provided 75 additional civilian
employees last year. What's the status of those employees that
we did provide for? They've all been hired?
Chief Gainer. They have not all been hired. But what we did
do, about 6 months ago, was promote a new Director of Human
Resources and she has retooled Human Resources substantially.
Human Resources, along with our finance folks, have identified
the bottlenecks to that hiring process and we believe we are on
track to have all the hirings done for 2004 and also from
carryover from 2003 by the end of the fiscal year.
FAIRCHILD BUILDING LEASE
Senator Campbell. A lease was recently signed by the
Architect of the Capitol for several floors of the Fairchild
Building for the Capitol Police. Does that accommodate your
space needs?
Chief Gainer. Not totally. Right now we occupy probably
just under 200,000 square feet and that is largely
insufficient. The master plan called for some 500,000 square
feet. What the Fairchild Building provides us is about 101,000
square feet and it will go a long way to easing the pressure in
our headquarters building, the Senate and House office
buildings as well as the Capitol. It may very well free up some
space in the Capitol Visitor Center. But I think the bottom
line, Senator, I should point out, we see that Fairchild
100,000 square feet as very, very temporary and not a long-term
solution to the needs of the Department.
FIRING RANGE
Senator Campbell. I see. And you requested funding through
the Architect for a firing range. You do the training now over
there way down in the bowels of the Rayburn Building somewhere.
Chief Gainer. We do.
Senator Campbell. I understand. Well, if we are unable to
provide those funds is that where they'll continue training,
where they are now?
Chief Gainer. Well, that will be part of it but that again
is not enough. The Congress was very good, especially then to
the Department of the Treasury and now Homeland Security, in
securing a large facility at Cheltenham, Maryland, where a
large firing facility was designed and built. Unfortunately,
when that was designed and conceived only some 20 agencies were
going to use it; with the recomposition of Homeland Security 70
plus agencies are now going to use it. So we're all kind of
scrambling to see what piece of that we can get. We have met
with the Board and Senate staff, Homeland Security personnel to
see if we can work out a solution where we would have some
rights of priority at that facility. If that works out then the
absolute need for a range on-base would not be necessary.
LOC POLICE MERGER
Senator Campbell. I see. I believe, like Senator Stevens,
that we're at an impasse between the Library of Congress
objectives and the Capitol Police too, and I'm sorry you
haven't been able to get that all together and in sync. But I
just wanted to identify myself, associate myself with his
comments that I look forward to trying to work this difference
of opinion out about how we merge one department with the other
one. So I just wanted to tell you that.
Chief Gainer. Thank you.
MOUNTED HORSE UNIT
Senator Campbell. You mentioned the mounted unit. Are they
are on the grounds now?
Chief Gainer. Actually, they paid a visit to us just last
week and I have to tell you they were mobbed by people wanting
to get pictures with them. They're still in their training.
Senator Campbell. I'd like to say ``I told you so.''
Chief Gainer. Yes sir. They graduate April 16 and we hope
maybe that your schedule will permit you to be part of that. We
have eight officers and two sergeants in that school; we've
lost a couple through riding mishaps and they decided not to
continue riding. We have the equipment, we're in the midst of
buying the horses.
Senator Campbell. Did somebody tell them they're supposed
to get back on when they fall off?
Chief Gainer. Actually, they did right away but the next
day they decided not to get back on.
Senator Campbell. Oh, they shouldn't have been there in the
first place if they decided not to get back on. And they're
stabled with the Park Service horses down on the Mall?
Chief Gainer. That's what we're working on.
Senator Campbell. That's not where they are now, however?
Chief Gainer. Right now, Senator, they're still at the Rock
Creek training stable.
Senator Campbell. I see.
Chief Gainer. We're working out the agreement to determine
at which stable they will be.
Senator Campbell. So they're just training them and they
brought them down?
Chief Gainer. Right. We do have three vehicles and three
trailers. But one of the concerns is with the World War II
monument opening up and whether the Park Police will retain
that stable on the Mall is being discussed.
Senator Campbell. Is the Park Service Mounted Unit doing
some of the training of these officers?
Chief Gainer. They're conducting the training, it's all
under their direction and their authority, their expertise.
TRAINING HOURS
Senator Campbell. This is a broader training question--your
in-service training is about 80 hours a year, is that correct?
Chief Gainer. It is. And in fact, we really probably exceed
that now with all the specialized training. Last year we
collectively trained for about 200,000 hours.
Senator Campbell. How much training do those mounted
patrolmen go through?
Chief Gainer. That's a 10-week program.
Senator Campbell. Ten weeks. Okay, thanks. Senator Durbin.
ESCAPE HOOD REPLACEMENT
Senator Durbin. Chief Gainer, can you or somebody on the
Board explain escape hood replacement costs of $8 million.
Chief Gainer. Yes. When the hoods were purchased they
appeared to have a 4-year shelf life. We're hoping that's still
the case. But what we've seen with the escape hoods is that
they're very difficult to put on; and it is impossible to
communicate with them on. So, we and others, have been working
with the authorities to see if there's a better hood to be made
available. The hope is that there would be; the National
Certification Group is looking at different hoods. We hope that
if a new hood becomes available it will be easier for adults
and children to wear. If that's the case, we've made the
preliminary decision rather than replace the current hoods,
which have a 4-year life, or 3 years left now, rather than
doing that piecemeal and give someone an older, less viable
escape hood we would convert all to new escape hoods. If
there's not a new one discovered then we probably only need to
replace a quarter of those and we would not need the full $8.1
million.
Senator Durbin. What was the original cost of the escape
hoods?
Chief Gainer. The total cost? Excuse me. We purchased
45,000.
Chief Gainer. We purchased 45,000 for about $4.7 million.
But the price of them has gone up.
Senator Durbin. Obviously.
Chief Gainer. Yes sir. We're anticipating getting higher
quality hoods.
Senator Durbin. What's to tell us that 1 year after we
purchase these we've decided we shouldn't have purchased them
and $4.7 million may have been wasted? What have we learned?
Chief Gainer. Well, that was the best product at the time.
And it was essential, I think, given the facts that everybody
was dealing with that we purchase something. Actually, even if
there was a better hood, in theory you could use these for the
next 4 years if one trains on them. Most of the staffs of both
the House and the Senate, have been excellent on training with
the existing hoods. Some others have been a little bit more
reticent to come to the training.
Senator Durbin. I resemble that remark.
Chief Gainer. But it is difficult to put on and impossible
to communicate with it on.
Senator Durbin. That may be a blessing with some elected
officials. Let me--well, it's a concern. I don't know how I
explain this at home, that we bought 45,000 for $4 million plus
and 1 year later, even though they have 3 years of life left in
them we've decided to junk them and to spend two times as much
to replace them. If technology is moving that fast to justify
it I suppose that's the argument but it appears that a decision
was made and it's being countermanded within 1 year and I'll
bet you that when the first $4 million was justified it was for
a 4-year hood. So that's what we're going to be faced with so
it seems like a pretty dramatic reversal in a short period.
Chief Gainer. But it's really still under analysis,
Senator, so there's no final decision at all.
FENCE
Senator Durbin. Let me say a word about this fence. I agree
with Senator Campbell completely. I've been around here long
enough and I think he has too to have seen some dramatic and
depressing changes in terms of life on Capitol Hill that
reflect the reality of threat. And I can recall the bombing in
the Senate corridor when I was just a brand new Member of the
House of Representatives; I heard it in my apartment just a
block or two away. And we started changing things the next
morning and they've never really stopped; 9/11, of course, was
the major catalyst of change here. I for one hope that we don't
move toward a security fence as I envision it. To call
something an aesthetically pleasing security fence, it's a
little hard for me to understand where they're coming from with
this. And is it not true that we're investing substantial sums
of money on Capitol Hill--maybe this goes to the Architect--for
the construction of these bollards and other things,
acknowledging that traffic would be within this complex? Is
this going to be another escape hood, where we'll say, well,
now we're going to build the multi-million dollar fence, we
probably shouldn't have built the bollards because there won't
be that much traffic within the perimeter of the fence. I don't
know who can answer that, but is anybody considering that
aspect?
Chief Gainer. Well just, from my perspective, Senator,
they're not incompatible. I guess all I'm suggesting, both here
and in the House, and I did this in consultation with the
Board, was to at least renew the discussion about this. I think
it became most clear to me as we see the different bombings
that are happening around the world. We have done a lot toward
standoff on trucks and we've done a substantial amount for
standoff on vehicles but unfortunately we see the suicide
bombers, whether it's in England, Ireland, Israel, Palestine,
Jordan, there are people bringing those packages and it is our
concern that those small-type of explosives, which will only
injure scores rather than the 9/11 type, is still a real
danger. Frankly, as I listen to the 9/11 Committee, in their
analysis, I just thought it was appropriate that we talk about
this again because heaven forbid if something happens here on
the Hill. Who knows what would have happened if 1 year before
9/11 someone would have come in and said maybe we ought to seal
all the doors on airplanes. I know it seems bizarre, it doesn't
look good, but I think we need to lay it out and decide whether
we want to accept the risk or not.
Senator Durbin. I think it's entirely appropriate that you
raised the issue. But I'm struggling with the concept that says
we will have a perimeter fence to limit access to the Capitol
Hill area, and that means that we'll have fewer Capitol Hill
police, for example, who have to worry about access points;
there will be fewer access points with such a perimeter fence
and yet we can still justify the bollards for traffic that's
going to pass through this secure area? I think those two
things are inconsistent. Either a perimeter fence limits access
and the bollards then become redundant or unnecessary or it
doesn't limit access and you ask why you have it. So I need to
work with you on that to understand this a little better.
Chief Gainer. I know we're just a long way from even
touching on this, but if you can envision how the White House
is, where there are bollards along Pennsylvania Avenue and the
bordering streets and then the fence. The fence is really
designed less for vehicles and more for people. Unlike the
White House, the vision for this is where we would have
sufficient openings and officers, so the access for people
would be freeflowing. Then we would know anybody inside the
perimeter of the Capitol would be completely bomb-free,
weapons-free and then they'd have complete access to the entire
Capitol.
Senator Durbin. I guess my misunderstanding was I thought
initially they'd said that the fence would be outside of the
office building area.
Chief Gainer. That was one of the suggestions. Now again,
it was at least one of the suggestions, you're correct.
Senator Durbin. Before we get into all the details which
would be a long discussion, I would just weigh in with Senator
Campbell. I just hope that we don't reach that point where
we're fencing off the Capitol area. I want to try to find some
way to achieve security. Short of that, if it becomes a
necessity then frankly we have to accept it.
SWORN PERSONNEL REQUESTED
May I ask you this. The 1,800 sworn personnel, 1,805, if
I'm not mistaken that has been a goal for several years, that
the Capitol Police would reach that level of sworn personnel.
Chief Gainer. Approximately, yes.
Senator Durbin. Yes. And so the last several hundred that
you're asking for this year, 200 or whatever it happens to be,
is in pursuit of that goal that we set a number of years ago.
Is that correct?
Chief Gainer. Correct.
RECRUITING OFFICERS
Senator Durbin. There was a time not too long ago when I
asked either you or your predecessor how many applications need
to be taken before you find someone who can be qualified to
serve as a Capitol policeman? What is the current ratio, do you
know?
Chief Gainer. It's about 1 out of 10 and sometimes it goes
1 out of 18. We do have some great candidates who are applying
and maybe the job market helps us in that regard, but it's
about 1 in 10.
Senator Durbin. And what are the major reasons why
applicants are not accepted?
Chief Gainer. It is more a matter of being best qualified,
it's really not that people are unqualified, it is in fact they
are less qualified. We do the written test, the psychological
and the background.
Senator Durbin. Drug test?
Chief Gainer. Yes sir. And a polygraph.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
Senator Durbin. I see. I have some questions for the record
but thank you very much, Chief.
Chief Gainer. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Campbell. I have no further questions. There may be
some written ones by other committee members. But I just want
to say in parting it's been terrific working with both of you.
Thank you.
Chief Gainer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Pickle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[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
Question. In 2001, the Capitol Police developed a plan to remedy
administrative deficiencies identified by the GAO. In January GAO
completed its semi-annual review of the status of these issues. GAO
found that ``the overall pace of progress on USCP's strategic
initiatives continues to be limited.'' Areas such as developing
procurement policies and procedures, implementing a performance
management system, and improving workforce planning were among the
deficiencies noticed. Can you describe briefly how you will meet the
milestones the Department itself set forth in 2001 to improve USCP
administrative functions? How many new personnel are needed to
implement these milestones? What is the status of hiring a new Chief
Administrative Officer--a position that has been vacant for about
three-quarters of a year?
Answer. Mr. Anthony Stamilio was selected for the CAO position and
reported for work on May 4, 2004.
Significant progress has been made in administrative operations
since the creation of the CAO in 2001. As reported by GAO in their
semi-annual reviews of our administrative operations the following
achievements have been made:
--Completed a strategic plan for fiscal years 2004 through 2008 for
the Department, including departmental goals, objectives, and
associated performance measures.
--We have stabilized and are making significant improvements in
financial management, including the development and
implementation of policies and procedures to control and guide
the appropriate use of funds. We have requested the
consolidation of our Salaries and General Expense
appropriations and have requested funding for a new accounting
system to continue the progress we have initiated.
--We have implemented a zero based budget approach for all Department
operations to ensure budget requests are appropriately
developed and justified each year.
--We have developed an IT systems architecture as a road map for the
deployment of technology within the Department and have
replaced and are in the process of replacing a significant
number of antiquated systems throughout the Department as well
as leveraging opportunities for systems augmentation and
development for new operational and administrative
capabilities.
--Hired contract and additional staff, including a new Director and
senior staff in the Human Resources area to tackle the backlog
of filling positions and policy development.
Areas that require additional work:
--The GAO has identified the employment of critical administrative
staffing with the right mix of skills and competencies as the
number one impediment to the USCP achieving its administrative
goals.
--Other areas for improvement include further development and
implementation of policies and procedures, completion of an IT
acquisition strategy, implementation of a competency based
performance management system, as well as developing a robust
workforce planning capability.
We acknowledge that excessive operational demands and significant
staffing shortages continue to consume critical administrative
resources and impeded or slow progress toward reaching strategic goals
and initiatives.
We also understand the decisions reached as part of the planning
process needed to drive the focus of daily operations.
Question. The recent SAIC report identified several areas in USCP
that had poor management practices, while in other areas it found
``best practices'' in managing work and resources. Why does this
management imbalance exist in USCP and what is top management doing to
increase the management capabilities of those areas deemed deficient?
Answer. The focus of the SAIC analysis was not to conduct a review
of management practices and management of work but rather the
methodology utilized in the USCP developed Staffing Analysis. Based on
the review of the USCP methodology, SAIC determined that there were
pockets of best practices in the organization. For example the Office
of Information Systems (OIS) and Security Services Bureau were cited as
a ``best practices'' because they utilized processes to depict workload
and mapped workload to FTE requirements based on benchmarking,
historical data, and/or subject matter expertise. While these areas
were determined to be best practices, other areas were not able to
document workload due to lack of data or lack of experience to create
workload data (i.e., work had not previously been accomplished and
workload data was not available). However, SAIC did indicate, ``most
offices under the Chief Administrative Officer are not positioned to
operate as fully functioning support organizations.'' SAIC went on to
state, ``most deficiencies have been recognized and steps are being
taken to address them.'' The USCP has initiated the process to contract
with outside consultants to review selected operations, within fiscal
constraints. Areas included in the current review processes include
training services, internal affairs, budget, accounting, and selected
areas of protective services.
Question. USCP asked for a considerable number of additional
positions in the Comprehensive Staffing Analysis, yet SAIC could not
validate the assumptions and criteria used by USCP for most of these
positions. What is USCP doing to increase the assurance that the fiscal
year 2005 positions can be justified and validated?
Answer. SAIC's task was to review the methodology used to develop
the USCP staffing needs. SAIC reviewed each position and provided a
stoplight (red, yellow, green) indication as to whether appropriate
supporting information was available to support the new positions. They
did not perform workload analyses or comment on the need for the
positions, but rather the level of supporting information they
reviewed.
While the USCP does concur with many parts of the SAIC evaluation,
there are also several areas where the USCP does not agree with SAIC's
findings. The inability of SAIC to fully validate the justifications of
several positions, where the USCP thought it had strong justifications,
is where most disagreements exist. The following outlines where some of
the validation issues occurred:
--In several cases Bureaus/Offices were asked by SAIC to produce
workload data in order to validate justifications. Such
workload data was sometimes not available, or not as thorough
as one would like it, primarily due to the fact that there has
not been sufficient staff necessary to collect workload
information, or because current systems are not able to capture
the necessary data. In many offices the current staffing levels
are only sufficient to perform the minimum requirements of the
office, not allowing for the additional time necessary to
collect workload data, manually if it is not available
automatically.
--SAIC asked for outside staffing studies to confirm what Bureaus/
Offices were telling them in terms of the need for additional
staff. While the USCP acknowledges that such studies are very
useful tools, and were used when available in putting together
the Comprehensive Staffing Analysis, the Department has not had
studies done on all areas of the Department, in large part due
to costs associated with having such studies performed.
--In some instances Bureaus/Offices thought the information provided
to SAIC logically showed the need for additional staff, while
SAIC would not validate, or would only partially validate the
request.
--SAIC was unable to validate a majority of personnel requests for
administrative staff, stating that this was due to the lack of
sufficient analysis of current and projected workloads. The
Department is aware that there has been a great need for more
administrative staff to alleviate higher-level staff from
having to undertake administrative duties. To validate the
staffing requests, SAIC stated that an in-depth workload
analysis would need to be performed, thereby enabling accurate
manpower requests. Once again, as stated above such studies are
very costly.
--In the last GAO report reviewing progress being made in the areas
under the USCP's Chief Administrative Officer, several
references were made about the great need that the USCP had in
the management/administrative areas for additional staff. The
SAIC report on the other hand, could not fully validate many of
the justifications presented for additional staff in those same
areas, and which the Department believes are obvious staffing
needs.
In addition to the additional information provided to both SAIC and
GAO, the USCP has initiated the process of contracting with outside
consultants to review selected operations, within fiscal constraints.
Areas included in the current review process include training services,
internal affairs, budget, accounting and selected areas of protective
services.
Question. You have requested $5.7 million for a ``sworn pay scale
adjustment.'' What is this and what are the implications if we are
unable to fund this initiative?
Answer. The sworn pay scale adjustment rectifies inequities between
grade and step levels in the sworn pay scale as a result of prior year
adjustments to selected portions of the pay scale without appropriate
consideration of the impact these adjustments had on the pay scale as a
whole.
At the direction of the Appropriations Committees, a study was
completed that recommended a correction of the current inequities. The
study determined that it would cost $11.4 million in fiscal year 2005
to implement the proposed pay schedule on October 1, 2004. The $5.7
million included in the fiscal year 2005 request would provide for an
April 1, 2004 implementation. An additional $5.9 million (includes
estimated 3.5 percent January 2006 COLA) would be required in fiscal
year 2006 for the annualization of the adjustments.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Richard J. Durbin
Question. What are the long term capital costs required for the
Capitol Police?
Answer. Excluding facilities related items, most of the USCP
capital costs relate to the replacement of systems or equipment such as
vehicles, X-ray, magnetometers and cameras. The cyclical replacement
costs of these capital items are included on an ongoing basis in our
annual requests.
In the area of information systems modernization, the USCP
currently operates a set of administrative systems including personnel,
time and attendance, scheduling and inventory control. These mainframe
systems are a heterogeneous collection of legacy mainframe software
applications and commercial off-the-shelf software applications. The
legacy systems are costly to operate and difficult to maintain. The
infrastructure has been managed and developed on an as-needed basis,
often tied to specific applications.
USCP has developed an Enterprise Architecture and IT Strategic Plan
consistent with the modernization effort started in fiscal year 2001.
These efforts target web-enabled, integrated applications running on
one or more enterprise servers to include back-up servers soon to be
located at the Alternate Computer Center (ACF).
The modernization effort project is large and enterprise-wide in
scope. As such, there are multiple phases with multiple subprojects
that are coupled together. Users have both functional and non-
functional requirements that cross the enterprise IT Architecture,
requiring close coordination and project management of multiple teams.
The Office of Information Systems (OIS) created a Business Systems
Modernization Office (BSMO). The BSMO mission is to provide technical,
functional, managerial, and planning IT support to the USCP in the
development of an Enterprise Architecture (EA), development of a
Transition Plan as well as oversight of the ongoing implementation
efforts.
Phase 1 of the modernization effort provided for the implementation
of Administrative systems. Time and Attendance, Personnel, Scheduling,
Training and Fleet Management, as well as a Case Management System for
Internal Affairs have been completed. All Law Enforcement Systems have
been brought up to the same relational data base level.
Phase 2 will encompass the implementation of an Asset Management
System integrated to the Financial Management System to include budget.
A Data Warehouse and Operational Data Store has been designed and
implementation is to take place in early fiscal year 2005.
Phase 3 will occur in fiscal year 2006 and provide for an Executive
Information System (EIS) to assist in the recovery and use of data and
information as necessary.
One significant item that is on the horizon is the replacement of
the radio systems. A new digital radio system, which will be used by
the USCP and other Legislative Branch entities, is roughly, and
preliminarily, estimated at $30 million. A contract is being negotiated
with the Navy Aviation Systems Command to assess and make
recommendations for the radio communications system upgrades. This
study will include firmer estimated costs for their proposed
recommendations. Over the past several years, we have been working
closely with the Architect of the Capitol in the development of a
facilities master plan for the USCP. The potential cost of new
facilities and the cost of facility renovation are best addressed by
the Architect of the Capitol.
Question. Chief Gainer, could you please explain why you need $8.1
million for replacement of escape hoods?
Answer. When the current escape hoods were purchased they were the
best on the market. However, the current masks are difficult to put on
and it is impossible to communicate when they are donned. In October
2003, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)
published national standards for escape hoods, and all further testing
and approval will be accomplished against those standards. At this
time, several companies have submitted escape hoods to NIOSH for
testing under the new standards and product approvals are expected to
occur during the second half of 2004. Approved escape hoods are
expected to be available for purchase in 2005. It is anticipated that
the escape hoods that meet the new standards will be easier for adults
and children to wear and will solve the communications issue. If as
anticipated new masks are on the market in 2005 that meet the NIOSH
standards, a preliminary decision was made to replace all the escape
hoods rather that doing it in a piecemeal fashion and give someone an
older, less viable hood. The cost of replacing all 45,000 escape hoods
is estimated to be $8.1 million.
Question. What training requirements are not being met at the FLETC
facility at Cheltenham?
Answer. The USCP is currently conducting follow-on basic and in-
service training at the FLETC facility at Cheltenham, Maryland. We are
also negotiating a MOA with the FLETC to utilize the firearms range for
re-certifications, and will utilize the driving range when it is
complete this fall. Some of our long distance rifle training needs,
which are best conducted in an outside environment, will not be met at
the Cheltenham facility. Also, basic recruit training, which is
conducted by the FLETC in Georgia, was never intended to move to
Cheltenham and will not be relocated to the Cheltenham facility. We
continue to work with FLETC regarding issues on availability of the
facilities as well as funding requirements, and we expect to have a
Memorandum of Agreement finalized soon. We have also been working with
the Appropriations Committees regarding the resolution of the issues.
Question. What is the cost for building a separate firing range for
the Capitol Police?
Answer. The Architect of the Capitol's budget request contains $12
million for the design and construction of a 36-point 50-yard
underground firing range. As conceived, the range would be co-located
and built with the Off-site Delivery Facility. If the scheduling
requirements, addressed in the above question, for all USCP firearms
training and re-certification can be accommodated by the FLETC, the
USCP will not require the facility requested by the AOC. However, if
the facility availability issues are not worked out, the construction
of a new firing range is critical to the operations of the USCP.
Question. It was my understanding that the Capitol Police have free
use of the firing range at Cheltenham. Why do you need a separate
firing range?
Answer. Our primary issue regarding the use of FLETC firing range
at Cheltenham is one of access and accommodating our needs for firearms
training and re-certification. As indicated above, the original
partnership with the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) on
the new training facility in Cheltenham, Maryland included 26 agencies.
With the creation of Department of Homeland Security and subsequent
merger with Treasury/FLETC, the facility now serves 70 plus agencies
but the size of the range has not grown proportionally. If our training
needs cannot be met by the FLETC, the construction of a new firing
range is critical to our operations.
FLETC has indicated that it is expecting a reimbursement for firing
range use by all federal agencies and we have included funds for this
purpose in our fiscal year 2005 budget request.
Question. What are the costs associated with the Capitol Police
having access to the Cheltenham facility? Are theses costs being
covered by the Capitol Police or by the Department of Homeland
Security?
Answer. Although we are still working with the FLETC on access and
reimbursement issues, based on reimbursement cost rates FLETC provided
in the Fall of 2003, we estimated it will cost the USCP $1,032,000 in
fiscal year 2005 to cover all firearms training. This amount is
included in our fiscal year 2005 budget request. However, we now
understand that FLETC may be lowering their rates. A Memorandum of
Agreement (MOA) between the USCP and FLETC is being negotiated and it
should be completed soon. This MOA will spell out who will pay for what
cost and when cost will begin being paid by the USCP. In addition to
the firing range reimbursements, these costs will include the
operational and maintenance costs of Building 31, the primary training
facility that we occupy, and any other resources utilized by the USCP
at the Cheltenham facility. The FLETC has estimated the cost to be
$281,400 for fiscal year 2004. FLETC will also expect reimbursement for
the driving range when it opens and a daily per person user fee,
currently set at $5, for the use of their other facilities at
Cheltenham. We do anticipate reimbursing the FLETC for the operational
and maintenance, driving range and other facility usage fees.
Question. What is the status of filling the vacancy of the Chief
Administrative Officer?
Answer. Mr. Anthony Stamilio was selected for the CAO position and
reported for work on May 4, 2004.
Question. What are your priorities for improving administrative
operations of the Capitol Police?
Answer. Our first priority is to fill all the vacant civilian
positions including the 75 new positions that were provided in fiscal
year 2004. We have hired outside consultants to jumpstart our hiring
and human resources operations. We are committed to having
substantially all these positions filled by the end of the fiscal year.
As part of our strategic planning effort we have developed performance
plans and measures to continue the improvement of our administrative
operations. We continue to move forward with our information technology
systems modernization related to law enforcement databases and
administrative systems as well as modernizing human resources and
continuing with improvements with financial management operations.
Question. We recently received SAIC's evaluation of your
Comprehensive Staffing Analysis. It seems that the Capitol Police could
benefit from the development of a comprehensive manpower plan that
would determine the number and kinds of positions, both existing and
new, needed to meet the requirements identified in the threat and
vulnerability assessments as well as the strategic plan. Are there any
efforts underway to undertake the preparation of such a plan? What
would be required to produce a manpower plan that would clearly relate
manpower requirements to a congressionally approved strategic plan that
clearly ties to threat and vulnerabilities?
Answer. One of the priorities of the new CAO is to take a strategic
view of human capital management. Based on GAO recommendations, we are
currently exploring the benefits and processes of strategic human
capital planning, synchronized with the USCP Strategic Plan. The threat
environment, evolving tactics and technology will drive requirements
for future manpower adjustments. Our tentative plan is to assess
functional slices of the organization in light of the above ``drivers''
to determine the manner in which the organization will operate in the
future. The manpower requirements, to include numbers and skill sets
will evolve from this analysis. Initial assessments should begin in
fiscal year 2005.
Question. Do you feel that a perimeter security fence is a good
idea? Do you think it should include both the Capitol and the office
buildings?
Answer. All of our major security surveys (Secret Service, DTRA,
SAIC) since 1983 have raised the issue of a perimeter fence to enhance
Capitol Complex security. Strictly from a security standpoint, we agree
that a fence is a good idea. Based on the current environment and
events that are happening around the world, we believe that the
perimeter security fence issue should be revisited and that here should
be a discussion on its merits and whether we want to accept the risks
as they exist today. This discussion should include a perimeter
security fence around the Capitol and the office buildings. We realize
that other factors, including perceived openness and cost, need to be a
part of this discussion. The resolution of this issue is directly
related to the manpower requirements of the USCP.
Question. Are you working on a plan to ease staff entry into the
Senate buildings? I have noticed on many occasions that the lines are
out the doors and on the sidewalks at many of the Hart and Dirksen
Building entrances.
Answer. We have recently made several changes to reduce the line at
entrances to the Senate buildings. We are designating several entrances
as ``staff only'' until 10:00 a.m. and outside officers are directing
visitors to lower volume entrances. We will continue to monitor the
situation and make adjustments are needed.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
Senator Campbell. If there is nothing further, the
subcommittee will next meet at 11 a.m., Thursday, April 8 to
hear from the Secretary of the Senate and the Architect of the
Capitol.
[Whereupon, at 3 p.m., Wednesday, March 31, the
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene at 11 a.m., Thursday,
April 8.]
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005
----------
THURSDAY, APRIL 8, 2004
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 11:03 a.m., in room SD-138, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Ben Nighthorse Campbell (chairman)
presiding.
Present: Senators Campbell and Durbin.
U.S. SENATE
Office of the Secretary
STATEMENT OF HON. EMILY J. REYNOLDS, SECRETARY OF THE
SENATE
ACCOMPANIED BY:
MARY SUIT JONES, ASSISTANT SECRETARY
TIM WINEMAN, FINANCIAL CLERK
DIANE SKVARLA, CURATOR
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL
Senator Campbell. The subcommittee will come to order. We
meet this morning for our last scheduled hearing for the fiscal
year 2005 budget cycle for the legislative branch. We will take
testimony from the Secretary of the Senate, Emily Reynolds, and
the Architect of the Capitol, Alan Hantman.
Good morning, Emily. How are you this morning?
Ms. Reynolds. I am fine, sir. Thank you.
Senator Campbell. The budget request for the Office of the
Secretary is $21.286 million, an increase of $755,000, or about
a 4 percent increase over the current year budget.
In the last year, your office had accomplished very much,
including further implementation of a financial management
information system, keeping the Senate operating during the
February ricin incident and, of course, working with the owner
of the Curtis chair that I was so interested in, and I thank
you for that, which is now back in the Senate. We certainly
appreciate that.
Following your testimony, we will hear from the Architect
of the Capitol, Alan Hantman. The AOC's budget request totals
almost $858 million, which is an increase of $170 million, or
41 percent over the fiscal year 2004 appropriation. Roughly,
half of the budget is for operations and maintenance of the
buildings and grounds administrative support, safety programs,
and restaurants.
The increase of 18 percent over fiscal year 2004 for this
portion of the budget is due to increased utility costs,
payroll, and safety programs. The other half of the budget,
major capital projects, is up 143 percent over the current
year, and would support 71 projects, including the Copyright
Deposit Facility for the Library of Congress, storage modules
for the Library at Fort Meade, and Capitol Police projects.
The number of projects and dollar values associated with
them will be very difficult to accommodate, not only in the
view of the budgetary constraints but also owing to the
concerns that you have a lot on your plate already, not the
least of which is the completion of the Capitol Visitor Center.
We will be looking forward to that testimony, too.
Senator Durbin will be along, but while we are waiting for
him, you go ahead and proceed, Ms. Reynolds.
Ms. Reynolds. Thank you, sir. My full statement, which
obviously you all have, I would like to have submitted for the
record.
Senator Campbell. It will be included in the record. Is
your button on, on that microphone?
OPENING STATEMENT OF EMILY REYNOLDS
Ms. Reynolds. Thank you very much. My full statement, of
course, as you just said, we will include in the record. I
thank you for that. I would like to give just a brief overview
this morning and hit some of the high points of our past year.
I have with me this morning our very able team, Mary Suit
Jones, our Assistant Secretary, Tim Wineman, our financial
clerk, and a number of our department heads, all of whom I am
honored to work with each and every day.
As you said, our budget request for the year is
$21,286,000. That is $1.7 million in operating funds and just
over $19 million in our salary costs. Our operational budget is
static from last year but now knowing, obviously, the strengths
of this office, what it takes us to operate, and also to take
on some new initiatives, we believe that--that request is a
sound one and will enable us to continue to function well in
all three of our divisions, legislative, financial, and
administrative.
Our personnel costs, as you pointed out, we are requesting
a very slight increase, that for the COLA and for merit, so
that we can continue to attract and retain the talent that the
United States Senate both needs and deserves in our operations.
I want to thank the committee, Mr. Chairman, for your past
support of two major projects, one of which you mentioned; our
financial management information system, and our legislative
information system, both of which, in the course of this last
year, we continue to make enormous progress.
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM
On FMIS, as you know, that was developed from a 5-year
strategic plan for the disbursing office. It now covers some
140 offices here in our Senate community and our goal is to
move to a paperless voucher system.
We reached an important step at the end of March, with a
test of creating laser checks, which was successful. That is
one of our production goals for this year. Moving into fiscal
year 2005, our plans call for us to create a small pilot of the
technology for paperless payment processing. So again, we are
making considerable progress in that regard.
LEGISLATIVE INFORMATION SYSTEM
On the legislative information system, to implement the
extensible mark-up language, or XML, is our data standard by
which we author and exchange documents, again, enormous
progress. That really has been a very collaborative effort,
with both our project office, Sergeant-at-Arms staff, and our
Senate legislative counsel, who have been our guinea pigs, if
you will, as part of that project team.
I am happy to report that they are now using the LEXA
application and, by all accounts, it is going quite well. In
fact, one member of the Senate legislative counsel team
reported that this is a story with a happy ending. The ending,
of course, is not yet completely in sight, as we will continue
to develop and enhance that project.
All and all, our LIS system means an improved exchange
program, quicker access to legislative information, and
documents that we can use much more easily reuse and re-
purpose.
I also want to thank the committee. We had some non-
recurring costs that you all were supportive of us on. We had
some technology upgrades that we needed very badly, in closed-
captioning, in our gift shop, in our stationery room, and we
have made progress on all of those in no small part thanks to
this committee's help. So I thank you, again.
SENATE PRESERVATION FUND AND CURATORIAL ADVISORY BOARD
Most especially, something that I know is near and dear to
you, and Senator Stevens' leadership was very helpful to us on
this as well, and that is the creation of the Senate
preservation fund, and a curatorial advisory board for us here
in the United States Senate.
I want to give you a quick update on that, in that, for the
curatorial advisory board, we are in the process of gathering
nominees from the members of the Commission on Art.
Specifically, the legislation reads that those board nominees
be experts, scholars in their field. And they will help us in
terms of providing counsel on our Senate collection, looking at
possible acquisitions for us, developing preservation policies.
My hope is that we can have that board in place within the
next month, and gather them for their first meeting this
summer. So, that is an exciting opportunity.
Second of all, again, the Senate Preservation Fund, the
seed money that you all provided this committee, that $500,000,
will give us the ability to service that curatorial advisory
board in terms of administrative costs and also to make some
potentially time-sensitive acquisitions going forward.
In addition, I think that board and the Preservation Fund,
the more people know of what we are looking to bring back to
the United States Senate or the kinds of acquisitions we are
looking for, the more that word spreads in that curatorial
field, the better our ability will be to attract some
additional treasures back to the Capitol and the Senate wing,
in particular.
CURTIS CHAIR
I want to again thank you, as you mentioned a moment ago,
for bringing to our attention last year the existence of the
chair that belonged to former Vice President Charles Curtis,
and the detective search that we all enjoyed in terms of
locating that chair, and bringing it back home, if you will.
The chair is now, of course, on loan to us from an
anonymous donor. With Vice President Curtis, it was housed in
the Russell Senate Office Building. It now, as you know, has
been placed in the ceremonial office for the Vice President, in
the Capitol. As we move forward with plans for the exhibit
content of the Capitol Visitor Center, our hope is that it will
be displayed in the Visitor Center in the years to come, as
well.
PORTRAIT OF MARGARET CHASE SMITH
In other curator activity, the portrait of Margaret Chase
Smith will arrive this year. This fall, we will see the
addition of Senator Vandenberg and Senator Wagner to the Senate
reception room. So, that will be an exciting event that all of
us will look forward to, here in our Senate family.
With our 26 departments, there are so many highlights in
addition to all the curators' work. I just want to take a
moment, just for a couple of additional highlights.
SENATE LIBRARY
Our tremendous Senate library. While a lot of information
centers are showing actual decline of usage, our Senate library
last year continued its tradition of posting increases in use
to up to 14 percent last year. Senate.gov, a tremendous tool,
not only just for those of us here in the Senate community but
for the general public, we are now averaging 115,000 visits to
Senate.gov a day. So, it is a tremendous public education tool.
SENATE HISTORICAL OFFICE
Our historical office last year was deeply involved in the
first-ever conference of university-based research centers that
are dedicated to the study of Congress. I am delighted to
report that out of that conference, an Association of Centers
for the Study of Congress was created. And with that, our
historical office, we will help host that group for their first
formal meeting. They will be meeting here with us in the
Capitol next month. So again, something to look forward to. And
again, our historical office played a pivotal role in that,
something I am very proud to report.
Our historical office also is a valuable part of the
content team for the Capitol Visitor Center, as we look to
opening that facility within the next couple of years.
COOP AND COG PLANNING
I also want to mention that our continuity of operations
planning and our continuity of Government planning, which I
know our Sergeant-at-Arms, at his hearing last week, spent a
great deal of time with you all on, is also an area that our
office works very collaboratively with the Sergeant-at-Arms on.
Clearly, as you mentioned a moment ago in the introduction,
that planning pays off. Most recently, with our ricin scare
February 2.
Although our buildings were closed, our disbursing office
still met payroll, just as they did during the anthrax incident
of 2001. For offices that might have been relocated for a
period of time, we exercised our COOP plan for the stationery
store, so the supplies were available to offices as they set up
in other locations. We had a statutory deadline in public
records, and we were able to set up shop in our emergency
operations center to meet that statutory filing deadline.
We continue to exercise frequently with the Sergeant-at-
Arms in all aspects of COOP and COG, so that, most importantly,
our team can meet our legislative responsibilities and any
other responsibilities incumbent upon us.
At the top of my remarks a moment ago, I mentioned the very
able people within the Secretary's office, and I want to
commend them, if you will indulge me for a moment. It is
remarkable to me that total combined within our office, the
individuals who staff the Secretary's office represent a
combined service of over 2,500 years of service to the United
States Senate.
They really do represent the best of the vision of Senators
Mansfield and Dirksen for now some 40 years ago. And that is
attracting people to the Secretary's office to serve as true
professionals, to maintain and strengthen the United States
Senate as an institution, as a whole, and they are a remarkable
group of individuals.
You see how that strength and their expertise is so
important to us when you look at the kind of legislative year
we had last year. It was the busiest legislative year since
1995. Having that depth and breadth of experience, especially
as we went through two, of course, overnight marathon sessions
in November, and followed by a rare weekend session right on
the heels of that, that longevity in service, that expertise
serves the Senate very well every day.
SUCCESSION PLANNING AND CROSS-TRAINING
With that longevity of service also comes the need for
succession planning and cross-training among our specialties.
That initiative continues as well. We have a perfect example I
just want to cite amongst our own personnel, in terms of
succession planning, is that we have been able, in a very
pivotal role within the legislative clerk's office, we were
able to bring someone on 10 months in advance of a pending
retirement, so that those individuals have ample time to train,
share knowledge, work side by side on a daily basis; and when
that retirement occurs, will allow for a seamless transition in
our legislative shop.
You will also notice in our cross-training efforts, our
staff that works at the Senate rostrum, among the legislative
clerk's staff, while their faces do not necessarily change,
they will change seats on you from time to time. That is
because all of them were cross-trained amongst their
specialties; again, to give us all that depth and breadth of
experience, enabling the Senate to meet its constitutional
responsibilities.
It has been my real privilege, for now just about 16
months, to serve as the Senate's 31st Secretary, to be part of
the tradition and history of this incredible institution. That
is why on balance, I believe, after careful examination, the
budget request we bring you today, both in terms of our
operating budget and our personnel costs, will enable us to
continue to provide the very best possible legislative,
financial, and administrative services to this body.
PREPARED STATEMENT
I thank you and I look forward to your questions.
Senator Campbell. Thank you, Emily.
Ms. Reynolds. Thank you, sir.
[The statement follows:]
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
2005.
Detailed information about the work of the 26 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 2005 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 2005 budget request
I am requesting a total fiscal year 2005 budget of $21,286,000.
The fiscal year 2005 budget request is comprised of $19,586,000 in
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 2004 budget request as a result of (1) the costs associated with
the annual Cost of Living Adjustment in the amount of $717,000; and (2)
an additional $570,000 for merit increases and other staffing.
The net effect of my total budget request for fiscal year 2005 is
an increase of $722,000.
Our request in the operating budget, which is the same as fiscal
year 2004, is a sound one, enabling us to meet our operating needs and
provide the necessary services to the United States Senate through our
legislative, financial and administrative offices.
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 United States Senate.
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY APPORTIONMENT SCHEDULE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AMOUNT
AVAILABLE BUDGET
ITEM FISCAL YEAR ESTIMATE DIFFERENCE
2004 PUBLIC FISCAL YEAR
LAW 108-83 2005
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENTAL OPERATING BUDGET:
EXECUTIVE OFFICE........................................... $525,000 $525,000 ...............
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES.................................... 1,100,000 1,135,000 $35,000
LEGISLATIVE SERVICES....................................... 75,000 40,000 (35,000)
------------------------------------------------
TOTAL OPERATING BUDGET................................... 1,700,000 1,700,000 ...............
================================================
SPECIAL PROJECTS............................................... 565,000 .............. (565,000)
------------------------------------------------
TOTALS................................................... 2,265,000 1,700,000 (565,000)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 Senators' offices, 20 Committees and 20 Leadership
and support offices. As a result of a five year strategic plan
developed by the Disbursing Office, the Appropriations Committee
subsequently approved a $5 million appropriation of a multi-year
program to upgrade and expand FMIS for the Senate.
With these funds, the Disbursing Office continues to modernize
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 Web-FMIS system, and
make payroll and accounting system improvements. In addition, we are
working cooperatively with the Sergeant at Arms to prepare auditable
financial statements for the Senate.
In 2003, specific progress made on the FMIS project included:
--Implementing three releases of Web FMIS, the accounting system used
by offices, which included making the online ESR function
available to all offices and piloting online review and
sanctioning capability to the Rules Committee Audit staff;
making changes to the reporting functionality; making changes
to the underlying technology; and providing additional office/
committee functionality such as credit documents and the
ability to create budgets for a new fiscal year.
--Implementing two releases of the Senate Automated Vendor Inquiry
(SAVI), the system used by Senate staff to see payment
information and to prepare expense summary reports (online
ESR's). Those releases were designed both to streamline access
to data necessitated by the full Senate implementation of
online ESR and to enhance security.
--Implementing software enabling the Rules Committee Audit staff to
conduct the first and second post payment audits. This was done
in conjunction with the delegation of sanctioning authority to
the Financial Clerk for vouchers of $35 or less. These
statistically valid samples were returned with zero errors, and
the threshold was consequently increased by the Rules Committee
to $100 or less, effective January 1, 2004.
--Piloting payments to external vendors via direct deposit.
--Revising requirements for imaging of supporting documentation and
electronic signatures.
For fiscal year 2004, the following FMIS activities are underway:
--Full scale implementation of Rules Committee on-line review of Web
FMIS-produced vouchers is now completed.
--Implementation of two WEB FMIS releases that will simplify the
system architecture, upgrade the technology used, provide
simpler disaster recovery and provide the platform for the
imaging of supporting documentation and electronic signatures.
--Conduct a pilot for the use of laser checks.
--Implementation of a new release of the SAVI system that enables e-
mail notification of payments to vendors and staff.
--Implementation of a new release of the online ESR component of SAVI
that will incorporate suggestions made by users.
--Investigate the use of electronic signatures, imaging of supporting
documentation, and receipt of electronic invoices.
During fiscal year 2005, the following FMIS activities are
anticipated:
--Implementation of a Web FMIS release to provide additional reports
useful to office with improvements in the software used to
create reports.
--Conduct a pilot of the technology for paperless payment processing.
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 also
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, 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 $4
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 is developing the Senate's legislative
editing XML application (LEXA) which was installed in the Office of the
Senate Legislative Counsel (SLC) in January 2004. The attorneys and
staff assistants received training and immediately began drafting some
bills, resolutions, and amendments in XML with the first XML draft
introduced on January 22, 2004.
The SLC's document management system was completed in December
2003, and will be implemented this year. Several of the XML document
conversion projects have been completed, including the conversion of
bills, resolutions and amendments from the 106th, 107th and 108th
(first session) Congresses. The conversion of the compilations of
current law to XML will be completed in the next few months. The SLC
and House Legislative Counsel use the compilations in drafting bills
and amendments.
The SLC is working closely with the project team on continued
development and enhancement of LEXA. The Enrolling Clerk and the
Government Printing Office are next in line to begin using LEXA. When
LEXA is fully functional for these two operations in producing XML
documents, the project team will then turn its attention to other
Senate offices and other types of legislative documents.
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 educational benefits for our visitors will
be tremendous.
continuity of operations and emergency preparedness 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 department within the Office of the Secretary to perform its
essential functions during and after an emergency.
COOP planning in the Office of the Secretary began in late 2000.
Since that time, this office has successfully implemented COOP plans
during the anthrax and ricin incidents, and have conducted roughly one
dozen drills and exercises to test and refine our plans. In conjunction
with the Sergeant at Arms, Capitol Police, and the Offices of the
Attending Physician and the Architect of the Capitol, the Office of the
Secretary has established and exercised Emergency Operations Centers,
Briefing Centers and Alternate Senate Chambers, both on and off Capitol
Hill.
In addition, the Office has identified equipment, supplies and
other items critical to the conduct of essential functions, and has
assembled ``fly-away kits'' for the Senate Chamber and for each
department within the Office of the Secretary. Multiple copies of each
fly-away kit have been produced. Some are stored in our offices, and
back-up kits are stored nearby but off Capitol property, as well as at
other sites outside the District of Columbia. This approach enables the
Office of the Secretary to resume essential operations within 12 to 24
hours, even if there is no ability to retrieve anything from offices in
the Capitol.
Today, the Office of the Secretary is prepared to do the following
in the event of emergency: support Senate Floor operations in an
Alternate Senate Chamber within twelve hours on Capitol property, and
within 24 to 72 hours off property, depending upon location; support an
emergency legislative session at a Briefing Center, if required;
support Briefing Center Operations at any of three designated locations
within one hour; and activate an Emergency Operations Center on campus
or at Postal Square within one hour.
During the past year, the Office of the Secretary continued to
update, refine and exercise emergency preparedness plans and
operations. Specific activities included the following:
--Activated an Emergency Operations Center, Leadership Coordination
Center and selected departmental COOP plans during the ricin
incident response;
--Participated in the Capitol Police Incident Command during the
ricin incident response;
--Provided supplies to temporary offices in the Capitol and Postal
Square during the ricin incident response;
--Conducted an offsite Alternate Chamber exercise and a Briefing
Center exercise;
--Identified and acquired all equipment and supplies required to
support Senate operations at an offsite Alternate Chamber, and
stored all materials at the Alternate Chamber location;
--Reviewed, revised and published the Office of the Secretary's
Master COOP plan, and all departmental COOP plans.
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. The Office's emergency preparedness
programs are designed to ensure that the Senate can carry out its
Constitutional functions under any circumstances. These programs are
critical to the mission of the Office, and have become a permanent,
integral part of operations. With the continued assistance of the
Leadership, the Sergeant at Arms, and the Appropriations Committee, the
Office of the Secretary is confident that we will be successful in
facing any future emergency.
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 as well as the constitutional responsibilities
of the Senate. The department consists of eight offices--the Bill
Clerk, Captioning Services, Daily Digest, Enrolling Clerk, Executive
Clerk, Journal Clerk, Legislative Clerk, and the Official Reporters of
Debates--who are supervised by the Secretary through the Legislative
Clerk. The Parliamentarian's office is also part of the Legislative
Department of the Secretary of the Senate.
Each of the nine 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 twenty years. There is not one
supervisor with less than thirteen years of service. The experience of
these senior professional staff is a great asset for the Senate. As in
previous years and 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, 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, cosponsors, 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 generally regarded as the most timely and most
accurate source of legislative information.
Legislative Activity
The Bill Clerk's Office processed slightly fewer pieces of
legislative materials and significantly more roll call votes during the
first session of the 108th Congress versus the first session of the
107th Congress. Below is a comparative summary of the first sessions of
the 107th and the 108th Congresses:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
107th 108th
Congress, 1st Congress, 1st
Session Session
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate Bills............................ 1,883 2,003
Senate Joint Resolutions................ 30 26
Senate Concurrent Resolutions........... 93 86
Senate Resolutions...................... 198 283
Amendments Submitted.................... 2,697 2,231
House Bills............................. 264 282
House Joint Resolutions................. 17 20
House Concurrent Resolutions............ 91 78
Measures Reported....................... 247 352
Written Reports......................... 132 220
-------------------------------
Total Legislation................. 5,652 5,571
===============================
Roll Call Votes......................... 380 459
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assistance from the Government Printing Office (GPO)
The Government Printing Office has responded in a timely manner to
the Secretary's request through the Bill Clerk's office for the
printing of bills and reports, including the printing of priority
matters for the Senate chamber. Specifically, the Secretary requested,
through the Bill Clerk, that GPO reprint (star printed) 21 pieces of
legislation during the course of the Congress, and that GPO expedite
the printing of 31 measures for the Senate.
Projects
Amendment Tracking System.--In the fall of 2001, the Rules
Committee approached our office with the task of scanning submitted
amendments onto the Amendment Tracking System on LIS. The Rules
Committee identified a need for Senate staff to have all amendments
submitted in the Senate made available online shortly after being
filed, especially during cloture. 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, and a draft outline was completed.
Once the final version is delivered, the Secretary through the Bill
Clerk, 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.
Electronic Ledger System.--Shortly after the September 2001 attacks
and the subsequent anthrax attacks in the Capitol complex, the Bill
Clerk identified the need to have an electronic version of the official
Senate ledgers to ensure the integrity of the information recorded in
the ledgers. The electronic version should 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. office of 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.
General Overview
Accuracy remains the watchword of this office. Overall caption
quality is monitored through translation data reports, monitoring the
captions in real-time and reviewing the caption files on the Senate
Intranet.
Technology Update
A year-long review of all available real-time captioning technology
for the office in fiscal year 2002 led to the acquisition of new real-
time captioning technology. By the end of fiscal year 2003, windows-
based software and paperless writing devices had been installed and all
closed captioners had been trained and were on the air with the new
technology.
Voice recognition technology continues to improve and the Office of
Captioning Services is on the cutting edge of testing and evaluating
these products as they evolve. The pilot project to real-time caption
Judiciary Committee hearings in fiscal year 2004 continues and a
summary of the results will be provided at the completion of the
project.
Primary 2004 Objectives
To assist in both the execution of the Judiciary Committee's real-
time captioning pilot project and the preparation of a final report at
the conclusion of the project for the Rules Committee, the Judiciary
Committee and the Secretary of the Senate.
To develop indefinite backup capability for assistance during
sessions that may go around-the-clock.
3. daily digest
The Senate Daily Digest serves seven principal functions:
--To render a brief, concise and easy-to-read accounting of all
official actions taken by the Senate in the Congressional
Record section known as the Daily Digest;
--To compile an accounting of all meetings of Senate committees,
subcommittees, joint committees and committees of conference;
--To enter all Senate and Joint committee scheduling data into the
Senate's web-based scheduling application system. Committee
scheduling information is also prepared for publication in the
Daily Digest in three formats: Day-Ahead Schedule;
Congressional Program for the Week Ahead; and the extended
schedule which actually appears in the Extensions of Remarks
section of the Congressional Record;
--To enter into the Senate's Legislative Information System all
official actions taken by Senate committees on legislation,
nominations, and treaties;
--To publish in the Daily Digest a listing of all legislation which
has become public law;
--To publish on the first legislative day of each month in the Daily
Digest a ``Resume of Congressional Activity'' which includes
all Congressional statistical information, including days and
time in session; measures introduced, reported and passed; and
rollcall votes. (See Attachment--Resume of Congressional
Activity); and
--To assist the House Daily Digest Editor in the preparation at the
end of each session of Congress a history of public bills
enacted into law and a final resume of congressional
statistical activity.
Committee Activity
Senate committees held a total of 906 meetings during the first
session of the 108th Congress, as contrasted with 961 meetings during
the first session of the 107th Congress.
Chamber Activity
The Senate was in session a total of 167 days, for a total of 1,454
hours and 5 minutes. There were 3 quorum calls and 459 record votes. (A
20-Year Comparison of Senate Legislative Activity follows).
Computer Activities
The Digest office continues to work closely with Senate computer
staff to refine the LIS/DMS system. Under the direction of the Editor,
the computer center staff was able to create two new reports for the
Daily Digest. Report 82 is a compilation of Treaties Approved in Digest
format, and Report 83 is a compilation of Written Executive Reports of
Committees in Digest format. The Digest is also pleased to report that
all refinements made to the Senate Committee Scheduling application
have been successfully implemented, including the capability of
entering multiple documents. The committee scheduling application was
developed back in 1999 as a server-based web-enabled application that
is browser accessible to all Senate offices on Capitol Hill. It was
designed to replace the committee scheduling functions and reports that
were supported by the mainframe-based Senate Legis System.
Assistance from the Government Printing Office
The Daily Digest continues to send the complete publication at the
end of each day to the Government Printing Office (GPO) electronically.
The Editor, Assistant Editor, and Committee Scheduling Coordinator
function coordinate in preparing Digest copy on computers, storing and
sharing information, permitting prompt editing, and transferring the
final to floppy disc. The Digest continues the practice of sending a
disc along with a duplicate hard copy to GPO, even though GPO receives
the Digest copy by electronic transfer long before hand delivery is
completed adding to the timeliness of publishing the Congressional
Record. The Digest office is comfortable with this procedure, both to
allow the Digest Editor to physically view what is being transmitted to
GPO, and to allow GPO staff to have a comparable final product to cross
reference.
The Daily Digest continues the practice of discussing with GPO
problems encountered with the printing of the Digest, and are pleased
to report that with the onset of electronic transfer of the Digest
copy, occurrences of editing corrections or transcript errors are
infrequent.
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 2003, 62 enrolled bills (transmitted to the President) and 8
concurrent resolutions (transmitted to Archives) were prepared,
printed, proofread, corrected, and printed on parchment.
A total of 593 additional pieces of legislation in one form or
another, were passed or agreed to by the Senate, all processed from
this office.
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 first session of the 108th Congress, there were 1,201
nomination messages sent to the Senate by the President, transmitting
28,423 nominations to positions requiring Senate confirmation and 13
messages withdrawing nominations previously sent to the Senate during
the first session of the 108th Congress. Of the total nominations
transmitted, 600 were for civilian positions other than lists in the
Foreign Service, Coast Guard, NOAA, and Public Health Service. In
addition, there were 2,578 nominees in the ``civilian list'' categories
named above. Military nominations received this session totaled 25,245
(9,068--Air Force; 6,012--Army; 7,752--Navy; and 2,413--Marine Corps).
The Senate confirmed 21,580 nominations this session. Pursuant to the
provisions of paragraph six of Senate Rule XXXI, 18 nominations were
returned to the President during the first session of the 108th
Congress.
Treaties
There were 14 treaties transmitted to the Senate by the President
during the first session of the 108th Congress for its advice and
consent to ratification, which were ordered printed as treaty documents
for the use of the Senate (Treaty Doc. 108-1 through 108-14). The
Senate gave its advice and consent to 11 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 8 executive reports relating to treaties ordered printed
for the use of the Senate during the first session of the 108th
Congress (Executive Report 108-1 through 108-8). The Senate conducted
78 roll call votes in executive session, all on or in relation to
nominations and a treaty.
Executive Communications
For the first session of the 108th Congress, 5,352 executive
communications, 337 petitions and memorials and 58 Presidential
messages were received and processed.
Legislative Information System (LIS) Update
Our staff consulted with the Senate Computer Center (SCC) during
the year concerning the ongoing improvements to the LIS pertaining to
the processing of nominations, treaties, executive communications,
presidential messages and petitions and memorials. Working with the
Government Printing Office (GPO) and SCC staff, a process was developed
last year for the printing of the Executive Journal by creating a PDF
file. This year the Secretary's Information Systems staff provided the
Executive Clerk's office with a new HP Digital Sender that has proven
to be an even faster and more efficient process for sending the PDF
file of the Executive Journal to GPO for printing.
In the future, the Senate Computer Center will develop the
Executive Calendar in a more ``user friendly'' program that will be
beneficial to our office and the SAA computer support staff. In the
meantime, the text field for placing unanimous consent agreements on
the Executive Calendar was redesigned to provide the Executive Clerk
more control in editing the Calendar in 2004.
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.
In 2003, the Journal Clerk completed the production of the 903-page
2002 Journal of the proceedings of the Senate, the annual project as
required by the Constitution. 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 of the United States, (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 at the end of each calendar year.
Over the past two years, the Sergeant at Arms' Technology
Development Service Department, under the guidance of the Journal
Clerk, has developed the LIS Senate Journal Authoring System. This
system provides a much needed, supportable system for authoring and
publication of the Senate Journal, in place of the decade-old software
currently used for production. The system was installed for user
evaluation in March 2004, and will be released for use by the end of
April. The system's functionality was successfully exercised during the
compilation of the 1,146 page 2003 Journal, which was sent to the
Government Printing Office for printing at the end of March.
7. legislative clerk
The Legislative Department provides support essential to Senators
in carrying out their daily chamber activities as well as the
constitutional responsibilities of the Senate. 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 of the
department's eight offices.
Underscoring the importance of planning for the continuity of
Senate business, under both normal and possibly extenuating
circumstances, cross-training is strongly emphasized among the
Secretary's legislative staff. Currently, 50 percent of the legislative
staff have been cross-trained between their specialities.
Summary of Activity
The first session of the 108th Congress completed its legislative
business and adjourned sine die on December 9, 2003. During 2003, the
Senate was in session 167 days, over 1,454 hours and conducted 459 roll
call votes. There were 352 measures reported from committees, 590 total
measures passed, and 153 items remained on the Calendar at the time of
adjournment. In addition, 2,231 amendments were processed.
Legislative Information System (LIS) Enhancement
In an effort to monitor and improve the Legislative Information
System (LIS), the Legislative Clerk acts as the liaison between
legislative clerks and technical operations staff of the Sergeant at
Arms. The Legislative Clerk also reviews, prioritizes, and forwards
change requests from the clerks to the technical operations staff. Over
the past year, 36 change requests submitted by the clerks to improve
the system have been implemented.
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 (GPO).
The office works diligently to assure that the electronic
submissions to GPO are timely and efficient. The Official Reporters
encourage offices to make submissions to the Record by electronic
means, which results in both a tremendous cost saving to the Senate and
minimizes keyboard errors.
9. parliamentarian
In 2003, the Parliamentarian's Office continued to perform its
extensive legislative duties. These include advising the Chair,
Senators and their staff, committee staff, House members and their
staffs, 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 in close
cooperation with the Senate leadership and their floor staffs in
coordinating all of the business on the Senate floor. 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 also keep track of the amendments offered to
the legislation pending on the Senate floor, and monitor them for
points of order. The Parliamentarians reviewed more than 1,000
amendments during 2003 to determine if they met various procedural
requirements. The Parliamentarians also reviewed thousands of pages of
conference reports to determine what provisions could appropriately be
included therein.
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, and communications
received from the executive branch, state and local governments, as
well as private citizens. In order to perform this responsibility, the
Parliamentarians do extensive legal and legislative research. During
2003, the Parliamentarian and his assistants referred 2,467 measures
and 5,747 communications to the appropriate Senate committees. The
office worked extensively with Senators and their staffs to advise them
of the jurisdictional consequences of particular drafts of legislation,
and evaluated the jurisdictional effect of proposed modifications in
drafting. The office continues to address the difficult jurisdictional
questions posed by the creation of the massive new Department of
Homeland Security, which now has responsibility for hundreds of issues
previously in the jurisdiction of other Senate committees. The
Parliamentarians have made dozens of decisions about the committee
referrals of nominations for new positions created in this department,
nominations for positions which existed before this department was
created but whose responsibilities have changed, and hundreds of
legislative proposals concerning the department's responsibilities.
Additionally, in the last three years, rules relating to
legislation on appropriations bills, and the scope of conference
reports on all bills were reinstated. This has opened up hundreds of
Senate amendments to renewed scrutiny by the Parliamentarians, and has
meant that the Parliamentarians now have the responsibility of
potentially reviewing every provision of every conference report
considered by both Houses of Congress.
The Parliamentarians have taken the lead in the Senate to analyze
the need for emergency procedural authorities of Congress generally,
and the Senate in particular.
YEARLY COMPARISON OF SENATE LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITY
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate Convened..................................... 1/25 1/3 1/21 1/6 1/25 1/3 1/23 1/3 1/3 1/5
Senate Adjourned.................................... 10/12 12/20 10/18 12/22 10/21 11/21 10/28 1/3/92 10/9 11/26
Days in Session..................................... 131 170 143 170 137 136 138 158 129 153
Hours in Session.................................... 94025" 1,25231" 1,27815" 1,21452" 1,12648" 1,00319" 1,25014" 1,20044" 1,09109" 1,26941"
Average Hours per Day............................... 7.2 7.4 8.9 7.1 8.2 7.4 9.1 7.6 8.5 8.3
Total Measures Passed............................... 726 583 747 616 814 605 716 626 651 473
Roll Call Votes..................................... 181 381 359 420 379 312 326 280 270 395
Quorum Calls........................................ 19 20 16 36 26 11 3 3 5 2
Public Laws......................................... 408 240 424 240 473 240 244 243 347 210
Treaties Ratified................................... 20 6 12 3 15 9 15 15 32 20
Nominations Confirmed............................... 41,726 55,918 39,893 46,404 42,317 45,585 42,493 45,369 30,619 38,676
Average Voting Attendance........................... 91.95 94.64 95.72 94.03 91.58 98.0 97.47 97.16 95.4 97.6
Sessions Convened Before 12 Noon.................... 106 119 117 131 120 95 116 126 112 128
Sessions Convened at 12 Noon........................ 18 38 25 12 12 14 4 9 6 9
Sessions Convened after 12 Noon..................... 7 13 1 25 5 27 17 23 10 15
Sessions Continued after 6 p.m...................... 81 104 92 97 37 88 100 102 91 100
Sessions Continued after 12 Midnight................ 11 7 15 6 7 9 13 6 4 9
Saturday Sessions................................... 1 3 2 3 ............ 1 3 2 2 2
Sunday Sessions..................................... ............ 1 ............ 1 ............ ............ 2 ............ ............ ............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YEARLY COMPARISON OF SENATE LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITY--Continued
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate Convened..................................... 1/25 1/4 1/3 1/3 1/27 1/6 1/24 1/3 1/23 1/7
Senate Adjourned.................................... 12/01 1/3/96 10/4 11/13 10/21 11/19 12/15 12/20 11/20 12/9
Days in Session..................................... 138 211 132 153 143 162 141 173 149 167
Hours in Session.................................... 1,24333" 1,83910" 1,03645" 1,09307" 1,09505" 1,18357" 1,01751" 1,23615" 1,04223" 1,45405"
Average Hours per Day............................... 9.0 8.7 7.8 7.1 7.7 7.3 7.2 7.1 7.0 8.7
Total Measures Passed............................... 465 346 476 386 506 549 696 425 523 590
Roll Call Votes..................................... 329 613 306 298 314 374 298 380 253 459
Quorum Calls........................................ 6 3 2 6 4 7 6 3 2 3
Public Laws......................................... 255 88 245 153 241 170 410 136 241 198
Treaties Ratified................................... 8 10 28 15 53 13 39 3 17 11
Nominations Confirmed............................... 37,446 40,535 33,176 25,576 20,302 22,468 22,512 25,091 23,633 21,580
Average Voting Attendance........................... 97.02 98.07 98.22 98.68 97.47 98.02 96.99 98.29 96.36 96.07
Sessions Convened Before 12 Noon.................... 120 184 113 115 109 118 107 140 119 133
Sessions Convened at 12 Noon........................ 2 15 12 31 17 25 10 12 4 9
Sessions Convened after 12 Noon..................... 17 12 7 7 2 19 24 21 23 23
Sessions Continued after 6 p.m...................... 100 158 88 96 93 113 94 108 103 134
Sessions Continued after 12 Midnight................ 7 3 1 2 3 8
Saturday Sessions................................... 3 5 1 1 1 3 1 3 1
Sunday Sessions..................................... ............ 3 ............ 1 ............ ............ 1 ............ ............ 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prepared by the Senate Daily Digest--Office of the Secretary.
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 in order to provide responsive, personal attention to Members
and employees on a 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 among the Financial
Services, Employee Benefits, and Payroll sections is also a major
responsibility of the position. Planning and project management of new
computer systems and programs is a further responsibility. Ensuring
that job processes are efficient and up to date, modifying computer
support systems, implementing regulatory and legislated changes, and
designing and producing up to date forms for use in all three sections
are additional areas of responsibility.
2003 Accomplishments and activities
Normal computer systems do not account for employees over 99 years
of age, and consequently, the DO life insurance computer data elements
have been expanded to accommodate 100 years of age. New age bands and
deduction rates were instituted by regulation and our computer systems
were modified to accommodate the new requirements.
OPM mandated that a new calculation routine for the Civil Service
Retirement-Offset deduction and new reporting requirements took effect
in January, 2003. Much of the work was performed in late 2002 and the
retirement record changes, the new deductions, and the new reports ran
perfectly for the first payroll of 2003. Two new computer screens were
built to track the new Offset CSRS deductions at 7.5 percent .
As part of an ongoing effort to prevent payroll errors, an edit was
added so that an account line with a future stop date cannot be
deleted. However, this was removed the next month as it was determined
that the high volume of alterations required due to offices changing
pay increases, terminations, and transfers, necessitated the ability to
delete future lines.
Computer system menus for update and inquiry were altered early in
the year to accommodate all of the new screens and the many changes
required for implementation later in the year.
To fill a critical need of the Continuity of Operations Plan, a
document imaging project is underway to place employees' Official
Personnel Folders in an easily accessible electronic format. This new
system is complete, and procedures are currently being finalized for
implementation this summer.
In mid-2003, a reexamination was done of both the Political Fund
Designee and S. Res. 110 (GS-15 Financial Disclosure) tracking and
reporting processes. The Office of Public Records and Select Committee
on Ethics use these reports extensively. By refining and extensively
updating processes initiated in 1975, reports now provide what each
office needs on a much more timely basis. Both Public Records and
Ethics approved of the final product.
Flexible Spending Accounts were announced in December, and a
contract was awarded in March 2003. Work began immediately to add the
two new FSAs (healthcare and dependent care) by the July 1 effective
date. Automated processes to load the data received by the Senate from
the FSA administrating agency, to deduct and report the monies on a tax
exempt basis, and transmit monies and reports to the administrating
agency, were completed on time.
New TSP Catch Up contributions for employees over 50 passed in late
2002 and regulatory requirements were received in February 2003.
Project planning began immediately. This project required tax deferred
deductions be withheld separate from the TSP program, reported
differently and reported separately. A completely new screen was
required. The project was completed and worked flawlessly on the
required date of August 1.
The Payroll Information Notice (pay stub) was completely redesigned
in mid year to provide much more room to accommodate the many new
deductions employees might have with the new programs established in
2003. The various changes provided almost 40 percent more room. New
deductions include Long Term Healthcare, Student Loan Repayment
Program, Flexible Spending Accounts, and TSP Catch Up contributions.
New PINs went out with the May 5 pay date. In October, a project was
initiated to replace the current payroll system's OLAG programming with
a completely new and updated version using BMS programming. This will
eventually ensure continued operations on the newest mainframe
operating systems, and to enable future payroll enhancements involving
the web, employee self-service and on-line review of payroll reports by
Senate offices. Work is scheduled to be completed by July 1, 2004.
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 Senate 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.
2003 Accomplishments and activities
The Front Counter processed approximately 2,200 cash advances,
totaling approximately $1.4 million and initialized check/direct
deposit advances, totaling approximately $730,000.
Received and processed more than 30,000 checks, totaling over
$3,600,000.
Administered Oath and Personnel Affidavits to more than 3,400 new
Senate staff and advised them of their benefits.
Maintained brochures for 11 federal health carriers and distributed
approximately 5,000 brochures to staff during the annual FEHB Open
Season and to new employees.
Provided 33 training sessions to new office managers.
The major emphasis during this year was the training for the 11 new
Senate offices into the operations of the Disbursing Office. Training
was provided to new office managers and guidance provided in their
business transactions with the Disbursing Office.
The only reconciliations of the Senate accountability were
confirmed by a General Accounting Office audit performed in June 2003
at the request of the Secretary of the Senate. Front Office operations
continued to provide the Senate community with prompt, courteous, and
informative advice regarding Disbursing operations.
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 Thrift Savings Plan
(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.
2003 Accomplishments and Activities
Funding for Calendar Year 2003 began as a Continuing Resolution.
This restriction of spending delayed the January 1, 2003 Cost of Living
increase. In January, the passage of the Legislative Branch
Appropriations Bill gave the U.S. Senate a 3.1 percent Cost of Living
increase retroactive to January 1, 2003. The passage of the Omnibus
Appropriations Bill in March 2003 provided the Senate with a final Cost
of Living increase of 4.27 percent retroactive January 1, 2003. While
the multitude of cost of living transactions taxed the resources of the
Payroll Section for a five month period, all pay adjustments were done
in an accurate and timely manner.
In late 2002 and early 2003, Payroll was heavily involved in the
testing of the new CSRS-Offset deductions and reports. Attention to
detail from the Payroll Section helped debug programs and streamline
the new processes.
During this same time period the Payroll Section maintained its
schedule of processing TSP Open Season forms. Senate employees for the
most part were taking full advantage of the increase in the cap for TSP
deductions, making the most of 13 percent/$12,000 maximums. The TSP
Catch-Up program was implemented in the fall of 2003. This program
allowed employees who are 50 or older to deposit additional funds into
their personal TSP. Payroll staff were involved in all of the testing
performed with the new screen, new deductions, and reports.
During the summer of 2003 the National Finance Center implemented
its EnTrust Financial Management System allowing the agencies to have
online update and correction abilities. Employees of our Payroll
Section were trained by the Department of Agriculture to use the on-
line payments and corrections system.
The Student Loan Program (SLP) continued into 2003. The new year
brought new challenges to the Payroll Section. The time consuming
methods of third party loan processing created needless delays of
notification for loan payoffs. The Payroll Section had to develop
procedures for returning overpayment of loans to the loan program
allocation refund, return the respective over- withholding of Federal,
State, FICA, and Medicare taxes to the employees involved. Regulations
were enforced to alleviate these problems. Payments for loans to be
paid off during the Agreement Year of a SLP are now spread out over the
full year, eliminating these overpayments.
The Payroll Section also assisted in developing methods for
processing Long Term Care and in July 2003 implemented the FSA
deductions system. These additional benefit plans were passed to
provide additional coverage to our normal FEHB deduction processing
system. Each of the above new deductions required research into the tax
implications of each deduction. Once the plan was implemented further
research was required for the proper modification of W-2s for calendar
year 2003. Payroll staff were involved in testing and verification
during the implementation of these systems. The Payroll Supervisor was
part of the project management team during the planning portions and
during final installation.
Payroll filing systems and checking processes were updated to
improve quality control. These changes help minimize errors in an
environment where payroll changes are much more common than in most
other government and private institutions. In addition, with
considerable staff changes in 2003, new training procedures for the
Payroll Section were implemented and have resulted in more
knowledgeable staff and reductions in errors.
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 staff 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.
2003 Accomplishments and activities
The year began with EBS finalizing retirement estimates and
processing the many retirement cases associated with outgoing Senators
and their staffs, as well as those staff on committees who were
affected by the changes. Approximately 170 retirement cases were
processed throughout 2003, including 10 death cases.
During 2003 the new Federal Flexible Spending Account (FSA) Program
was introduced and implemented government-wide. EBS worked diligently
to become educated in all aspects of the program. This required
constant interaction with OPM and the FSA plan administrator, SHPS, to
establish, understand and implement procedures for the plan. Employee
Benefits staff worked as part of the Project Team to apply
modifications and establish parameters for the implementation of the
program. Effective introduction to and participation in the FSA program
required extensive notification to employees, which included several
mail-outs, electronic notifications and use of streaming video on
Webster. Two Open Seasons were conducted, along with an educational
seminar on the FSA program and recurring FSA seminar broadcasts on
Senate Cable TV. EBS also developed and disbursed educational materials
for employees.
During our anthrax displacement, EBS discovered that the most
essential information that could not be accessed off-site was employee
personnel folders. Based on these lessons, EBS has worked with the
Deputy for Benefits and Financial Services as part of the Project Team
to outline the needs and parameters required for development and
implementation of a document imaging system for use in electronically
reproducing employee personnel folders. Through extensive meetings,
testing and feedback, the imaging system has been developed and is
ready for implementation. This system will allow computer-based access
to employee personnel folders as well as the ability to access them
from an off-site facility.
Based on the continued military operations and the call to active
duty of military reservists, the volume of Senate employees being
placed in a Leave Without Pay (LWOP) status and subsequently returned
to pay status was elevated throughout 2003. Counseling and
administration of their retirement and benefits was handled by EBS.
Effective in 2003, OPM announced a modification to the way
retirement deductions were to be reported for employees subject to
Social Security and CSRS. Compliance with this change required
coordination with the Senate Computer Center for programming changes
and screen development, followed by debugging and subsequent
implementation of the new withholding and reporting format.
Based on new legislation, the Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) implemented
a new provision enabling employees age 50+ to contribute additional
``Catch-up'' contributions to their TSP accounts. This enhancement
required a great deal of interaction with the Senate Computer Center to
apply modifications and establish parameters for the implementation of
the program. EBS worked to become a resource on the aspects of Catch-up
contributions and educational materials and notices were created and
supplied to eligible participants.
Mid-year, the TSP implemented their long-awaited new record keeping
system, which created many questions and requests for assistance from
Senate employees as well as from offices on behalf of their
constituents. Additionally, there were two TSP Open Seasons in 2003
during which employees could change their rate of contribution. The
number of employee changes was higher during the end of year Open
Season, as the allowable rates of contribution increased.
The annual FEHB Open Season was held and approximately 500
employees changed plans. These changes were processed and reported to
carriers in record time. This year, the DO offered an exciting new tool
for Senate employees as the Checkbook on-line Guide to Health Plans was
made available to research and compare FEHB plans. This tool will
remain available to staff throughout the year, and may become an annual
purchase. Feedback received on the Guide was very positive, and as
awareness increases, more users are anticipated. Once again, the DO
hosted a FEHB Open Season Health Fair, which was attended by about 600
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. In addition to having
health plan representatives available to provide information and answer
questions, representatives from FSA Feds and Long Term Care Insurance
were in attendance as well.
EBS continues to upgrade the information available on the DO
Webster site and has added more downloadable forms, routinely making
use of the 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 with time being spent on the
implementation of the FSA Program, the CLER program, and the continuing
TSP program changes and enhancements.
There was a great deal of employee turnover in early 2003. New
Members appointed numerous employees from the House and Executive
Branch, and many other employees left with outgoing Members, several of
whom were appointed to positions in the Executive Branch. This caused a
dramatic 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
enrollments to be processed. Transcripts of service for employees going
to other federal agencies, and other tasks associated with employees
changing jobs were at a high level this year. These required prior
employment research and verification, new FEHB, FEGLI, FSA, 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 were
especially high early in the year and remained constant throughout the
year. Telephone inquiries, though not specifically tracked, continued
at record levels.
disbursing office financial management
Headed by the Deputy for Financial Management, the mission of
Disbursing Office Financial Management (DOFM) is to coordinate all
central financial policies, procedures, and activities to process and
pay expense vouchers within reasonable time frames, 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. On a
semiannual basis, this group is also responsible for the compilation,
validation and completion of the Report of the Secretary of the Senate.
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 Human
Resources Administrator, and carries out the directives of the
Financial Clerk and the Secretary of the Senate.
accounting department
During fiscal year 2003, the Accounting Department approved nearly
80,000 expense reimbursement vouchers, processed 1,300 deposits for
items ranging from receipts received by the Senate operations, such as
the Senate's Revolving Funds, to canceled subscription refunds from
Member Offices. The number of vouchers that the Accounting Department
approves decreased over fiscal year 2002 numbers due to the Senate
Committee on Rules and Administration authorizing the Accounts Payable
Department to sanction vouchers of $35 or less. General ledger
maintenance also prompted the entry of thousands of adjustment entries
that include 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.
This year the Accounting Department assisted in the validation of
various system upgrades and modifications, including the testing
required to implement the new approval path for the Rules Committee's
on-line sanctioning. During January 2003, the Accounting Department
with assistance from our contractor, BearingPoint, completed the 2002
year-end process to close and reset revenue, expense and budgetary
general ledger accounts to zero. At the beginning of 2003 and during
the month of June 2003, we successfully tested and implemented in
Federal FAMIS the first two document purge processes. Further, the
financial file rollover was performed to update FAMIS' tables and
create the new index codes needed to accommodate data for fiscal year
2004.
The U.S. Department of the Treasury changed their end of month
reporting deadlines for agencies twice during fiscal year 2003; from
the 7th to the 5th business day and then from the 5th to the 3rd
business day of the following month. The second change on the Treasury
reporting deadline was a challenge for DOFM since the Senate's end of
the month payroll is a paid on the 5th of the following month. In order
to comply with this requirement, the Accounting Department, assisted by
BearingPoint, tested and implemented a change in how and when payroll
is reported with the non-payroll expenses. The changes to comply with
Treasury's accelerated reporting requirement were implemented in July.
The Department of the Treasury's monthly financial reporting
requirements 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 on a monthly basis,
the Statement of Transactions According to Appropriations, Fund and
Receipt Accounts that summarizes all activity at the appropriation
level of all monies disbursed by the Secretary of the Senate through
the Financial Clerk of the Senate is reported to the Department of the
Treasury. 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.
This year, the Accounting Department transmitted 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 performed 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 were reported and paid on a quarterly basis to
each state with applicable state income taxes withheld. Monthly
reconciliations were performed with the National Finance Center
regarding the employee withholdings and agency matching contributions
for the Thrift Savings Plan. Every month, all employee withholdings and
agency contributions for life and health insurance, and federal
retirement programs were 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
were also processed. In April and October, the Accounting Department
prepared the necessary reports and information to be included in the
Report of the Secretary of the Senate. All organizations and
appropriation accounts reported were validated 100 percent to the
financial system.
In addition to Treasury's external reporting deadlines there are
some internal reporting requirements such as the monthly ledger
statements for 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. It is the
responsibility of the Accounting Department to review and verify the
accuracy of the statements before Senate-wide distribution.
The Accounting Department, in conjunction with the Deputy for
Financial Management, is working closely with the Sergeant at Arms'
(SAA) Finance Department in completing all the corrective actions that
resulted from the Pro-forma financial statements auditability
assessment completed in April 2002. Based on the results of this
exercise, 23 corrective actions were suggested including an action plan
and proposed schedule to have them corrected within several years. Some
of the actions were rather simple to implement while others will take
additional time. Of the 23 corrective actions noted, 6 have been
completed, 13 are in process, and 4 are still open. As part of this
project, the Accounting Group drafted the Senate-wide capitalization
policy which has been reviewed and agreed to by the SAA's Finance
Department. The Accounting Group also drafted and finalized the travel
advance and vendor file procedures documents. The Deputy for Financial
Management is working closely with the SAA's Finance Department in the
replacement and implementation of the new asset management system,
Asset Center.
On a consulting basis, the Deputy for Financial Management has been
assisting the Senate Gift Shop with the implementation of their new
accounting system. In addition, the Accounting Group has been working
with the General Accounting Office (GAO) to provide them with expense
vouchers and certificate of deposits documentation requested for the
audits of all the Secretary of the Senate and Sergeant at Arms
revolving funds.
accounts payable department
During the Fall of 2003, the Accounts Payable Department was
restructured and a third section was created to adequately attend to
the needs of the Senate community. Currently, the A/P Department is
made up of the following three sections: the Audit group, the
Disbursement group and the newly created Vendor/SAVI group.
Accounts Payable Vendor/SAVI Section
The Vendor/SAVI (Senate Automated Vendor Inquiry) group was newly
created in the fall of 2003. This section is responsible for the prompt
completion of service requests from within the Senate community for
access to the Disbursing Office's new Web-based payment inquiry system
called SAVI, the timely processing of expense voucher payments via
paper check or ACH wire transfer and for training Senate staff on the
proper usage of the SAVI Web based system. The section also assists the
IT Department with daily monitoring of system performance and the
testing of new SAVI system upgrades. Another major responsibility of
this group is the daily maintenance of the Senate's central payee file,
which currently has over 11,000 vendors. Daily requests for new or
updated vendor addresses are promptly handled and processed within 24
hours of being requested. The section is in the process of collecting
ACH wire information on external vendors with the intention of
reimbursing most vendors electronically instead of by paper check.
Further, this section is working with the IT Department in the
selection and testing of a new e-mail notification project to inform
all external vendors via e-mail that an electronic reimbursement has
occurred.
As part of its objectives, this section started to scan the hard
copy supporting documentation (vendor-supplied remittance instructions)
for the entire payee file (starting with the most recent ones) on the
DO network which will enable quick access to necessary information.
Because of the size of the vendor file (over 11,000 vendors) and the
usual daily work which must be completed, this scanning project is
expected to take approximately a year to complete. Ultimately, scanning
of vendor-supplied supporting documentation will become a routine part
of file maintenance.
Accounts Payable Disbursements Department
During 2003, two new staff members were hired and one staff member
was transferred to the newly created Vendor/SAVI Department. The new
department now handles all aspects of the FAMIS vendor file which was
previously tasked to A/P Disbursements. In fact, 133,000 expense claims
were received and processed by the department. Over 40,000 expense
checks were written and approximately 25,000 direct deposit
reimbursements were made.
The Disbursements Department is also responsible for researching
returned checks as vendors request additional information relating to
payment allocation. Fortunately, few checks are returned. This is a
result of the use of a centralized vendor file and accurate
certification of payments.
The Accounts Payable Disbursements Department distributes the
monthly ledgers to the 160 accounting locations throughout the Senate.
Once produced, they are delivered to Disbursing. They are then sorted
and delivered or picked up according to a list of special instructions.
The main objective of this process is to have each office receive their
ledger statements by the 10th of the month.
A/P Disbursements also prepares the quarterly state tax returns.
The amounts are provided by the Accounting Department, and payment
coupons are prepared for the 43 state jurisdictions. The coupons are
obtained from each jurisdiction either in hard copy or on-line via the
Internet. Vouchers are prepared electronically via an uploaded
spreadsheet, which is used to generate check payments to the taxing
authorities. Once the checks are written, letters of transmittal are
prepared and mailed to the appropriate State jurisdictions and the
District of Columbia.
The Department also prepares the forms required by the Department
of the Treasury for stop payments. Stop payments are requested by
employees who have not received salary or expense reimbursements, and
vendors claiming non-receipt of expense checks. During this year, the
A/P Disbursement Supervisor and the Accounts Payable Manager
implemented the Department of the Treasury--Financial Management
Service (FMS) on-line stop pay and check retrieval process known as
PACER. The PACER system allows us to electronically submit stop-payment
requests and provides on-line access to digital images of negotiated
checks for viewing and printing. Once a check is viewed, it is printed
and may be scanned. Scanned images are then forwarded to the
appropriate accounting locations via e-mail. This process has been well
received by Senate offices as well as vendors. This saves time and
significantly reduces reliance on the postal system. The entire
Accounts Payable Disbursements staff has Treasury secure ID cards and
are being trained in the use of PACER. Given its time and money
savings, as well as its overwhelmingly positive reception, large growth
in the use of PACER is expected.
Two major events have helped in centralizing the filing and storage
of Accounts Payable and Accounting documents. First was new shelving
which replaced file cabinets for all in-house filing. The documents are
placed in side-tab folders which display their contents in an easy-to-
read format. The major benefit to the new shelving is space savings.
The result is that what previously required over 20 feet of wall space,
now requires a little less than 15 feet, a space savings of 25 percent.
Second, the new shelving also allows us to keep a year's worth of
vouchers in-house before sending them to our warehouse facility.
Previously, only six months' worth of vouchers could be kept on hand.
The warehousing of documents has improved and is still evolving.
Vouchers were housed at two facilities, but now all have been
transferred to a larger location, although there is need for expansion.
Meetings with the Sergeant At Arms, consultants, and prospective
vendors continue in an effort to provide state-of-the-art warehousing
for the entire Senate. Such plans include current space requirements,
future anticipated space requirements, and the need for ``staging''
areas, telephone, copier, and fax access, climate control, and
security.
Accounts Payable Audit Department
The third section under the Accounts Payable Department is the
Audit Department. The Accounts Payable Audit Section 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 submitted 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. During this year, the responsibility for
the printing of the semiannual Report of the Secretary of the Senate
was transferred from the retiring Assistant Financial Clerk to the
Accounts Payable Manager. This Section also monitors the Fund Advance
Tracking System (FATS) to ensure that advances are charged correctly,
vouchers repaying such advances are entered, and balances are 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 Section, currently a group of 11, has
the responsibility for the daily processing of expense claims submitted
by the 140 accounting locations of the Senate. During the first months
of the year, the Accounts Payable Audit Group had some staff turnover
and new auditors were hired. The new audit staff is undergoing
comprehensive training and the section processed approximately 133,000
expense vouchers during fiscal year 2003. The voucher processing ranged
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. On
average and as long as the voucher does not have any issues or
questions and the Audit Section is fully staffed, vouchers are
received, audited, sanctioned by Rules and paid by DO 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 of $35
or less to the Financial Clerk of the Senate. As a consequence, the
workload within this group increased by 15 percent. These vouchers are
sanctioned by the Certifying Accounts Payable Specialists and are being
received, audited, and paid within 5 business days of receipt. The
sanctioning authority was subsequently increased in 2003 from items
totaling $35 and less to items valued at $100 and below. The increase
in sanctioning authority came as a direct result of our passing two
post-payment audits performed by the Rules Committee. This additional
change increased the number of vouchers sanctioned by Audit to 57
percent of all submitted vouchers.
Additionally, advance documents and non-Contingent Fund items such
as Legal Counsel and Legislative Counsel vouchers are now posted in
Audit. The sanctioning responsibilities allowed for one staff promotion
to Certifying Accounts Payable Specialist.
The reduced flow of vouchers to the Rules Committee allowed us to
proceed with their inclusion in the on-line sanctioning process.
Initially, four Senators' offices and the Committees comprised the
pilot group. Currently, all vouchers sanctioned by the Rules Committee
through the Web-submit process are sanctioned on-line.
The Accounts Payable Audit Group 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 the Secretary of the Senate, the Sergeant at Arms, and the Library
of Congress. The Section was able to train 21 new Office Managers and
Chief Clerks and conducted 5 informational sessions for Senate staff
through seminars sponsored by the Congressional Research Service (CRS).
The Accounts Payable group 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 Group has been fully trained in the new travel
advance system and in the use of the four new WEB inquiries. The group
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. The creation of a Vendor/SAVI department allowed for a senior
staff promotion out of Audit, and two new staff were hired to help fill
the void caused by this promotion and one staff termination.
A cancellation process was established for advances. This was
necessary to ensure repayment of advances systematically for canceled
or postponed travel in accordance with Senate Travel Regulations.
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). In fiscal year 2003 the budget justification
worksheets were mailed to the Senate accounting locations at the end of
February. This deadline was much later than usual due to the late
passage of the Legislative Branch Appropriations bill. 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 the 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 the budget
baseline estimates that were developed for fiscal year 2004 to the
Office of Management and Budget, via the MAX database.
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 Information
System (FMIS) which is used by approximately 140 Senate accounting
locations (i.e., 100 Senators' offices, 20 Committees, 20 Leadership
and Support offices, and the Disbursing Office). Responsibilities
include:
--Supporting current systems;
--Testing infrastructure changes;
--Managing and testing new system development;
--Planning;
--Managing the FMIS project, including contract management;
--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 2003
was supported by the Sergeant at Arms (SAA) Technology Services staff,
the Secretary's Information Technology staff, and contracts with
BearingPoint.
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. BearingPoint 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 co-operatively.
Highlights of the year include:
--Conducting 44 classes, seminars, and demonstrations on Web FMIS;
--Implementation of three releases of Web FMIS and preparation for
two releases during 2004. One of these releases made the online
ESR function available to all offices and provided online
review and sanctioning capability to the Rules Committee Audit
staff;
--Implementation of two releases of SAVI;
--Implementation of a post payment audit for the Rules Committee
Audit staff whereby they can do a statistically valid sample of
vouchers of $35 and under for which sanctioning was delegated
to the Financial Clerk;
--Pilot of direct deposit payments to external vendors;
--Entering into a new multi-year contract with the FMIS support
vendor, BearingPoint;
and Hiring a new Systems Administrator.
FMIS is not a single computer system. It is composed of many
subsystems that provide Senate-specific functionality. These subsystems
are outlined in the table that begins 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 1998
Vendor file purchased from BearingPoint.
Administrative functions
Security functions
ADPICS (Mainframe)................ Preparation of requisition, purchase order, voucher from Off the shelf federal system Sergeant at Arms................... October 1998
purchase order, and direct voucher documents. purchased from BearingPoint. Disbursing Office
Electronic document review functions Secretary of the Senate
Administrative functions
Checkwriter (Client-server)....... Prints checks and check registers as well as ACH (Automated Off the shelf state government Disbursing Office.................. October 1998
Clearing House) direct deposit payments. system purchased from and
adapted to Senate's
requirements by BearingPoint.
Web FMIS (Client-server and Preparation of vouchers, travel advances, vouchers from Custom software developed under All Senators offices............... October 1999
intranet). advance documents, credit documents and simple commitment Senate contract by All Committee offices
and obligation documents. BearingPoint. All Leadership and Support offices
Entry of detailed budget Secretary of the Senate
Reporting functions (described below) Sergeant at Arms
Electronic document submission and review functions Disbursing Office
Administrative functions
FATS (PC-based)................... Tracks travel advances and petty cash advances (available to Developed by SAA Technology Disbursing Office.................. Spring 1983
Committees only). Services.
Tracks election cycle information
Post Payment Voucher Audit (PC- Selects a random sample of vouchers for which sanctioning was Excel spreadsheet developed by Rules Committee.................... Spring 2003
based). delegated to the Financial Clerk for the Rules Committee to BearingPoint. Disbursing Office
use in conducting a post payment audit.
SAVI (Intranet)................... As currently implemented, provides self-service access (via Off the shelf system purchased Senate employees................... Pilot--Spring 2002
the Senate's intranet) to payment information for employees from BearingPoint. Senate-wide--July 2002
receiving reimbursements via direct deposit.
Administrative functions
Online ESR (Intranet)............. A component of SAVI through which Senate employees can create Custom software developed under Senate employees................... April 2003
on-line Travel Expense Summary Reports and submit them contract by BearingPoint.
electronically to their Office Manager/Chief Clerk for
processing.
Secretary's Report (Mainframe Produces the Report of the Secretary of the Senate........... Custom software developed under Disbursing Office.................. Spring 1999
extracts, crystal reports, and contract by BearingPoint.
client-server ``tool box'').
Ledger Statements (Mainframe Produces monthly reports from FAMIS that are sent to all Developed by SAA Technology Disbursing Office.................. Winter 1999
database extracts, and crystal Senate ``accounting locations''. Services. Senate Accounting Locations
reports).
Web FMIS Reports (mainframe Produces a large number of reports from Web FMIS, FAMIS and Custom software developed under Senate Accounting Locations........ October 1999
database extracts, crystal ADPICS data at summary and detailed levels. Data is updated contract by BearingPoint.
reports, client server, and as an overnight process and can be updated through an on-
Intranet). line process by accounting locations.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Supporting Current Systems
The IT section supports FMIS users in all 140 accounting locations,
the Disbursing Office Accounts Payable, Accounting, Accounts Payable
Disbursements, Vendor/SAVI, and Front Office Sections, and the Rules
Committee Audit staff. The activities associated with this
responsibility include:
--User Support--provide functional and technical support to all
Senate FMIS users; staff the FMIS ``help desk''; answer
hundreds of phone calls a year; and meet with Chiefs of Staff,
Office Managers, Chief Clerks, and Directors of various Senate
offices 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;
--Security--maintain user rights for all ADPICS, FAMIS, SAVI, and Web
FMIS users. In 2003, we added, deleted and changed user rights
for 94 ADPICS, FAMIS and 57 Web FMIS offices and other users as
requested by Senators and Chairmen.
--System Administration--design, test and make entries to tables that
are intrinsic to the system. In 2003, this included making
changes to reflect Senate organizational changes for the 108th
Congress, establishing new offices, changing the Senate-wide
privately owned vehicle reimbursement rates, establishing and
testing new accounting transaction codes, and creating new
approval paths for vouchers of $100 or less;
--Support of Accounting Activities--provide assistance in the cyclic
accounting system activities. During 2003, the following
activities were performed--Upload of files into FAMIS (e.g.,
budgets, monthly certification charges, state office rental
vouchers), Year End Rollover (in March for Committee Funding
Resolution 66B, and in August for fiscal year 2004), Year End
Close, Document Purge, and Ad hoc queries; and
--Training--provide functional training to all Senate FMIS users.
During 2003, the IT Department conducted 44 classes, seminars,
and demonstrations on Web FMIS. The class schedule is issued
every other month and the classes offered were:
--1. Introduction to Web FMIS--conducted 12 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.
--2. Web FMIS Travel Class--conducted 15 times. The hands-on class
covers all aspects of travel vouchers from both the Office
Manager's and the traveler's perspective. It enables the
Office Manager or Chief Clerk to prepare travel advance
requests, create travel vouchers, create travel vouchers
from online ESRs using the Web FMIS import function, train
travelers to create on-line travel expense summary reports
(online ESRs), train travelers to track direct deposit
payments via SAVI; and perform the Web FMIS setup tasks
(e.g., establishing a traveler's profile, and establishing
office mileage rates). This class was created in 2003 with
the Senate-wide implementation of online ESR.
--3. Web FMIS Budget and Reports Seminar--conducted 12 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.
--4. Web FMIS Reconciliation Class--conducted 7 times. This hands-
on class covers how to reconcile an office's Web FMIS
balance with the DO's balance on a monthly basis. Also
provided individual training sessions for 14 persons who
were unable to attend the scheduled class sessions.
--5. Web FMIS Special Topics--conducted once. Occasionally a
``special topics'' seminar covering different subjects is
held. In May 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.
--6. User Demos--In advance of each Web FMIS release, a
demonstration is conducted at a Joint Office Manager/Chief
Clerks meeting of the new functionality included in the
release. The demo is repeated for those unable to attend
the meeting. For Web FMIS release 7.4, the material was
presented twice.
Testing 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 2003, the following
components of this infrastructure were changed:
--Mainframe hardware and software--Upgrade of the mainframe operating
system (OS390/2.10, including CICS and WebSphere upgrades)
required that the Disbursing Office extensively test all FMIS
subsystems both in a testing environment and in the production
environment. Additional testing, although less extensive, was
performed when the SAA activated the new Storage Area Network
facility (SAN), an essential component of the Alternate
Computing Facility;
--TDF and DHF Partitioning--The Transaction Detail File and Document
Header File, which are subsidiary files to the General Ledger,
were split into logical divisions in order to improve system
performance, especially for inquiries. The IT staff and
Accounting section staff created documents and tested all FMIS
functions with the partitioned files before the production
files were partitioned.
--Printing online via ``Reveal''--The DO's use of the ``Reveal''
software, which prints reports to a file for online viewing
instead of a printer, was expanded to include the weekly
Appropriations Summary Reports. This allowed the elimination of
a dedicated printer in SH-144.
Managing and Testing New System Development
During 2003, we supervised development, performed extensive
integration system testing and implemented changes to the following
FMIS subsystems: Web FMIS; Senate Vendor Information (SAVI) and Online
ESR; Post Payment Voucher Audit; and Checkwriter.
Web FMIS
Three releases of Web FMIS were done in 2003. Work was begun on two
additional releases which will be implemented in 2004. These
implemented in 2003 are:
--Web FMIS r7.4.8.--This release in April 2003 made the import ESR
function available to all offices. This function allows Office
Managers to create travel vouchers from online ESRs that
travelers create in SAVI. This saves a significant amount of
time for Office Managers. Previously, this had been used by a
pilot of 10 offices. Additionally, this release included online
review and sanctioning capability for the Rules Committee Audit
staff. The Rules Committee staff elected to implement a pilot
of 23 offices (all Committees and Senators whose last name
begins with A) in order to become familiar with the software
and develop appropriate procedures. (As of January 1, 2004, the
Rules Committee staff implemented online review and sanctioning
of all Web FMIS vouchers via Web FMIS. This was implemented in
conjunction with an increase in the threshold for delegation of
sanctioning authority. In December 2002, the Rules Committee
Chairman delegated sanctioning authority to the Financial Clerk
for vouchers of $35 and less. Effective January 1, 2004, the
Rules Committee Chairman increased the threshold to $100.)
--Web FMIS r7.4.9.--The July 2003 release focused on reports. The
most important change was reporting the total trip expense when
a travel advance was used. Additionally, several useful
formatting changes were made, including adding subtotals for
payroll and non-payroll to all of the ``summary'' reports.
--Web FMIS r7.5.4.--The August 2003 release implemented new
underlying technology, including an upgrade to WebSphere 4.0, a
new version of mainframe CICS, and a new Cold Fusion server. It
included a few functional changes, the most important of which
was the ability to create budgets for the new fiscal year prior
to October 1 and without regard to whether funding has been
authorized. In addition, we created the files necessary for
fiscal year 2004. Making it possible for offices to work with
their budgets in August was a request from Web FMIS users. The
necessary system changes were implemented in this release and
the ``new year roll'' was done earlier than in past years. In
the future, the new year roll will also be in August.
In addition, we began work on two projects scheduled for completion
in 2004, development of Web FMIS ``thin client'' and Web FMIS Imaging
and Signature Design, Electronic Invoicing and Remittance Enhancement.
During 2003, a significant amount of staff time was spent to prepare
for these releases. Activities included requirements analysis, planning
and consultation with users.
--Web FMIS ``thin client''.--There have been many functional releases
of Web FMIS, since it was implemented in October 1999. With
each release, the most appropriate technology available at the
time is selected. This has resulted in a complicated
architecture that has:
1. Client/server components on a Cold Fusion server (e.g.,
Document Entry and Budget Entry functions);
2. Web components on a Cold Fusion server (e.g., Local list
maintenance functions and reports); and
3. Web components on a WebSphere ``server'' on the Senate's
mainframe (e.g., the submit and on-line approval
functions).
Under this project the functions that use Cold Fusion will be re-
written to use WebSphere, eliminating two different
architectural components. This will be implemented in two
releases:
1. Phase I--implemented in early March, 2004--Web FMIS r8--re-
write the maintenance and administrative functions of Web
FMIS to use ``thin client'' technology, upgrade the
reporting function to use Crystal Reports version 9, which
is ``thin client,'' and revise the reporting function so
that it will continue to show data from closed fiscal years
(data that we would like to archive from FAMIS). Additional
functionality, previously developed but not implemented,
will be implemented in this release, the security paradigm
based on roles, and administrative contact screens that
consolidate information from several subsystems.
2. Phase II--currently scheduled for August, 2004--Web FMIS
r9--re-write the remaining functions that use client-server
technology, including the functions most used by office Web
FMIS users (e.g., Main Menu, Document Entry, Budget Entry).
Additionally, this release will change notification of
documents requiring office action from an internal Web FMIS
function to e-mail, add a non-travel ESR in SAVI and modify
the ESR import function in Web FMIS.
--Web FMIS Imaging and Digital Signature Design, Electronic Invoicing
and Remittance Enhancement.--As articulated in the FMS
Conceptual Design, the vision for the FMIS is for paperless
voucher processing. This requires implementation of electronic
signatures and imaging of supporting documentation. This
project begins the exploration of imaging and electronic
signatures and will result in a design for this functionality.
In addition, the plan is to explore, and if feasible implement,
the receipt of invoices electronically from large vendors. This
would eliminate the step of imaging paper invoices.
Senate Automated Vendor Inquiry (SAVI) and Online ESR
The Online ESR, 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. The April 2003 release of Web
FMIS made the corresponding ``import'' ESR function available to all
Office Managers. Office Managers in turn encouraged their staff to use
the online ESR, thus substantially increasing the number of online ESR
users.
The SAVI system enables Senate staff to check the status of
reimbursements, whether via check or direct deposit, and whether or not
referencing an online ESR. In June 2003, a serious performance problem
was encountered in SAVI. Web pages that normally took a few seconds to
access suddenly required more than a minute. This was due to
inefficient structure of a few ``calls.'' While they performed
adequately during testing and during pilot use of SAVI the increased
use of SAVI after the April 2003 release of Web FMIS highlighted this
inefficiency. In less than two weeks, DO and BearingPoint staff
identified the cause of the problem and developed, tested and installed
the solution, SAVI release 2.02. No substantial performance problems
have since been encountered.
In October 2003, SAVI release 2.1 was implemented. This release
included a number of security features, such as encryption of user
passwords, removal of Social Security Numbers from the Oracle database,
masking all but the last three digits of bank account numbers, and
disabling unused/unnecessary services on the servers. In addition, work
was conducted on SAVI release 2.2, which is scheduled for
implementation in 2004, and will include some major functional
enhancements, conversion to .NET (``dot net'') version of Visual Basic
and several other security enhancements.
Post payment Voucher Audit
In December 2002, the Rules Committee delegated to the Financial
Clerk the authority for sanctioning vouchers of $35 and less. This
authorization directed Rules and DO to establish a set of procedures
for a semi-annual audit of these vouchers. The two offices agreed that
Rules would conduct a random sampling inspection of these vouchers
based on industry statistical standards. Under the supervision of the
IT Group, BearingPoint created tools to determine the sample size, to
enable selecting the sample from the universe of vouchers of $35 and
less, and to determine the acceptable number of discrepancies given the
sample size and the desired confidence interval. The first audit was
conducted in May 2003 for the six-month period ending March 31, 2003,
covered 7,270 vouchers, and resulted in a favorable finding of zero
discrepancies. The second audit was conducted in November 2003 for the
six-month period ending September 30, 2003, covered 11,502 vouchers,
and again resulted in a favorable finding of zero discrepancies.
Checkwriter
The Disbursing Office makes payments via direct deposit and via
check.
--Direct Deposit.--In 2002 the Disbursing Office began making expense
reimbursements to Senate staff via direct deposit (i.e., ACH or
Automated Clearing House). In 2003 this was expanded to include
external vendors. The initial pilot vendors provided materials
to the Keeper of Stationery; and our first payments to them
were transmitted on June 3, 2003. After a very successful
initial pilot, it was expanded to larger-volume vendors such as
FedEx.
--Laser Checks.--In five years of using the Checkwriter application,
it became clear that there are benefits in switching from
printing checks on a continuous-feed impact printer to printing
checks on a laser printer. The laser version will provide more
flexibility for continuance of operations by eliminating our
dependence on the harder-to-find printer. It will also produce
a higher print quality, which will help the postal service in
the delivery of checks. The higher quality print will also
prevent checks from being negotiated for an unintended dollar
amount. During 2003, the DO held numerous meetings with
Checkwriter's designer, BearingPoint, to establish new
specifications for the laser version. As a result, a new and
substantially different check proof has been established with
the Treasury Department. Additionally, the choice of folder/
inserter machines to use with the laser check stock was
narrowed. Testing is currently underway for the implementation
of laser checks in 2004.
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
In 2003, three meetings continued among the DO, SAA and
BearingPoint to coordinate schedules and activities. These are:
--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 BearingPoint to
discuss coordination 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
BearingPoint engagement partner, SAA technical and functional
staff, DO IT and functional staff, and BearingPoint staff to
discuss progress on each project.
With progress being made, the decision was made to move more
activities from the project office meeting to the technical meeting,
and by the end of 2003, the project office meeting was eliminated. In
January 2004 one technical meeting is held each month as a joint
technical/project office meeting.
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 is the basis for the $5 million in multi-
year funds given to the Secretary's office by the Senate Committee on
Appropriations 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 Subsystem 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.
Managing the FMIS Project
The responsibility for managing the FMIS project was transferred to
the IT group during the summer of 2003 due to the retirement of the
Assistant Financial Clerk. These responsibilities include developing
the task orders with contractors and overseeing their work. In 2003,
four new task orders were executed with BearingPoint:
--Web FMIS Thin Client;
--Web FMIS Imaging and Digital Signature Design and Electronic
Invoicing and Remittance Enhancements;
--Additional Operational Support; and
--Extended Operational Support (Sept. 2003--August 2004).
In addition, in August 2003 a new multi-year contract with Bearing
Point was negotiated and signed. This was a joint effort between the DO
staff and the SAA procurement staff.
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.
Office-wide LAN maintenance and upgrade
Existing workstations were maintained with appropriate service
patches, and security updates including:
--Conducted Pre-Install meetings for the new DO SQL server--Worked
with the Senate support vendor to determine installation
strategy and procedures to properly prepare an SQL production
server;
--Supervised DO SQL server installation--Ensured that system was
installed in accordance with all agreed upon requirements;
--Installed SNAP servers--These devices provide an additional means
for LAN data backup;
--LAN Planning--Began planning for the installation of a new LAN
server in 2004; and
--Maintained our Office Information Authorization form log which
provides easy access from DO staff desktops to up-to-date
information about the authorized contacts for each Senate
office.
Office-wide Technical Skills Improvement
The Systems Administrator was tasked with improving the DO's
efficiency with the use of available technology. One example of this
improvement is how check inquires are processed. Prior to the
implementation of existing technology, when an office requested
information about negotiated checks, DO Accounts Payable Disbursements
staff printed a copy of the front and back of the check via Treasury's
Pacer system. Then the staff would mail these copies to the office. As
a result of the training provided by the Systems Administrator, the DO
staff scan the Pacer copy of the front and back of the check and attach
the image to an e-mail message to the office, providing better and
faster responses.
Projects for the Accounts Payable and Accounting Sections
The activities of the Accounts Payable and Accounting Sections were
supported with the development of a Vendor Data Imaging process which
consists of simple scanning procedures to capture and electronically
store the paperwork associated with vendors.
Projects for Payroll and Employee Benefits Sections
Activities of the Payroll and Employee Benefits sections were
supported with four specific projects:
--Assisted in the development of the Payroll Imaging system, which
captures payroll documents turned in at the DO front counter
electronically, including ordering all required system
components. This system is still being implemented;
--Maintained required software to enable the Employee Benefits
section to continue transmitting employee health plan
information electronically to the National Finance Center in
order to participate in the program called Centralized
Enrollment Clearinghouse System (CLER); and
--Posted Revised Overtime Schedules for different work weeks along
with a generic time sheet on the DO website.
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, with the following performed on this software:
--Coordinated the update and installation of the ``Toolbox'' software
(provided by BearingPoint) on existing PCs;
--Reviewed existing spell check dictionaries, and worked with
BearingPoint to make the required updates; and
--Implemented 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), a broadly
focused activity, addressing all aspects of DO 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 each year. Disbursing Office staff and SAA
Procurement staff are active participants in the planning and execution
of these tests. In a February 2003, exercise, the mainframe subsystems
of FMIS (i.e., ADPICS and FAMIS) were tested successfully. Two critical
subsystems, checkwriter and Web FMIS, were also tested with limited
success. Due to time constraints, security for Web FMIS was bypassed
and generating reports was not included in the test. In addition,
because of the communications architecture, some ADPICS document prints
(Purchase Orders and Vouchers) could not be created.
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 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.
The contracted-for 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. The DO also has
an open-ended agreement with the Senate Federal Credit Union that
allows the DO to transmit from their facility in Alexandria, Virginia.
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
future transmission problems.
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 2003 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 2003 testing, these tests were completed
satisfactorily. However, ADPICS printing of Purchase Orders and
Vouchers does not work in the disaster recovery mode.
Two components of FMIS, checkwriter and Web FMIS, were tested for
the first time with limited success. Testing of the ``checkwriter''
process, which generates checks and/or direct deposits in payment to
vendors, was tested successfully in the February 2003 exercise. The
disaster recovery testing of Web FMIS was accomplished in the 2003
effort. This testing required installation of additional hardware and
software at the contractor's facility. In order to perform the testing
in the available time frame, security had to be disabled and user
requested reports were not generated. It was anticipated that problems
associated with both will be resolved and tested satisfactorily in the
future.
Printing of ADPICS purchase orders and vouchers is still 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 should have more advanced infrastructure,
allowing for the printing of these documents.
Coordinating COOP
The DO staff wrote a Continuation of Operations Plan (COOP) in
2001. This document addresses issues beyond the scope of disaster
recovery. Normal maintenance is performed on this document to ensure
that it remains up-to-date and viable.
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. This office's initiatives include
deacidification of paper and prints, phased conservation for books and
documents, collection surveys, exhibits, and matting and framing for
the Senate Leadership.
Over the past year, the Office of Conservation and Preservation has
embossed 110 books and matted and framed 515 items for the Senate
Leadership. The office is especially proud to be a part of a Senate
tradition. For more than 22 years, the office has bound a copy of
Washington's Farewell Address for the annual Washington's Farewell
Address ceremony. In 2003, a volume was bound and read by Senator Saxby
Chambliss.
As mandated in the 1990 Senate Library Collection Condition Survey,
the Office of Conservation and Preservation continued to conduct an
annual treatment of books identified by the survey in need of
conservation or repair. In 2003, conservation treatments were completed
for 112 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. The Office of Conservation and
Preservation will continue preservation of the remaining 4,165 volumes.
This office assisted the Senate Library with 578 books sent to the
Library Binding section of the Government Printing Office for binding.
The Office of Conservation and Preservation also worked with the Senate
Library on four exhibits located in the Senate Russell building
basement corridor.
This office continues to serve Senate offices with conservation and
preservation of documents, books, and various other items. The office
is currently monitoring the temperature and humidity in the Senate
Library, the vault, and the warehouse for preservation and conservation
purposes, and plans to phase 15 antique books for box conservation for
storage as well as cross-train a Senate Library staff member to repair
Senate Library materials.
2. curator
The Office of Senate Curator, on behalf of the Senate Commission on
Art, develops and implements the museum and preservation programs for
the United States Senate. The Office collects, preserves, and
interprets the Senate's fine and decorative arts, historic objects, and
architectural features; and exercises supervisory responsibility for
the chambers in the Capitol under the jurisdiction of the Commission.
Through exhibitions, publications, and other programs, the Office
educates the public about the Senate and its collections.
Collections: Commissions, Acquisitions, and Management
Several important commissioned portraits are currently in progress,
including 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 Senator Margaret Chase
Smith. The Vandenberg, Wagner, and Smith portraits are scheduled to be
completed and unveiled in 2004.
The marble bust of Vice President Quayle was unveiled last
September. The sculpture was added to the Senate's Vice Presidential
Bust Collection and installed on the second floor outside the Senate
Chamber. The Curator's Office also installed a painted canvas state
seal of Kentucky in the Majority Whip's Office.
Thirteen objects were accessioned into the Senate Collection this
year. Objects of note include two porcelain Senate Restaurant plates
dating to the early 20th century; a rare cigar label from the mid-
1800's depicting Senators Webster, Clay and Calhoun; an historic
lithograph of George Washington by Rembrandt Peale based on the
Senate's well-known Patri' Pater painting; as well as several historic
prints and political cartoons.
Thirteen new foreign gifts were reported to the Select Committee on
Ethics and transferred to the Curator's Office. They were catalogued,
and are maintained by the office in accordance with the Foreign Gifts
and Decorations Act.
In response to work on the Capitol Visitor Center (CVC) and other
projects, the Curator's Office worked with the Architect of the Capitol
(AOC) to relocate several sculptures in the Capitol. The marble bust of
Constantino Brumidi was moved to accommodate the restoration efforts in
the Brumidi Corridors; while the three marble patriot busts in the
Senate Vestibule and the sculpture of Justice and History were
relocated to accommodate CVC construction. Due to the size and fragile
nature of Justice and History, a conservator was contracted to assist
with the move, and later cleaned and reattached the two pieces in the
sculpture's new location.
The 2002 project to professionally photograph the Senate's
approximately 1,000 historic prints was completed. One set of
transparencies will be stored off-site for emergency purposes, while a
second working set will be used for image requests, future
publications, and new web site postings.
The office also undertook a new initiative to photograph the 102
historic Senate Chamber desks (one hundred on the Senate floor and two
in storage). A contract was awarded to photograph the exterior of each
desk, as well as the interior desk drawer. The project is phased to
coincide with the conservation of the desks; a total of 20 desks were
photographed in 2003, and the project will be completed in 2008. One
set of transparencies will be stored off-site for emergency
preparedness, while a second working set will be used for the website,
image requests, and future publications.
In keeping with the inventory schedule established by the
Registration department last year, all prints, drawings, and
advertising images in collection storage were inventoried in 2003.
Additionally, all objects on display in the Capitol and Senate Office
Buildings were inventoried to verify that no changes in location or
condition occurred in the past year.
Conservation and Restoration
A total of 19 objects received conservation treatment in 2003.
These included 15 Senate Chamber desks, a portrait frame and canvas, a
1909 Russell Senate Office Building partner desk, and two historic ship
models.
The initiative to conserve each of the 100 historic Senate Chamber
desks began in 1999 at the direction of the Senate Commission on Art.
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 to address the wear and
degradation of these historic desks due to continued heavy use. To
date, 76 desks have been restored and the project is on track to be
completed in 2005. This year a condition survey of the desks already
treated was completed. The survey found the desks in good overall
condition. The survey noted that the Senate Cabinet shop should
complete the installation of rubber bumpers to the arms of the Senate
Chamber chairs to protect the front of the desks from damage.
The gilt frame for the portrait of Pocahontas received conservation
treatment. While removing the frame from the painting, it was
discovered that a small section of the canvas had adhered to the liner
of the frame as a result of a previous conservation treatment. A
painting conservator separated the frame and painting and performed
minor conservation treatment to clean, repair, and protect the surface
of the painting.
The office of Senate Curator is studying the possibility of
conserving the canvas and frame for the painting George Washington by
Gilbert Stuart.
An historic partner desk, part of the original suite of furniture
purchased for the Senate Russell Office Building in 1909 and now
assigned to the Republican Leadership suite, was refinished according
to a detailed protocol treatment that restores the original type of
finish and appearance to the Russell Office Building furniture.
Major renovation of the Rules Committee Hearing Room in the Senate
Russell Office Building provided the opportunity for conservation
treatment of two historic ship models in the room. The ships, one
representing the U.S. Constitution and the other the Santa Maria, are
part of the original 1913 decorative scheme for the room when it served
as the Foreign Relations Committee Room. The ships were removed and
examined by a conservator. Extensive cleaning was necessary, as well as
repairs to the rigging, sails, and other small associated details.
The Collections Manager participated in training sessions for the
Capitol Police regarding the care and protection of art in the Capitol.
The Curator's staff also continued to educate the housekeeping
personnel on maintenance issues related to the fine and decorative arts
collections.
Historic Preservation
Over the past year the preservation program continued to develop
the infrastructure systems necessary to support all levels of
preservation activities. Efforts focused on research (archival and
physical investigations), documentation, record keeping, and project
oversight.
Research projects, in response to Senators' requests, produced room
histories and chronologies for individual architectural features, some
of which involved fabric analysis and condition assessments. The office
initiated documentation projects to capture physical changes of a space
or object, and to catalogue existing architectural elements through
surveys. These research and documentation projects, aside from
contributing to the office's architectural knowledge, provided a forum
for developing and refining standards for information collection and
reporting. In addition, various record keeping systems were established
in order to house the findings, including relational FileMaker Pro
databases and traditional files. Such systems allow the office to
easily store and access information, and will continue to evolve as the
preservation department expands its research, documentation, and
oversight purview.
The most significant research-related projects included the
completion of an historic structures report (HSR) for the Senate
Reception Room, and the creation of a collections guide to local
archives. The HSR employed a standard format and will served as a model
for all future HSR's. Based on this effort, the office worked with the
AOC to develop a project for an HSR for the Senate vestibule, adjacent
stairwell, and small Senate rotunda. Regarding the collections guide,
the office initiated a program of systematic review of all relevant
local research collections for the purpose of informing future research
efforts. Through this undertaking, collection content is recorded, all
crucial materials are copied, and the research path is clearly
documented.
Along with establishing internal procedures, the office worked in
partnership with the AOC and the Sergeant at Arms to monitor all
relevant Senate side projects and to provide guidance on those with
potential to impact historic resources. Projects requiring considerable
time and attention included creation of S-125A in the Brumidi
Corridors; continued conservation of the Brumidi Corridor walls;
initiation of a shutter restoration program; development of a plaster
stability testing project; installation of escape mask hood storage
units; rehabilitation of the Republican Leadership suite; and
completion of the rehabilitation of the Democratic Leadership suite.
Historic Chambers
The Curator's staff continued to maintain the Old Senate and Old
Supreme Court Chambers, and coordinated periodic use of both rooms for
special occasions. By order of the Capitol Police, the Old Senate
Chamber was closed to visitors after September 11, 2001. However,
during three Senate recesses (August, October, and December), the
historic room was opened to Capitol Guide and staff-led tours. Thirty-
eight requests were received from current Members of Congress for
after-hours access to the chamber. Of special significance was the re-
enactment swearing-in ceremony for the newly-elected Senators of the
108th Congress. Thirty-one requests were received by current Members of
Congress for admittance to the Old Supreme Court Chamber after-hours.
The office also worked with the AOC to install an electric lift outside
the Old Court for the use of disabled visitors. The lift was necessary
due to CVC construction and related accessibility issues.
Loans To and From the Collection
A total of 69 historic objects and paintings are currently on loan
to the Curator's Office on behalf of Senate Leadership and officials
within the Capitol. Throughout 2003, the Curator's staff returned seven
objects at the expiration of their loan periods to their respective
owners. At the request of the Republican Leadership, 12 new paintings
were borrowed this year.
Of significance was the office's success in locating and securing a
loan of an historic chair originally presented to Vice President
Charles Curtis. The chair, which reflects Curtis's Native American
heritage, is on indefinite loan to the Senate from an anonymous lender.
The Curator's Office continued to work with CVC staff to assemble
information on Senate Collection objects under consideration for loan
to the exhibition in the main gallery of the CVC.
The Secretary's china was distributed and returned three times in
2003. The official Senate china was inventoried and used at 34
receptions for distinguished guests, both foreign and domestic.
Publications and Exhibitions
This summer the Office of Senate Curator teamed with the Government
Printing Office to supervise the printing of the United States Senate
Catalogue of Fine Art. The book marks the first time in its more than
200-year history that the Senate has showcased its entire collection of
paintings and sculpture in a publication. Using full-page color images
and historic photographs, the book provides detailed information on
both the subject and artist for 160 works of fine art, and is a
significant resource for those interested in the history of the Senate
and the heritage of its art. Advance copies of the publication were
distributed to congressional offices in October, and additional copies
will be available in 2004. Several brochures were reprinted, and one
new brochure was published, The United States Capitol, Room S-219.
The interactive exhibit Take the Puck Challenge! was deinstalled
after a 5-year run. The office is continuing to work with the Architect
of the Capitol to develop and install the second phase of the
Constantino Brumidi exhibit. The Senate Cabinet shop is constructing
exhibit kiosks to display informational panels for the paintings George
Washington at Princeton and The Recall of Columbus.
The Curator's office completed final drafts for the Senate
Appropriations Committee Room and Isaac Bassett. These drafts have been
submitted to the Appropriations Committee and the Secretary for final
review.
In early 2004, funding was approved to develop internet sites on
the political cartoons of Puck and the drawings of Lily Spandorf.
Policies and Procedures
This year saw the passage of important legislation related to the
Commission on Art, Public Law 108-83, the Legislative Appropriations
Act of 2004, with several important technical amendments to the
Commission's enabling legislation, including a provision to permit the
Commission to impanel advisory boards, and the establishment of the
Senate Preservation Fund. It also created a Curatorial Advisory Board,
which will greatly enhance the Commission's ability to care for the
Senate's collections and to evaluate potential acquisitions on behalf
of the Senate. Such a board will be composed of respected scholars and
curators who will assist in the development of policies and procedures,
and will review important acquisitions to ensure appropriateness and
validity.
The office also created several important procedural documents in
2003. These included standard procedures for portrait unveilings and
foreign gifts disposition. In response to recent Senate activities, the
office developed formal guidelines for adding or removing applied and
fixed fine art in the Senate. The guidelines call for the creation of
parameters for each space where art has or could be applied, and the
office developed parameters for the Brumidi Corridors and the Senate
Reception Room. The guidelines are currently under review. The office
also assisted in the development of standard contract procedures that
will be used throughout the Secretary's offices in an effort to
standardize and safeguard the contracting process.
Progress continued on a definitive Collections Management Policy.
The new Curatorial Advisory Board will review the document, which will
be presented to the Commission on Art. A first draft of the Commission
on Art's collections management policy has been completed with peer
review expected in 2004.
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 and the Capitol: Tour Guide Series'' and
``The Vice Presidential Bust Collection.''
The office contributed numerous articles to Unum, the Secretary of
the Senate's newsletter. Along with regular features, a new series
highlights art from the country's four geographic regions.
Office Administration
The Curator's Office continued to improve office safety and
emergency procedures. Practice evacuation drills were conducted
monthly. The office purchased a digital camera for its COOP plan, and
performed routine updates of COOP documents. The collection object
files are the primary legal title, research, and management records for
all art and historical objects in the Senate's collections. Microfiche
and digital copies of these records will be stored off-site for
disaster recovery and archival purposes. Additional copies will be used
on-site for research and public information in order to lessen the
handling and damage to the original paper records. In this way, these
unique historical records will be preserved for future generations in
case of disaster.
Planning continued with AOC staff regarding both additional storage
space in the Capitol complex and related construction outside the
Curator's two archival storage rooms on the fourth floor of the
Capitol. To ensure that the additional space meets the Curator's needs
for both temporary and long-term storage for works of art and
historical objects, a variety of considerations were addressed,
including access, security, fire prevention, and environmental
controls. The office worked closely with the AOC to ensure the safety
and accessibility of these spaces during construction. At the same
time, as part of a larger security system upgrade for the Capitol, the
Physical Security Division coordinated replacement of the alarm systems
for the storage rooms.
On behalf of the Sergeant at Arms, the Government Services
Administration (GSA) signed a three year lease with a contractor to
provide secure, climate controlled, museum quality storage for objects
in the Senate Collection that are not displayed and cannot be
accommodated in the storage rooms on the fourth floor. The office
subsequently relocated 70 objects to the new storage facility,
primarily historical furniture, rugs, and decorative arts.
In addition to fulfilling storage requirements, the fourth floor
construction included renovation of the Curator's space. The changes
have greatly improved operational efficiency and staff workspace.
Automation
With the assistance of a consultant, the Senate Collection database
was restructured and is now configured as a true relational database, a
feature that will streamline data entry, enhance data recovery and use,
and facilitate overall maintenance. In addition, data entry screens are
better organized and more user friendly. Additionally, some staff in
the office upgraded to a new version of FileMaker Pro 6. This version
is compatible with XML and already has enabled the Senate website
information to be updated directly from the collections database.
In response to a new initiative to publish a catalogue on the
Senate's historic prints and engravings, clean-up of data related to
almost 1,000 graphic images began. The Registrar and Associate
Registrar were tasked with confirming the accuracy and completeness of
data for the requisite fields in the database which will provide the
basis of the identification information for the objects in the
catalogue. In order for this to occur most effectively, each print was
viewed and its information compared with the data that appears in the
automated database.
The office published an exhibit, ``Women in Senate Art,''on the
Senate web site. This collection of paintings and sculptures
illustrates the role of women artists in the Senate Collection, as well
as highlights the women depicted in Senate art. The office also posted
PDF versions of many of its publications to the web site.
Objectives for 2004
Conservation and preservation concerns continue to be a priority.
Projects in 2004 will include the restoration of 15 Senate Chamber
desks and restoration of an historic mirror in the Capitol.
Investigation will be carried out to identify appropriate expertise and
direction for conservation of the painting and frame for a portrait of
George Washington by Gilbert Stuart, the First Reading of the
Emancipation Proclamation by F.B. Carpenter, and an historic globe from
the Senate Rules Committee Hearing Room.
The office, through the Commission on Art, will be responsible for
commissioning a new painting. S. Res. 177 directs the Commission on Art
to commission by the end of the session a scene commemorating the
Connecticut Compromise for display in the Senate.
The office will develop regulations, guidelines, and authorities
for administration of the Senate Preservation Fund and associated
boards. The Curatorial Advisory Board will be furthered; any additional
boards that the Commission deems are needed will be established; and a
plan for the Preservation Fund developed.
In compliance with S. Res. 178 directing the Senate Commission on
Art to update every six months a list of art and historic furnishings,
the office will work closely with the SAA and Senate Superintendent to
coordinate and submit a complete inventory to the Rules Committee.
Appropriate disposition of objects in the foreign gift collection
will be a priority. The office has established procedures for reviewing
and processing foreign gifts that will allow for quicker transfer of
objects and alleviate storage issues.
Microfiching of the fine art collection files and microfilming of
the Isaac Bassett papers will proceed. The office will continue with
the photography of the Senate Chamber desks. Clean-up of the historic
print and engraving data will be a high priority.
The next major publication will be a catalogue on the Senate's
graphic art collection. Similar in style to the recent fine art
catalogue, the United States Senate Catalogue of Graphic Art will
highlight the approximately 1,000 prints in the collection along with
essays by the Senate Curator and Associate Senate Historian. Other
publications scheduled for 2004 include: Bassett: The Venerable
Doorkeeper, presenting the career of Isaac Bassett and reproducing
passages from his papers, and a brochure on the Appropriations
Committee Room.
The office will begin installing information panels for important
Senate artworks, and standard labels for all fine art work will be
developed.
New internet exhibits will include sites on the Senate Chamber
desks, Isaac Bassett, and the United States Senate Catalogue of Fine
Art. The office also plans to begin publishing its historic engravings
on the web, opening that entire collection to public view for the first
time.
Regarding the Senate Preservation Program, the office will expand
its knowledge of architectural history through research and
documentation. The office will move forward on historic structures
reports for the Vice President's Room, Marble Room, and President's
Room, and work with the AOC on an HSR for the Senate Vestibule and
small Senate Rotunda. In the area of physical preservation, the office
will continue project oversight and documentation, and will move into
project development by identifying appropriate preservation treatments
and sequential tasks for the Senate Reception Room and S-238. In
conjunction with the AOC, the office will follow the existing AOC
project development procedure to accomplish the preservation goals for
these spaces.
3. joint office of education and training
The Joint Office of Education and Training provides employee
training and development opportunities for all Senate staff both in
Washington D.C. and the states. There are three branches within the
department. The technical training branch is responsible for providing
technical training support for approved software packages. This 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 offers 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.
Training Classes
The Joint Office of Education and Training offered 694 classes in
2003 with 6,916 Senate employees participating. The registration desk
handled 15,390 requests for training and documentation.
Of the above total, in the Technical Training area, 335 classes
were held with a total attendance of 1,799 students. An additional
1,126 staff received coaching on various software packages and other
computer related issues. Training was provided to virtually the entire
Senate community as the new Senate Mail Infrastructure was rolled out
through the year.
In the Professional Development area 359 classes were held with a
total attendance of 5,117 students. Individual managers and supervisors
were also encouraged to request customized training for their offices
on areas of need.
The Office of Education and Training is available to work with
offices on issues related to team performance, communication or
conflict resolution. During 2003, 40 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 the Health Promotion area, 774 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 1,300 staff participated in the
Annual Health Fair held in October.
The Office of Education and Training also works with the Office of
Security and Emergency Preparedness to provide security training for
Senate staff. In 2003 the office coordinated 23 sessions of Escape Hood
Training for 1,359 Senate staff. The office also worked with the Office
of Security and Emergency Preparedness to mount a safety and security
curriculum, comprised of numerous topics related to security and
emergency preparedness.
State Training
Since most of the classes offered are only practical for
Washington, D.C. based staff, the Office of Education and Training
continues to offer the ``State Training Fair'' which first began in
March 2000. In 2003, three sessions of this program were offered to
state staff. There were 134 state staff participants. This office also
offered a State Directors Forum for the first time. This program was
designed specifically for the senior leaders in the Senators' state
offices. There were 42 participants. The office continues to offer
``Virtual Classroom,'' which is an internet based training library of
300+ courses. To date, 164 state office staff representing 59 Senators
are using this training option.
4. chief counsel for employment
Background
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 all legal defense 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.
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 handled all work in 2003
internally without the assistance of outside attorneys.
Union Drives, Negotiations And Unfair Labor Practice Charges
In 2003, the SCCE handled one union drive. The Office did the
following with respect to the union drive: trained managers and
supervisors regarding their legal obligations during a union campaign,
advised the client in selecting its representatives for the election,
conducted training sessions for the employer representatives regarding
improper conduct at elections, and conducted 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 in
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 2003, the SCCE
handled 5 OSHA complaint procedures.
Management Training Regarding Legal Responsibilities
The SCCE conducts legal seminars for the managers of Senate offices
to assist them in complying with employment laws. In 2003, the SCCE
gave 75 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;
--Equal Pay for Equal Work: Management's Obligations Under the Equal
Pay Act;
--The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA): Steps Your
Office Must Take to Verify Employment Eligibility;
--Enhancing Diversity and Avoiding Discrimination in the Workplace;
and
--Workplace Violence.
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,
Administrative Directors, Office Managers, Staff Directors, Chief
Clerks and General Counsels at their request. The purpose is 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 and 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.
5. senate gift shop
Pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 121(d), the Senate Gift Shop was established
in 1992 under administrative direction and supervision of the Secretary
of the Senate. 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 Senators, staff and employees of the
Senate, as well as constituents, and the many visitors to the U.S.
Capitol complex. Products include a wide variety of souvenirs,
collectibles, and fine gift items created exclusively for the U.S.
Senate. Services include special ordering of personalized products and
hard-to-find items, custom framing, gold embossing, engraving, and
shipping. Additional special services include the distribution of
educational materials to tourists and constituents visiting the Capitol
Building and Senate Office Buildings.
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 more than ten 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 Senate Gift Shop recorded sales of $1,516,594.88 for fiscal
year 2003. Cost of goods sold during this same period were
$1,114,899.59, accounting for a gross profit of $360,172.97. Records
show total sales in fiscal year 2002 were $1,418,065.88. This
represents an increase in sales of $98,529.00 from fiscal year 2002 to
fiscal year 2003.
In addition to tracking gross profit from sales, the Senate Gift
Shop maintains a revolving fund and a record of on-hand inventory. As
of October 1, 2003, the balance in the revolving fund was $1,109,717.22
with on-hand inventory valued at $2,304,772.88.
A General Accounting Office (GAO) audit of the gift shop's fiscal
year 2002 sales transactions, requested by the Secretary, is in
progress and will be completed this year.
Additional Activity
One of the most important objectives for 2003 was replacing point-
of-sale and accounting software, Basic Four, which is more than 20
years old and no longer meets the increasingly unique needs of the Gift
Shop. (This old application was shared with the Stationery Room). A
contractor was selected to perform the system installation including
the required hardware for the new retail and financial management
system. The contract is nearing completion and cut-over to the new
system occurred in February 2004. The system is now in an acceptance
stage to ensure that all aspects are functioning properly.
The selected software package, Microsoft Retail Management Systems:
Headquarters, Store Operations and Great Plains Financial, was
purchased in late 2002. It is an off-the-shelf package that requires
little modification to meet the special technical requirements of
Senate Gift Shop operations. Currently, Gift Shop staff are creating
the necessary databases that will serve as the foundation for the new
retail system including inventory details, financial data and other
information required for detailed reports. Contractors are now training
Gift Shop staff on the new system and will continue to provide hardware
and software support after the cut-over date.
The installation of the required hardware--servers, computers,
monitors, and point of sale terminals--and software, is mostly
complete. The majority of hardware and software along with the support
services necessary for full implementation of the new system were
funded through fiscal year 2003 appropriations allocated to the
Secretary of the Senate. A few additional items, i.e., application user
fees, required funds which were appropriated in fiscal year 2004.
It is important to note that the new system will not only meet the
Gift Shop's current and near-future requirements, but it will also
accommodate potential add-on features.
Accomplishments and New Products in 2003
Official Congressional Holiday Ornaments
In 2003 the Senate Gift Shop introduced the second ornament in the
2002-2005 series, the third consecutive ``four-year ornament series.''
Each ornament features an architectural milestone of the Capitol
building and is packaged with 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.
Our 11th annual ornament, released in 2003, pictures a watercolor
of the Capitol as it appeared in 1834 as depicted by New York architect
Alexander Jackson Davis. In keeping with a Gift Shop tradition, the
authentic colors of the original watercolor were reproduced onto a
white porcelain stone and set with a brass frame finished in 24kt gold.
Holiday sales of the 2003 ornament were very good with additional
sales expected throughout 2004. Revenue from selling nearly 35,000 of
these ornaments has generated more than $40,000 in scholarship funds
for the Senate Child Care Center.
Porcelain ``Legislation'' Box
``Legislation'' was the second in a series of four porcelain boxes
that displays different images from the Constantino Brumidi fresco
painted on the ceiling of the President's Room in the Senate Wing of
the United States Capitol. The first box in the series, ``Liberty'' was
released in 2002. Each of the final two porcelain boxes will display
one of the two remaining allegorical figures, Executive and Religion,
in Brumidi's painting. The boxes will be released in late 2004 and late
2005, respectively.
Capitol Visitor Center (CVC) Coin Products
To better promote the CVC and to better showcase the CVC coins, the
Gift Shop incorporated coins into a variety of unique gift items. While
we have noticed an increase in coin sales due to the creation of these
items, we do not anticipate any substantial reduction of inventory
until the actual opening of the CVC. The items developed to date
include:
--CVC coins encased in Lucite paperweights, which have sold well
since their development last year.
--A variety of ladies' and men's wristwatches and pocket watches with
CVC coins serving as the face (developed by the Gift Shop and a
vendor/manufacturer).
--Introductions of additional items currently in development are
expected in 2004.
Senate Seal Watches
The ``official Senate watch'' is now provided by a different
manufacturer. The new men's and ladies' watches have the same look and
feel as the discontinued watches, with additional space on the
backplate for personalized engravings. The first shipment of watches
was received in December and is expected to be a popular gift item.
Projects and New Ideas for 2004
United States Senate Catalogue of Fine Art
The Gift Shop is working with the Senate Curator in order to secure
copies of the new publication, United States Senate Catalogue of Fine
Art.
Capitol Complex Trees
During the early construction stages of the CVC the Senate Gift
Shop arranged for the recovery of the felled trees from the grounds of
the Capitol complex. The recovered trees have been milled and kiln
dried. The resulting 12,000 board feet of cut lumber are being
temporarily stored in a warehousing facility.
While the Gift Shop continues researching ideas for products that
can be produced from the recovered trees, the general thought is to
create presentation pieces for official use and a variety of
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. As in previous years, the Gift Shop will rely on
Tiffany & Co. to produce the plates.
In addition we are creating a library of complementary designs and
artwork from which designs for future Congressional plates could be
chosen. This library will include mock-ups produced in conjunction with
the selection for the artwork chosen for the 108th Congressional Plate.
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 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.
Editorial Projects
Executive Session Transcripts of the Permanent Subcommittee on
Investigations, 1953-1954.--The Historical Office completed editing,
annotating, and indexing 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). In May 2003, the PSI released the
resulting five-volume work in both printed and electronic editions. The
transcripts received extensive national media attention.
The Senate Leader's Lecture Series.--From 1998 through 2002, the
Senate Majority Leader hosted a series of lectures on Senate
leadership. These talks, featuring former Senate presidents and party
floor leaders, were held in the Capitol's historic Old Senate Chamber
before an audience of current Senators and invited guests. The
Historical Office provided production and publication support for the
series, including a 188-page volume containing all nine lectures and
separate remarks by President Pro Tempore Strom Thurmond. That book,
entitled Leading the United States Senate, was published by the
Government Printing Office in September 2003.
The Documentary History of the United States Senate.--The
Historical Office is conducting an ongoing documentary publication
program to bring together in edited volumes fundamental source
materials that will help explain the development of the Senate's
constitutional powers and institutional prerogatives. Currently in the
research and writing stage are volumes on Senate impeachment trials,
the Senate's consideration of controversial treaties, and the evolution
of the Senate's standing rules.
Administrative History of the Senate.--During 2003, the assistant
historian continued the research and writing of this historical account
of the Senate's administrative evolution, taking advantage of newly
discovered archival resources and improved search capabilities for
contents of nineteenth century newspapers and periodicals. 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.
Biographical Directory of the U.S. Congress, 1774-present.--In May
2003, both Houses of Congress adopted H. Con. Res. 138, authorizing
printing of the sixteenth edition of the Biographical Directory of the
United States Congress, 1774-2005. The first edition of this
indispensable reference source was published in 1859; the most recent
edition appeared in 1989. Since 1989, the assistant historian has added
many new biographical sketches, has expanded bibliography entries, and
has revised and updated most of the database's 1,875 Senate entries.
The assistant historian has updated the Congress-by-Congress listing of
members through the 108th Congress, in preparation for the new print
edition, and has completed the editing and proofing of existing
information to allow for expanded search capabilities on the online
version at http://bioguide.congress.gov.
Capitol Visitor Center Exhibition Content Development.--The Senate
historian assisted in preparing detailed plans for the exhibition
gallery of the Capitol Visitor Center. Three staff historians
contributed to exhibition scripts that set forth the chronological
history of the Senate and describe the role of Congress in helping to
realize the nation's basic aspirations.
Member Services
Senate Historical Minutes.--At the request of the Senate Democratic
Leader, the Senate historian prepared and delivered a ``Senate
Historical Minute'' at thirty-one 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. They subsequently
appear each week in The Hill newspaper. 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 her program of assisting 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. The archivist completed and the Senate published a
comprehensive revision of Records Management Handbook for United States
Senators and Their Archival Repositories together with a revised
pamphlet for Senate staff entitled ``Senators' Papers: Management and
Preservation Guidelines.'' The archivist assisted in the production of
an ``Opening an Office Handbook'' and produced a brochure, ``New
Senators Briefing: Your Historical Records.'' The archivist updated the
archival sections of the handbook, ``Closing a Senate Office.''
Committee Records Management and Disposition Assistance.--The
Senate archivist provided each committee with staff briefings, record
surveys, guidance in preservation of information in electronic systems,
and instructions for the transfer of permanently valuable records to
the National Archives' Center for Legislative Archives. 3,530 feet of
records were transferred to the Archives. The archivist completed a
review of records disposition guidelines for the offices under the
Secretary's jurisdiction. The Office's archival staff continued to
provide processing assistance to committees and administrative offices
in need of basic help with noncurrent files.
Association of Centers for the Study of Congress.--In May, the
Historical Office joined with the National Archives' Center for
Legislative Archives, and the Robert C. Byrd Center for Legislative
Studies to conduct a conference designed to establish an association of
university-based research centers devoted to the study of Congress. The
Association of Centers for the Study of Congress will conduct its first
meeting in May 2004. Among the centers involved are those associated
with the public careers of former Senators Howard Baker, Bob Dole,
Everett Dirksen, Margaret Chase Smith, George Aiken, Thomas Dodd,
Wendell Ford, Hubert Humphrey, Richard Russell, John Stennis, and John
Glenn.
Oral History Program
The Historical Office conducts a series of oral history interviews,
which provide personal recollections of various Senate careers. This
year, oral history interviews were completed with J. Stanley Kimmitt,
former Secretary of the Senate; C. Abbott Saffold, former Democratic
Secretary; Jade West, former staff director of the Republican Policy
Committee; Tom C. Korologos, former staff of Senator Wallace Bennett
and White House congressional liaison; Arthur Rynearson, deputy Senate
Legislative Counsel; Alphonso Lenhardt, former Senate Sergeant at Arms;
and Martin Gold, procedural counsel to the Majority Leader.
Photographic Collections
The photo historian continued to expand the Office's 40,000-item
photographic collection, acquiring images of former Senators not
previously represented in the collection and photographing historically
significant Senate events, including hearings of Senate committees.
Digital images of frequently used photographs were created to promote
their use and safeguard the originals. Images are now being transmitted
to patrons via e-mail or CD, and 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. An exhibition
of Capitol photographs (1900-1950) was developed for display on the
Capitol's second floor.
Educational Outreach
In coordination with the Senate Office of Education and Training,
Historical Office staff provided seminars on the general history of the
Senate, women Senators, and Senate floor leadership. Office staff also
participated in seminars and briefings for specially scheduled groups.
On April 18, 2003, the Washington Post published a highly
complimentary feature-length article, ``Ensuring a Senate Inscribed in
History,'' on the operations of the Historical Office.
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
developing and implementing human resources policies, procedures, and
programs for the Office of the Secretary of the Senate that not only
fulfill the legal requirements of the workplace but which complement
the organization's strategic goals and values. This includes recruiting
and staffing; providing guidance and advice to managers; 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.
The Human Resources Office 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
For the Secretary of the Senate's operation, the Office of Human
Resources has conducted a complete classification and compensation
study which includes, for the first time, a comprehensive collection of
current job classifications and specifications for every position.
Furthermore, the pay plan and bands reflect the accurate and equitable
layout of all staff within the organization. Needs for the upkeep of
the system are being drafted to afford the Secretary the opportunity to
keep the system current.
Policies and Procedures
HR will continue to update and revise the Employee Handbook of the
Office of the Secretary. With nuances in employment law and other
advances, policies need to be reviewed, revised and updated annually.
In regard to potential violations of said procedures, the
Secretary, through HR and the Senate Chief Counsel for Employment, has
developed an effective method to coordinate inquiries.
Attraction and Retention of Staff
HR is responsible for the ongoing task of advertising new vacancies
or positions, screening applicants, interviewing candidates and
assisting with all phases of the hiring process. The office works
closely with the applicable department to ensure the process moves
smoothly and expeditiously. HR presents to the Secretary the
recommendations of department heads concerning payroll and hiring
actions.
Training
In conjunction with the Senate Chief Counsel for Employment, HR
prepares training for department heads and staff. Some of the training
topics include Sexual Harassment, Interviewing Skills, Conducting
Background Checks, Providing Feedback to Employees and Goal Setting.
Orientation of New Staff
Since first impressions make such a lasting impression, HR has
developed a new consistent means of orienting new staff joining the
Office of the Secretary. This new system allows for a seamless
transition from the orientation of HR, policies, parking, and metro
subsidy, to the particular department the staff member is joining and
fosters a greater overall understanding of the Secretary's operation.
Interns and Javits Fellows
HR coordinates both the Secretary's internship program and the
Javits and Heinz Fellowship programs. The Javits program is due to
terminate in September 2004. The Heinz Fellowship is also due to
terminate at the end of this fiscal year. HR is aware that the Heinz
Foundation is currently working to secure reauthorization for the
program.
Employee Outreach, Feedback and Development
HR acts as a liaison for staff of the Secretary in soliciting and
receiving feedback, suggestions and insight in an effort to continually
improve processes and procedures.
A key to maintaining and improving performance standards, as well
as ensuring completion of organizational objectives, is providing
employee feedback. 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 is in the process of obtaining feedback on the current Employee
Feedback and Development Program (EFDP) process. A new modified tool
will be created to encompass the recommendations and efficiencies
brought to light over the past two years.
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.
Employee Self-Service (ESS)
HR has implemented use of the Employee Self-Service system (ESS)
which is a secure system enabling Secretary staff to review and update
personnel information pertaining to addresses, phone numbers and
emergency contact information. Employees are now able to review and
correct information to their electronic personnel records kept by HR.
Staff and managers can also access leave records and reports through
this system. The ability to review and update this information is
instrumental to maintaining accurate contact lists for emergencies or
other contingencies.
New Leave Tracking System
In the past, employees of the Secretary of the Senate had to
maintain ``timesheets'' for each day of work throughout the year. This
system was maintained by each employee and signed off on by the
supervisor and/or department head. The accrual rates for both sick
leave and annual leave, in conjunction with the manual attendance
tracking, proved a tedious task for all. HR has created a new leave
tracking system whereby attendance is only recorded by the exception,
or absence. Leave slips have been created for staff to complete and
submit prior to taking leave. The supervisor approves the request and
forwards it to HR to be entered into the system. Staff will then have
access to their leave balances which will be accrued and maintained by
HR.
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 work 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.
Mission Evaluation
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.
As in fiscal year 2002, improved procedures were adopted to stretch
support across all Secretary departments. With one exception, which
should be completed in June, all offices have been updated to the
Senate Mail Exchange Application as the principal e-mail application.
Individual offices that previously maintained cc:Mail post offices,
namely Public Records, the Stationery Room, and Page School, were
combined into one central Secretary Microsoft Exchange server located
at Postal Square.
For security reasons, 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 resources. Information System staff continue to
actively participate in all new project designs and implementations
within the Secretary of the Senate operations.
Improvements to the Secretary's LANs
The Senate chose Windows NT as the standard network operating
system in 1997. The Senate standard will shift to Microsoft Server 2000
operating system software in fiscal year 2004.
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 staff,
intern, and patron accounts in the Capitol, the Senate Hart, Russell,
Dirksen buildings, and the Page School.
Fiscal Year 2003 Highlights
Installed 3 LIS major production releases on all Legislative
workstations and laptops. In conjunction with the SAA Office of
Application Development, legislative software applications are updated
and revised on a continual basis. One notable enhancement in fiscal
year 2003 was the continuing design and development of the Senate
Journal application.
Replaced all Captioning Services workstations with improved
hardware and software applications and installed Secretary-Judiciary
workstation pilot hardware and software to support voice-to-text speech
recognition applications.
Renovated Gift Shop hardware and software workstations and servers
to implement improved point-of-sales operation.
Added Quantum Snap Server for existing Stationery server emergency
data backup operation.
Updated Official Reporter workstations to Windows 2000 operating
systems and improved high speed printing operations.
Installed new Library Oracle server and Web server on schedule in
July 2003; Senate Library catalog database deployment for intranet
operation is scheduled for 2004.
Deployed enterprise-wide virus-patch installation process to
automatically download Norton anti-virus definition files to Secretary
workstations. No legislative workstations were affected by the August
2003 outbreaks of the Blaster and Welchia viruses which distributed
security vulnerabilities for servers and workstations.
Deployed three major hardware COOP LIS operational upgrades. In May
2003, all legislative department heads were provided a laptop with
secure-id/VPN access to the Senate Network that mirrors their office
desktop operation. In October, a second set of laptops was deployed
off-site. In December a third mirrored set was installed at the
Alternate Chamber facility. The setup and installation of the January
2004 Alternate Chamber exercise utilized equipment from outside the
perimeter of the exercise site.
Installed and replaced original Secretary intranet development web
server. This server will function as the primary data warehouse for the
Office of Human Resources' People-Trak database. Networking routes have
been established for all Secretary department access to this web
server.
The Historical Office completed the McCarthy publication project
marking the 50th anniversary of these hearings. Digital scanning
techniques implemented and adopted three years ago by our office
continue to be utilized in all Secretary departments.
Fiscal Year 2004 Objectives
Implementation of the SAA Active Directory Redesign project in 2004
will present a rapid change in server-client hardware and software
functionality for all Secretary offices. System requirements have been
developed and forwarded to SAA to meet and provide continual
application growth for all departments. This change in networking
structure will allow Information System staff to migrate from a SINGLE-
LAN support group to an Enterprise-Level support organization--as
extending the flexibility of available support to all departments is
vital to the IT growth within the Office of the Secretary.
9. interparliamentary services
The Office of Interparliamentary Services (IPS) has completed its
22nd 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 office also provides appropriate
assistance as requested by other Senate delegations.
The statutory interparliamentary conferences are: NATO
Parliamentary Assembly; Mexico-United States Interparliamentary Group;
Canada-United States Interparliamentary Group; and British-American
Interparliamentary Group.
Two additional interparliamentary conferences were created in 2003
which will meet for the first time this year. The new conferences are
United States-Russia and United-States China Interparliamentary Group.
In June, the 42th Annual Meeting of the Mexico-U.S.
Interparliamentary Group was held in Tennessee. In July, the British-
American Interparliamentary Group meeting was held in Virginia.
Arrangements for both of these successful events were handled by the
IPS staff.
As in previous years, 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.
Planning is underway for the 45nd Annual Meeting of the Canada-U.S.
Interparliamentary Group to be held in the United States in 2004.
Advance work, including site inspection, will be undertaken for the
44nd annual Mexico-U.S. Interparliamentary Group meeting to be held in
the United States in 2005. Preparations are also underway for the
spring and fall sessions of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly.
10. library
The Senate Library provides legislative, legal, business, and
general information services to the United States Senate. The Library
collection encompasses legislative documents beginning with the
Continental Congress in 1774; current and historic executive and
judicial branch materials; and an extensive book collection on American
politics, history, and biography. Collection resources also include a
wide array of online systems used to provide nonpartisan, confidential,
timely, and accurate information services to the Senate.
Notable Achievements
Information Services inquiries increased more than 14 percent over
2002 totals.
Significant progress made toward making online catalog available
Senate-wide.
Submitted proposal to Sergeant at Arms for off-site storage
facility.
XML-generated tables posted on Senate.gov, LIS, and Webster from a
single file.
Senate Floor Schedule on Senate.gov posted nightly by Library
staff.
Deaccessioned and transferred to the Federal Depository Program
24,293 outdated, superseded, and surplus government documents.
Information Services
Senate.gov and the Legislative Information System (LIS)
The Senate Library's role in the production of www.senate.gov
significantly expanded in 2003. The Information Services Team focused
on increasing their knowledge and skills with the latest Internet
technologies. Each librarian accepted additional responsibility to
research, write, edit, and post time-sensitive information on the
Senate's official public Internet site. Reference Librarians worked
closely with the Webmaster to coordinate and plan the rapidly growing
site.
The Senate Library is dedicated to creating an Internet site that
provides up-to-the-minute, well-organized information to dual
audiences, both Senate offices and the general public. Presentation of
timely information on Senate.gov, enhanced by Library-authored
navigational guides, significantly improves the Senate's ability to
disseminate information. The most popular Senate Library-authored pages
on Senate.gov and LIS had 348,198 visitors in 2003.
VISITORS TO SENATE LIBRARY--AUTHORED SENATE.GOV AND LIS PAGES
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Active Legislation on Senate.gov........................... 95,301
Reference on Senate.gov.................................... 192,725
Virtual Reference Desk on Senate.gov....................... 41,301
Hot Bills List on LIS...................................... 12,353
Appropriations Tables, Fiscal Year 1987-2004 on LIS........ 6,518
------------
TOTAL................................................ 348,198
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Librarians are critical in the development of information
architecture, which is the underlying organization system for an
Internet site. Well-designed information architecture greatly improves
the workflow of adding new information and also makes it easier to
locate existing information. Examples are numerous, but they include
Active Legislation and the Virtual Reference Desk. These pages provide
valuable gateways to thousands of legislative documents, articles,
biographies, statistical tables, and works of art categorized by key
topics. The addition of the important ``teasers,'' help visitors
navigate through more than 10,000 pages of information on Senate.gov.
The Library continues to serve as the official LIS Help Desk for
Senate staff and provides LIS training sessions in conjunction with the
Office of Education and Training. Reference Librarians participated in
15 LIS training events for Senate staff during 2003.
Patron Services and Document Delivery
Inquiry statistics for phone, fax, e-mail, and walk-in visitors
increased more than 14 percent in 2003 (46,234), surpassing the target
of a 3 percent increase over 2002 totals (40,359). Visitors to Library-
produced pages on Senate.gov and LIS are factored into the inquiry
statistics this year for the first time, having both the effect of more
accurately reflecting and dramatically increasing the 2003 inquiry
total (394,432).
INFORMATION SERVICES INQUIRY STATISTICS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phone, Fax, E-mail Requestors.............................. 34,081
Walk-in Visitors........................................... 12,153
Visitors to Senate Library-Authored Senate.gov and LIS 348,198
Pages.....................................................
------------
TOTAL................................................ 394,432
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Library activity is also reflected by the number of photocopies
produced (156,891) and the number of pages printed (6,945) in the
Micrographics Center. Technology that scans documents from the
Library's extensive microform collection of congressional and executive
materials, newspapers, and magazines has become a popular tool. It
enables staff to post copies of historic documents on Senate.gov or e-
mail them directly to researchers. Use of these technologies decreased
the number of information packages hand-delivered to Senate offices
(4,078), loaned books and documents (1,664), and outgoing faxes
(2,747).
Webster
The librarians have forged a well-deserved reputation on Capitol
Hill as authorities in the field of information service and are
frequently asked for consultation. In 2003 administrators of the
Sergeant at Arms' Senate Information Services (SIS) program relied upon
the Senate Library to thoroughly review the online version of the
Leadership Directories before purchasing a Senate-wide license. A
second major project involving the reference librarians was their
participation in a SIS project to identify a replacement for the
outdated News Edge system on Webster. The Library also agreed to serve
as the Search Help Desk to assist all Senate staff in the use of
commercial research tools provided by SIS via the Front Page on
Webster. Serving as the Search Help Desk requires that each member of
the Information Services Team maintain expert search skills for
LexisNexis, WestLaw, ProQuest, Leadership Directories, Congressional
Quarterly, Bureau of National Affairs, National Journal, Federal
Document Clearinghouse, Associated Press, and Reuters.
Client Relations
The Library hosted 27 client relations staff events during 2003,
including quarterly Services of the Senate Library Seminars, a State
Fair, five District-State Seminars, monthly New Staff Seminars, and a
reception for office managers and chief clerks. The Library also
conducted two special seminars for the Senate Page School. New
borrowing accounts established for 350 Senate staff during 2003 reflect
the success of the Library's public relations program.
The Senate Library is proud to have a reputation among information
professionals and researchers. Tours and demonstrations during 2003
brought 68 individuals from organizations including the annual
Depository Library Conference, University of North Carolina, Federal
Library and Information Center Committee, and the University of
Maryland. Tours and research assistance was extended to foreign
visitors from Brazil, Japan, Russia, Egypt, England, and Hong Kong.
This is the sixth year that the Library hosted National Library
Week activities. This year's book talk featured Senator Dale Bumpers
who spoke about his autobiography, The Best Lawyer in a One-Lawyer
Town: A Memoir. More than forty staff enjoyed his candid reminiscences
of past and current political figures. The annual dessert reception
brought an additional 115 Senate staff to the Library. These annual
events are excellent public relations tools that are enjoyed by
frequent Library users and by new Senate staff.
Library staff produced three new display cases in the Russell
Building corridor in 2003. The new displays included What Hath God
Wrought: Communication Technology in the Senate. The display documents
the use of television, radio, telephone, and telegraph in the Senate
since Samuel F.B. Morse transmitted the first official telegraph
message from the Capitol in 1844. A second display was the Signers of
the Declaration of Independence. The display features a first-edition
copy of Annual Register, or a View of the History, Politics, and
Literature, for the Year 1776--significant because the first printing
of the Declaration of Independence in a book is in this edition. The
recently unveiled portrait and historic accomplishments of Senator
Blanche Kelso Bruce, the second black Senator in history and the only
former slave to serve in the United States Senate, was the third
display for 2003.
Technical Services
Acquisitions
Two significant collections of historic congressional documents
were added to the permanent collection in 2003. The Unpublished U.S.
House Committee Hearings 1969-1972 and 1945-1968 Supplement, produced
by the Congressional Information Service, is a microfiche collection of
1,180 hearing transcripts that were previously only available at the
National Archives. In addition, copies were made of legislative
calendars for the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration and the
Senate Committee on Veterans Affairs, dating from the mid-1930s, which
had previously only been available in committee libraries.
A book acquisitions committee has been established to implement a
collection development policy in the Library. Members of the committee
include the Acquisitions Librarian, several members of the Information
Services team, and the Librarian. The committee meets monthly to review
each potential acquisition for content, cost, scholarliness, and value
to the permanent collection.
The Library added 11,698 books, congressional and executive branch
documents, and microforms to the permanent collection in 2003. New
materials include 1,034 books, 7,188 congressional documents, and 3,476
executive branch publications. Statistics for books and standing orders
are reported in a single category as of 2003, which more accurately
reflects the cataloging and processing workload.
Cataloging
Major progress was made in 2003 that will enable the Senate
community to access the Library's online catalog via Webster. Two
Windows 2000 catalog servers were received in August and the Oracle
catalog database was transferred to the primary server on December 3,
2003. The new technology significantly upgraded system administration
by improving backup and remote management functions. Software and
licenses have been ordered for the secondary server that will reside at
the Senate Computer Center in Postal Square. The Library's online
catalog provider, the Library Corporation (TLC) installed the secondary
server in early January 2004. The secondary server will provide patron
access to the online catalog, and will be available by the fourth
quarter of 2004.
The Library's catalog database was rebuilt and significant
workstation upgrades were completed in early 2003. Improvements include
automated temporary circulation record deletion; expanded printer
support; integrated e-mail notification; catalog support of search
history, new title searches, and results sorting; full authority record
editing; multiple ISBN (International Standard Book Numbers) indexing;
and the ability to mask collections from public display. Additional
databases improvements made during 2003 are the correction of improper
title truncation, and a rebuild of the keyword title index that
provides greater flexibility in the modification and display of
records.
There are a total of 151,930 searchable bibliographic items in the
Library's online catalog. The cataloging team added 7,524 new items to
the catalog, and deleted 11,225 items. The item total represents 4,355
new titles and 3,169 updates to existing collections. To maintain
quality control standards, 50,367 maintenance transactions were
completed during 2003. Those transactions include creating and editing
authority records, editing existing records, barcoding new volumes,
editing PURLs (Persistent Uniform Record Locators) for electronic
resources, withdrawing records for discarded materials, and deleting
temporary loan records.
The multi-year project focusing on the cataloging of rare
congressional materials continued during 2003. These nineteenth and
early twentieth century Senate treaty documents, executive reports, and
committee publications may be the only copies in existence. The large
number of original cataloging records and subject headings required for
this project led to Senate Library participation in the Library of
Congress' National Authorities Cooperative Program (NACO). NACO
establishes the official subject headings used in catalogs for the
majority of the academic, public, and professional libraries in the
United States. The Senate Library is one of 179 institutions, including
the largest and most prestigious academic institutions in the country,
that participates in NACO. The Library contributed 489 new subject
headings related to congressional committees, subcommittees,
nominations, and treaties during 2003.
Government Documents Collection
This is the third year of the Library's review of documents
received through the Government Printing Office's (GPO) Federal
Depository Library Program (FDLP). The review team includes staff from
all Library departments and the goal is to deaccession outdated,
superseded, and surplus government documents. In 2003, 24,293 items
were withdrawn from the collection. Items withdrawn from the Senate
Library collection are offered to FDLP libraries throughout the United
States. 20,818 (88 percent) of those have been accepted by other
institutions.
The review team also deselected 293 publication series from FDLP in
2003. Documents selected to remain in the collection will be cataloged
according to the Library of Congress classification system, replacing
of Superintendent of Documents system. The cataloging team reclassified
179 titles in 2003, and looks forward to completely integrating
classification of the primary book and government document collections.
Access to core government documents formerly received through FDLP
has not been compromised by these cancellations. Increased availability
to these materials through agency and department Internet sites allows
libraries to print information on-demand. The reduction of GPO-issued
items in tangible formats is evident by the 180 percent decrease in
government documents received in 2003. The positive impacts of this
technological advance include increased physical space, reduced staff
time processing materials, and the Library's online catalog serving as
a gateway to government-wide information.
Collection Maintenance and Preservation
On April 17, 2003, a water leak was discovered that caused
significant damage to several hundred books in SR-B14. The damaged
books were immediately moved to alternate sites to be dried. Sheet
plastic from the Library's disaster kits was used to protect adjacent
areas from additional damage. Judging from the extent of the wicking,
the leak probably began several days earlier. The Superintendent's
Office replaced a section of pipe, but the original source of the leak
was never determined. Several dozen volumes were purchased to replace
the unsalvageable items. Installation of water detection alarms and
containment trays by the AOC is anticipated in fiscal year 2005.
Warehouse
Library staff met with SAA staff and their consultants concerning
the Library's off-site storage requirements. The initial June 23, 2003
meeting set the framework for a draft warehouse plan that met the
Library's needs. The Library's proposal for a new facility calls for
added security, increased shelving, and improved environmental
conditions. In anticipation of a move from the existing warehouse,
Library staff and summer interns packed 14,000 books. Volumes
determined to be in poor condition were set aside for cleaning and
repair by the Office of Conservation and Preservation. Several excess
collections were transferred to the Regional Depository Library at the
University of Maryland.
Administrative
Budget
The seventh year of budget reviews delivered minimal reductions
totaling $1,285. This is the lowest amount since the annual reviews
began in fiscal year 1997. During that time, the reviews have
eliminated duplicate copies, titles available through online services,
and materials not meeting the Senate's current needs. This has resulted
in $59,930.34 in cancellations, which have been critical in offsetting
annual cost increases for core materials. The collection and
acquisitions program now better meet the information demands of today's
Senate. The goal is to provide the highest level of service using the
latest technologies and best resources in the most cost-effective way.
Professional Staff Development
During 2003, Library staff participated in 142 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. In addition to classes
on news and legal databases, technical training sessions included
Microsoft Excel, CQ Online, CQ Votes, Homesite, Wilson Web Bio, Dialog,
Data Harmony, XML, Newswire, Powerpoint, and Writing for the Web.
Technical Services staff attended several skill enhancement classes
including MARC content designation, taxonomy, and OCLC authorities.
Research classes included courses on legislation, law, treaties,
copyrights, and the CRS Advanced Legislative Process Institute. Other
staff activities included tours to the National Archives, Pentagon
library, Senate Recording Studio, Senate Legal Counsel, Senate
Judiciary Committee library, the United Nations library, Computers in
Libraries conference, and the annual Special Libraries Association
conference.
Interns
Summer interns completed several key projects. These included
boxing 11,500 volumes of the Congressional Serial Set and copying
historic Senate committee calendars for the permanent collection. The
interns also identified House hearings and committee prints missing
from the Library collection. Copies of missing titles were received
from the committees.
Unum, Newsletter of the Office of the Secretary of the
Senate
The Secretary's quarterly newsletter was established in October
1997 and has been produced by Senate Library staff since May 2000. With
a distribution to approximately 1,000 readers, Unum serves as an
historic record of accomplishments, events, and personnel in the Office
of the Secretary of the Senate. The Summer 2003 issue of Unum was the
first full-color issue.
Major Library Goals for 2004
Provide Senate-wide access to the Library's catalog via Webster.
Implement navigation and organization design improvements on
Senate.gov.
Prepare updates to Senate Votes on Cloture Motions (Senate Print
99-95) and ANecrology of United States Senators.
2003 ACQUISITIONS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Books Government Congressional Publications
------------------- Documents -------------------------------------
------------------ Repts/ Total
Ordered Received Paper Fiche Hearings Prints Bylaw Docs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
January...................... 23 57 310 77 301 23 41 202 1,011
February..................... 23 48 242 56 261 23 23 133 786
March........................ 25 61 169 35 233 37 37 200 772
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1st Qtr................ 71 166 721 168 795 83 101 535 2,569
==================================================================================
April........................ 67 110 182 145 333 37 39 274 1,120
May.......................... 40 135 165 71 248 32 43 284 978
June......................... 22 82 163 115 313 21 60 277 1,031
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2nd Qtr................ 129 327 510 331 894 90 142 835 3,129
==================================================================================
July......................... 32 78 227 71 191 15 58 525 1,165
August....................... 20 62 150 89 318 16 60 270 965
September.................... 3 57 248 88 178 14 52 349 986
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3rd Qtr................ 55 197 625 248 687 45 170 1,144 3,116
==================================================================================
October...................... 41 74 244 82 296 17 48 263 1,024
November..................... 33 177 139 52 225 14 64 99 770
December..................... 26 93 245 111 274 17 71 279 1,090
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4th Qtr................ 100 344 628 245 795 48 183 641 2,884
==================================================================================
2003 Total............. 355 1,034 2,484 992 3,171 266 596 3,155 11,698
2002 Total............. 263 628 2,287 1,083 3,094 152 576 1,977 9,797
==================================================================================
Percent Change............... 34.98 64.65 8.61 -8.40 2.49 75.00 3.47 59.59 19.40
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2003 CATALOGING
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Titles Cataloged
LIS ------------------------------------------------------------
Hearing Government Congressional Publications Total
Numbers Documents ------------------------------ Titles
Added Books -------------------- Docs/ Cataloged
Paper Fiche Hearings Prints Pubs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
January........................ 21 25 14 4 261 10 29 343
February....................... 30 30 14 10 222 14 16 306
March.......................... 38 32 16 4 272 21 2 347
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1st Qtr.................. 89 87 44 18 755 45 47 996
================================================================================
April.......................... ........ 46 21 10 144 4 49 274
May............................ 33 30 21 ........ 138 54 ........ 243
June........................... 3 66 12 18 88 92 15 291
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2nd Qtr.................. 36 142 54 28 370 150 64 808
================================================================================
July........................... 2 45 20 2 548 32 40 687
August......................... 39 37 10 1 105 42 13 208
September...................... ........ 58 13 31 375 113 55 645
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3rd Qtr.................. 41 140 43 34 1,028 187 108 1,540
================================================================================
October........................ 5 70 6 ........ 305 63 33 477
November....................... ........ 78 9 ........ 101 43 16 247
December....................... 50 101 3 1 154 2 26 287
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4th Qtr.................. 55 249 18 1 560 108 75 1,011
================================================================================
2003 Total............... 221 618 159 81 2,713 490 294 4,355
2002 Total............... 99 430 488 183 2,873 123 461 4,558
================================================================================
Percent Change................. 123.23 43.72 -67.42 -55.74 -5.57 298.37 -36.23 -4.45
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2003 DOCUMENT DELIVERY
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Micrographics Photocopies
Volumes Materials Faxes Center Pages Pages
Loaned Delivered Printed Printed
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
January...................................... 141 404 202 637 11,718
February..................................... 102 219 200 560 9,989
March........................................ 146 274 300 651 9,648
------------------------------------------------------------------
1st Qtr................................ 389 897 702 1,848 31,355
==================================================================
April........................................ 167 403 300 286 14,293
May.......................................... 162 507 223 323 15,204
June......................................... 190 522 309 1,774 20,349
------------------------------------------------------------------
2nd Qtr................................ 519 1,432 832 2,383 49,846
==================================================================
July......................................... 136 423 260 921 20,551
August....................................... 119 206 169 232 9,376
September.................................... 130 334 199 276 12,484
------------------------------------------------------------------
3rd Qtr................................ 385 963 628 1,429 42,411
==================================================================
October...................................... 137 293 254 144 15,767
November..................................... 115 250 209 781 10,408
December..................................... 119 243 122 360 7,104
------------------------------------------------------------------
4th Qtr................................ 371 786 585 1,285 33,279
==================================================================
2003 Total............................. 1,664 4,078 2,747 6,945 156,891
2002 Total............................. 1,952 4,467 7,148 4,421 132,903
==================================================================
Percent Change............................... -14.75 -8.71 -61.57 57.09 18.05
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. senate page school
The United States Senate Page School provides a smooth transition
from and to the students' home schools, and offers those students a
sound program, both academically and experientially, during their stay
in the Nation's Capital, balancing a unique work situation with the
Senate's demanding schedule.
Summary of Accomplishments
Accreditation by the Middle States Commission on Secondary Schools
continues until December 31, 2008.
Two page classes successfully completed their semester curriculum.
Closing ceremonies were conducted on June 6, 2003, and January 23,
2004, the last day of school for each semester.
Orientation and course scheduling for the Spring 2003 and Fall 2003
pages were successfully completed. Needs of incoming students
determined the semester schedules.
Extended educational experiences were provided to pages. Twenty
field trips, four guest speakers, opportunities to compete in writing
contests, to play musical instruments and vocalize, and to continue
foreign language study with the aid of tutors of four languages were
all afforded pages. Sixteen 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.
Effective and efficient communication and coordination among
Sergeant at Arms, Secretary of the Senate, Party Secretaries, Page
Program, and Page School continues and policies of the program have
been reviewed.
The community service project embraced by pages and staff in 2002
continues. Items for gift packages were collected, assembled, and
shipped to military personnel in Afghanistan, Kuwait, Iraq, and the USO
in Frankfurt, Germany (where distribution of the boxes to troops
enroute to war zones take place). Pages included letters of support to
the troops participating in Operation Enduring Freedom.
The evacuation and COOP plans have been reviewed and updated. Pages
and staff continue to practice evacuating to primary and secondary
sites. Staff, tutors and pages participated in escape hood training.
Staff were retrained in CPR and certified in First Aid and AED use.
Updated materials/equipment were purchased. These included a DVD
player, calculus textbooks and support software, English and history
textbooks, chemistry and physics probeware kits, textbooks with support
software and site license, and teacher resource material.
Summary of Goals
For the coming year, the goals of the administration and staff of
the Senate Page School include:
--Individualized small group instruction and tutoring by teachers on
an as-needed basis will continue to be offered.
--Foreign language tutors will provide instruction in French,
Spanish, German, and Latin.
--The focus of field trips will be sites of historic, political, and
scientific importance.
--Staff development options will include attendance at a ``Learning
and the Brain'' conference, seminars conducted by Education and
Training, and subject matter conferences conducted by national
organizations.
--Facility re-design to maximize space will be completed.
--Upgrading science laboratory equipment will continue allowing micro
labs and reducing quantities of supplies used.
--Review of technology applications for classroom use will be
completed.
--Continuation of the community service project.
12. printing and document services
The Office of Printing and Document Services (OPDS) serves as
liaison to the Government Printing Office (GPO) for the Senate's
official printing, ensuring 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. The office assists
the Senate by coordinating, scheduling, delivering and preparing Senate
legislation, hearings, documents, committee prints and miscellaneous
publications for printing, and provides printed copies of all
legislation and public laws to the Senate and the public. In addition,
the office assigns publication numbers to all hearings, committee
prints, documents and other publications; orders all blank paper,
envelopes and letterhead for the Senate; and prepares page counts of
all Senate hearings in order to compensate commercial reporting
companies for the preparation of hearings.
During fiscal year 2003, the OPDS prepared 5,334 printing and
binding requisitions authorizing GPO to print and bind the Senate's
work, exclusive of legislation and the Congressional Record. Since 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. As a result of this office's cost
accounting duties, OPDS is able 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, Historian, Disbursing, Legislative Clerk, Senate
Library as well as the U.S. Botanic Garden, U.S. Capitol Police and
Architect of the Capitol. Last year's major printing projects included
the Report of the Secretary of the Senate, an expanded Leader's Lecture
Series book, as well as a 500 page four-color case bound book the
``U.S. Senate Catalogue of Fine Art.'' Current major projects for the
office include a new full color version of the ``History of the U.S.
Botanic Garden 1861-1991.''
Hearing Billing Verification
Billing verifications are how reporting companies request payment
from a Senate committee for transcription services.
During 2003, OPDS provided commercial reporting companies and
corresponding Senate committees a total of 975 billing verifications of
Senate hearings and business meetings. This translated to an average of
51.3 hearings/meetings per committee, a 2.6 percent increase over 2002
and also represented over 70,000 transcribed pages at a total billing
cost of over $460,000.
OPDS utilizes a program developed in conjunction with the Sergeant
at Arms Computer Division that (a) provides more billing accuracy and
greater information gathering capacity and (b) adheres to the
guidelines established by the Senate Committee on Rules and
Administration for commercial reporting companies to bill the Senate
for transcription services. During 2003, the office increased the
efficiency and accuracy of the system by sending files and billing
verifications electronically between committees and reporting
companies. Department staff continue training to apply today's
expanding digital technology to improve performance and services.
HEARING TRANSCRIPT AND BILLING VERIFICATIONS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PERCENT
2001 2002 2003 CHANGE 2003/
2002
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Billing Verifications....................................... 1,004 952 975 2.4
Average per Committee....................................... 48 50 51.3 2.6
Total Transcribed Pages..................................... 72,799 71,558 70,532 -1.5
Average Pages/Committee..................................... 3,467 3,766 3,712 -1.5
Transcribed Pages Cost...................................... $479,921 $471,807 $461,807 -2.2
Average Cost/Committee...................................... $22,853 $24,832 $24,288 -2.2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, the Service Center within OPDS is staffed by
experienced GPO detailees who 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
because committees have been able to decrease or eliminate additional
overtime costs associated with the preparation of hearings.
Document Services Distribution, Inventory and On Demand Publication
The Document Services Section coordinates requests for printed
legislation and miscellaneous publications with other departments
within the Secretary's Office, Senate committees, and 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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2001 2002 2003
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Pages Printed............................................. 25,051 29,690 33,094
For the Senate.............................................. 14,084 14,489 16,835
For the House............................................... 10,967 15,201 16,259
Total Copies Printed and Distributed............................ 1,300,000 1,268,603 1,199,402
To the Senate............................................... 318,572 439,953 307,917
To the House................................................ 459,477 301,383 441,735
To the Executive Branch and the Public...................... 492,915 532,813 449,750
Total Production Costs.......................................... $15,428,530 $13,488,381 $20,143,538
Senate Costs................................................ $7,452,933 $6,339,539 $9,886,805
House Costs................................................. $7,333,134 $6,609,307 $9,563,592
Other Costs................................................. $642,462 $539,535 $693,141
Per Copy Cost................................................... $12.14 $12.14 $16.79
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2003, a total of 33,094 pages were printed in the Congressional
Record. Of this total, 16,835 pages were printed for the Senate, and
16,259 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, Digest and miscellaneous pages.
This is 3,404 pages more than were produced in 2002, an increase of
11.4 percent. A total of approximately 1.2 million copies of the
Congressional Record was printed and distributed in 2003. The Senate
received 307,917 copies, the House 441,735, with the remaining 449,750
delivered to the Executive Branch agencies and the public at large.
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 with the advancement of document
availability online, 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 which is staffed by experienced GPO detailees
that provide Member offices and Senate committees with on-demand
printing and binding of bills and reports. In 2003, the DocuTech Center
produced 803 tasks for a total of 971,077 printed pages, a production
increase of 22 percent over 2002.
The primary responsibility of the Documents Services Section is to
provide services to the Senate. However, the responsibility and this
office's dedication and assistance to the general public, the press,
and other government agencies is virtually indistinguishable from the
services provided to the Senate. Requests for material are received at
the walk-in counter, through the mail, by fax, phone, and online.
Recorded messages, fax, and e-mail operate around the clock and are
processed as they are received, as are mail requests. The office
stresses prompt, courteous and accurate answers to the various public
and Senate requests.
SUMMARY OF ANNUAL STATISTICS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CALENDAR YEAR CONGRESS/SESSION PUBLIC MAIL FAX REQUEST E-MAIL COUNTER REQUEST
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.00020e+15.................. 106/2nd......... 4,066 3,129 112 9.51869e+19
107/1st......... 3,449 2,093 621
107/2nd......... 3,637 1,866 662
108/1st......... 1,469 2,596 735
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Online Ordering
The past year brought significant changes in providing new services
and improving existing ones. For example, OPDS has continually sought
to improve the efficiency and utility of the Secretary of the Senate's
homepage. Beginning in late 2000, Senate offices, by way of a link to
the Webster, could order legislative documents online. Via the same
link, it is also possible to 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. In 2003 that process was expanded to provide the capability of
online ordering of blank paper. This is but one model of OPDS
continuing to seek new ways to use technology to assist Members and
staff with added services and enhancements.
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; and 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 2002, through September 2003, 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, and assistance given to
lobbyists attempting to comply with the provisions of the Lobbying
Disclosure Act of 1995. A total of 95,314 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 2003 Accomplishments
The office developed a manual detailing the policies and procedures
of the Public Records revolving fund for the purpose of producing a
financial statement. At the Secretary's request, GAO also performed an
audit of the revolving fund which revealed no discrepancies. Public
Records also completed a transition to the next generation of scanning
technology by replacing old hardware, and updating software.
Plans for Fiscal Year 2004
The Public Records office is revising and improving the lobbying
pages on senate.gov based upon recommendations of an independent survey
of North American disclosure web sites.
Automation Activities
During fiscal year 2003, the Senate Office of Public Records
automated the Gift Rule filings and the Mass Mailing registrations. In
the event of an emergency, these filing registrations are easily
accessible off site. The office also started a project to automate the
foreign travel reports required by the Mutual Security Act of 1954.
Federal Election Campaign Act, as Amended
The Act requires Senate candidates to file quarterly reports.
Filings totaled 4,238 documents containing 232,442 pages.
Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995
The Act requires semi-annual financial and lobbying activity
reports. As of September 30, 2003, 6,112 registrants represented 15,317
clients and employed 24,872 individuals who met the statutory
definition of ``lobbyist.'' The total number of lobbying registrations
and reports was 40,877.
Public Financial Disclosure
The filing date for Public Financial Disclosure Reports was May 15,
2003. The reports were available to the public by June 13, 2003. Copies
were provided to the Select Committee on Ethics and the appropriate
State officials. A total of 2,545 reports and amendments was filed
containing 14,481 pages. There were 316 requests to review or receive
copies of the documents.
Senate Rule 35 (Gift Rule)
The Senate Office of Public Records received over 1,233 reports
during fiscal year 2003.
Registration of Mass Mailing
Senators are required to file mass mailings on a quarterly basis.
The number of pages was 487.
14. senate security
The Office of Senate Security (OSS) 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
Five hundred fifty Senate employees held one or more security
clearances at the end of 2003. This number does not include clearances
for employees of the Architect of the Capitol or clearances for
Congressional Fellows assigned to Senate offices, which are also
processed by OSS.
In the past year, OSS processed 2,418 personnel security actions, a
31.9 percent increase from 2002. One hundred twenty investigations for
new security clearances were initiated last year, and 87 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 year, reinvestigations were initiated
on 58 Senate employees. OSS processed 71 routine terminations of
security clearances during the reporting period and transmitted 322
outgoing visit requests. The remainder of the personnel security
actions consisted of updating access authorizations and compartments.
The length of time required for the Department of Defense (DOD) and the
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to process Senate staff for
security clearances has increased by 66.7 percent relative to 2002.
Security Awareness
OSS conducted or hosted 79 security briefings for Senate staff.
Topics included information security, counterintelligence, foreign
travel, security managers' responsibilities, office security
management, and introductory security briefings. This represents an
increase of 1.3 percent from 2002.
Document Control
OSS received or generated 2,668 classified documents consisting of
79,931 pages during calendar year 2003. This is an increase of 10.3
percent in the number of documents received or generated in 2002.
Additionally, 60,873 pages from 3,263 classified documents no longer
required for the conduct of official Senate business were destroyed.
This represents a 0.6 percent increase in destruction. OSS transferred
754 documents consisting of 30,149 pages to Senate offices or external
agencies. These figures do not include classified documents received
directly by the Appropriations Committee, Armed Services Committee,
Foreign Relations Committee, and Select Committee on Intelligence, in
accordance with agreements between OSS and those Committees. Overall,
Senate Security completed 6,685 document transactions and handled over
170,953 pages of classified material in 2003, an increase of 5.5
percent.
Secure storage of classified material in the OSS vault was provided
for 106 Senators, committees, and support offices. This arrangement
minimizes the number of storage areas throughout the Capitol and Senate
office buildings, thereby affording greater security for classified
material.
Secure Meeting Facilities
OSS secure conference facilities were utilized on 1,375 occasions
during 2003. In July, the smallest OSS conference room was converted to
a computer and storage room. This was necessitated by changes in office
space and loss of computer connections previously supplied by the House
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, both due to the Capitol
Visitor Center (CVC) construction. This has somewhat limited the number
of people who could be allowed to read or use classified computer
systems when other rooms were in use. Even with the loss of this room,
use of OSS conference facilities increased 77 percent over 2002 levels.
Eight hundred thirty-eight meetings, briefings, or hearings were
conducted in OSS' three conference rooms. Of those, forty were ``All
Senators'' briefings. OSS also provided secure telephones, secure
computers, secure facsimile machine, and secure areas for reading and
production of classified material on 537 occasions in 2003 to Senators
and staff.
15. stationery room
The Senate Stationery Room's principal functions are to sell
stationery items for use by Senate offices and other authorized
legislative organizations, including:
--selecting 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;.
--purchasing supplies utilizing open market procurement, competitive
bid and/or GSA Federal Supply Schedules;
--maintaining individual official stationery expense accounts for
Senators, Committees, and Officers of the Senate;
--rendering monthly expense statements;
--insuring receipt of reimbursements for all purchases by the client
base via direct payments or through the certification process;
--making payments to all vendors of record for supplies and services
in a timely manner and certifying receipt of all supplies and
services; and
--providing delivery of all purchased supplies to the requesting
offices.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal Year Fiscal Year
2003 2002
Statistical Statistical
Operations Operations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gross Sales............................ $4,843,716 $4,628,342
Sales Transactions..................... 61,140 61,479
Purchase Orders Issued................. 7,545 6,218
Vouchers Processed..................... 8,689 7,376
Metro Fare Media Sold.................. 52,279 41,558
$20.00 Media....................... 46,260 36,943
$10.00 Media....................... 3,023 1,978
$5.00 Media........................ 2,996 2,637
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operational Growth
As indicated in the above statistics, the Stationery Room operation
continues its progressive growth pattern with an increase in gross
sales of $213,000 over fiscal year 2002.
It should be noted that current staffing level of twelve employees
for the operation remain at the same level as fiscal year 1974 when
sales were approximately $944,000.
Fiscal Year 2003 Activities
During the first quarter of the fiscal year, the Stationery Room
assisted ten Senator-elect offices. In addition, the Stationery room
assisted the new Majority Leader and his staff with their transition.
Members of Stationery Room staff were tasked as part of a Senate-
wide working group to assist the Sergeant at Arms (SAA) in the
development of an ``Emergency Go Bag.'' The finalized bag should
support each office in an emergency with a variety of supplies as
recommended by the Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency
Management Agency and the American Red Cross. Offices will be able to
purchase additional ``Go Bags'' on a Special Order basis through the
Stationery Room.
The Stationery Room made initial inquiries regarding a state-of-
the-art Retail Point-of-Sale system and back-office accounting system
during April 2003. A professional consultant was subsequently hired to
draft a requirements document, which will be finalized this spring.
Baseline estimates for application software are between $131,500 and
$133,000. This price structure does not include add-ons that will be
needed for automated flag ordering/tracking; an internal e-commerce
website for automated office product ordering capabilities; or other
custom system software modifications.
Working together, the Stationery Room and the Committee on Rules
and Administration began a review of the applicable Rules and
Regulations for the Mass Subsidy Program. On November 3, 2003, a
provision was added to the regulations to authorize the purchase of
media one week in advance of the month in which the media is to be
used. The Stationery Room was also tasked to provide a means in which
offices could order transit media electronically via e-mail. This
project is currently in beta testing with thirteen offices as a pilot
group.
As part of the Secretary's efforts to ensure financial
responsibility, the General Accounting Office began an audit of the
Stationery Room's operation. The final report may be issued in the
summer of 2004.
To fulfill emergency preparation needs, Stationery Room personnel
devised a mechanism--scanning--for data storage and retention of all
critical documents for the operation. Fiscal year 2003 records are
nearing completion of scanning. Once records have been scanned, that
information is available locally and paper copies are removed to a
National Archive facility storage and final disposition. This project
has been a joint effort by the Stationery Room, Historical Office and
Sergeant at Arms.
In an effort to establish an effective communication link with the
SAA IT product line, a process was devised to notify the Stationery
Room of new IT equipment being introduced into the Senate. Notification
now allows the Stationery Room to be proactive in supporting office
equipment.
Stationery Room staff regularly meets with Administrative Office
Managers to more effectively understand their needs and requirements.
In addition, the office is currently looking at creating (i) a Product
Review Committee to ensure the office carries the products it needs and
(ii) a working group regarding necessary emergency supplies in case
Continuity of Operations Plans are implemented.
The Stationery Room is part of a Flag Process working group being
guided by the Office of the Sergeant at Arms. The mission of this
working group is to streamline the flag procurement process for
constituents with a focus on timely processing and delivery. This is an
on-going project and is currently in its early stages.
16. webmaster
The Webmaster is responsible for the three web sites that fall
under the purview of the Secretary of the Senate: the 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 for Secretary staff only.
The Senate Web site (www.senate.gov) was completely redesigned and
the new site was launched in the fall of 2002. At that time the
Documentum Web Content Management System was implemented which allows
content providers to create and post information to the web site
without knowing HTML, the format language of the web.
Development work on the Documentum content management system
continued throughout 2003 as content providers identified changes that,
when implemented, would make their work easier. Adjustments were made
to the application that allows the curator to update the web site
directly from their database. This application has been working
effectively for almost a year.
An XML application was built for the Senate Library to allow them
to update the Active Legislation information one time and then
disseminate the information in different formats, such as publishing in
HTML to two separate web sites and creating a PDF version for printing.
The Active Legislation web page on www.senate.gov is consistently in
the top 10 most visited content items on the main site, drawing more
than 12,000 visitors a month.
Throughout 2003, senate.gov content providers became more cohesive
as a group. Monthly meetings were held where new ideas were shared.
Collaboration increased throughout the year and the posting of feature
articles in the major areas of the site were coordinated in terms of
timing and subject matter. The editing and creation of content
continued at a steady pace incorporating feedback received from staff
and the public.
In 2003 the web site averaged over 115,000 visitors a day.
Reviewing statistics on web page usage help the content providers
better understand what information the public is seeking and how best
to improve the presentation of that data. The main Senate homepage and
the home pages of the six subject areas (buckets) receive the most
visits as people navigate around the site. Within the buckets we find
that visitors are drawn to the following content items in order of
popularity: 1. Roll Call Votes; 2. Active Legislation List; 3. Senate
Leadership Page; 4. Senate Organization Chart; 5. Committee Hearing
Schedule; 6. Session Schedule for 2003; 7. Virtual Tour of the Capitol;
8. Bill and Resolutions; 9. Calendars and Schedules; 10. Nominations;
11. Individual State Pages; 12. Historical Office Page; 13.
Congressional Record; 14. Virtual Reference Desk; and 15.
Appropriations Bills.
E-mail traffic to the webmaster has shown a dramatic decrease in
questions about where to find information on the web site. The new web
site navigation structure makes finding information much easier. In
previous years the webmaster received on average 15 messages a day
asking for the location of some specific information on the site. In
2003 that number dropped to less than 5 requests a day.
A major effort in 2003 was the installation, configuration, and
testing of the Verity Search Engine for senate.gov. Based on the
initial round of tests, changes were made to the search engine
configuration resulting in greatly improved relevance ranking of search
results. Testing is now focusing on how to improve the search results
by adding or editing metadata associated with the content items. More
relevant and standardized keywords, and better descriptions and titles
will improve the relevance ranking and display of the search results.
Secretary staff assisted SAA staff in conducting briefings for Senate
Systems Administrators on how to use the search feature on their own
sites. Systems Administrators were encouraged to review how their data
displays in search results prior to final implementation of the search
feature for the public.
A continuing problem encountered in 2003 was that some web pages
were not always available when the public tried to access them.
Specifically, the problem was with pages that accessed a database using
Cold Fusion to populate the page with information. SAA staff spent a
tremendous amount of time and attention trying to solve this stability
problem, including calling in Macromedia engineers to work onsite. In
addition to making changes to the Cold Fusion settings, it became
obvious that architectural changes were required which would affect the
way Senate offices used databases to publish information to senate.gov.
These changes are being made and the stability of the Cold Fusion pages
on senate.gov has improved dramatically.
Training on the Documentum system continued in 2003. The Webmaster
took online courses in WebPublisher Administration, DQL (the Documentum
Query Language), and XML as implemented in Documentum, as well as
attending seminars on Authoring in XML, XML and Content Management, and
Search Engine Development. The Webmaster represented the Office of the
Secretary at meetings of the LegBranch Multimedia Group and Executive
Branch meetings on improving Citizen Participation through E-Government
Initiatives.
In the fall of 2003 a Web Developer was hired to assist the
Webmaster, and the Office of Web Technology was enhanced within the
Office of the Secretary, an acknowledgment of the growth in workload
and responsibility in disseminating information and providing services
to the public, and internally to the Senate, via websites.
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.
Background: LIS
An April 1997 joint Senate and House report recommended
establishment of a data standards program and in December 2000, the
Senate Committee on Rules and Administration and the Committee on House
Administration jointly accepted the Extensible Markup Language (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.
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,
re-used, and re-purposed. Parts of one XML document can be re-used 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 great progress has been made in the past year.
LISAP: 2003
During 2003 Senate staff continued to develop the Legislative
Editing in XML Application (LEXA) focusing on the Office of the Senate
Legislative Counsel and the production of bills, resolutions and
amendments in XML. LEXA features many automated functions that provide
a more efficient and consistent document authoring process. The SLC has
worked very closely with the LEXA development team to strengthen and
refine the application and provide a list of future enhancements. At
this time LEXA can be used to create introduced and reported bills and
resolutions and most amendments. Creation of conference reports and
compilations will be completed in the coming months.
In late 2003, a contractor developed a two-day training course on
LEXA that was held three times between January 6 and January 15 for the
39 attorneys and staff assistants in the SLC. It takes several months
for a drafter to learn to use XyWrite and the locator formatting codes.
Following the LEXA training, SLC staff immediately began producing
bills and resolutions using LEXA, and the first XML draft to become a
bill was introduced on January 22, 2004. The SLC will work gradually
toward creating all legislative documents in LEXA and will use XyWrite
only when necessary.
The document management system (DMS) for the SLC was also completed
in 2003. The DMS is integrated with LEXA and will be implemented in
2004 once the SLC has completed the transition from XyWrite to LEXA.
The DMS will provide the ability for the SLC to track and manage all
work requests, legislative drafts, and internal office documents
prepared in a variety of formats including XML, Word, WordPerfect, e-
mail, and PDF. The DMS will also provide search and retrieval, delivery
of documents to clients, and exchange of 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.
With the implementation of LEXA and the DMS for the SLC, support
becomes an important issue. The 2004 Legislative Branch Appropriations
Act directed the GPO to provide support for LEXA much as they have for
XyWrite for many years. With help from the LEXA development team, the
GPO is working toward achieving that goal. As LEXA becomes more widely
used in the SLC and other offices drafting legislation, the support
load will increase. The Systems Development Services group of the
Office of the Sergeant at Arms provides support and maintenance for the
LIS/DMS, and that group will also support the DMS for the SLC. The
training contractor is also developing a comprehensive printed and
online reference manual for LEXA and the DMS and will also produce
computer-based training for new hires.
Also in 2003, a contractor completed work on converting bills,
resolutions, and SLC drafts from the 106th and 107th Congresses to an
XML format for use in LEXA. In early 2004, the contractor converted the
documents from the first session of the 108th Congress. The conversion
software has been incorporated into LEXA providing the ability to
convert a locator-coded document to an XML document. The contractor
also developed software (also in LEXA) to convert an XML document back
to locator codes for printing through the Government Printing Office's
Microcomp software. This conversion will also be used to supply
locator-coded versions of documents to those offices and organizations
still working in XyWrite.
The conversion contractor also began work on converting the
compilations of current law to XML format for use by the SLC and the
House Legislative Counsel in drafting bills and amendments. This
contractor has also developed an XML component to assist in the
creation of tables and columnar data in legislation that will be used
by the Senate, House, GPO, and Library of Congress. This component
provides assistance and a visual display to the drafter during the
creation of a table. The XML tagging in the table provides a readable
display in the editor and on the Web and accurately prints the table
through Microcomp--all without manual intervention to change the
underlying tagging or data.
LISAP: 2004
The LEXA development team will continue to work with the SLC to
refine and enhance LEXA including developing software to create and
print conference reports and to edit and update the compilation
documents created and maintained by the House and Senate Legislative
Counsels. LEXA, as developed for the SLC, will establish a framework on
which to build applications for other offices producing other types of
legislative documents. The team will next address the specific needs of
the Office of the Enrolling Clerk. Additional functionality to produce
engrossed bills and amendments and enrolled bills will be added to
LEXA, and the office will receive training and the LEXA reference
manual.
The SLC's DMS will be implemented in 2004. Prior to implementation,
transition training will be developed for the office and the reference
manual will be expanded to include information on the use of the DMS.
The DMS will be integrated with LEXA and will provide a powerful
tracking, management, and delivery tool. Technology-based training
(TBT) will also be prepared for the SLC that will combine training on
LEXA and the DMS for new attorneys and staff assistants in the SLC. The
TBT, coupled with the standards-based LEXA and DMS applications, will
shorten the time needed for new hires to learn the drafting technology.
The SLC will be able to focus on teaching the legislative drafting
process and new hires will no longer have to spend months training on
entering printing codes using out-dated DOS-based technology.
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 re-verified
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 content-specific searches.
ACQUISITION OF ARTIFACTS THAT ONCE BELONGED TO THE SENATE
Senator Campbell. What particularly interests me, as you
mentioned, as well as Senator Stevens, and that is the
acquisition of former artifacts that belong to the Senate. Is
it my understanding that you can get these on permanent loan or
buy them, but that things cannot be donated to the Senate? Is
that true or not?
Ms. Reynolds. I am going to defer, as I did last year, to
our Senate curator on that, and ask her to educate us a little
bit on----
Senator Campbell. If she would come up to the table, and
identify herself for the record, please.
Ms. Reynolds. Diane Skvarla, our Senate curator.
Ms. Skvarla. The question I understand was whether items
could be donated to the Senate. They actually can be donated to
the Senate and we continue to get items donated to the Senate;
several every year. As Emily pointed out, we hope with the
Preservation Fund and new knowledge that we will get more of
those in the future.
Senator Campbell. Of the things that are donated, I suppose
some have real historic value; and who knows, maybe some do
not. Does this advisory board that you mentioned, are they ones
that determine what to accept and what not to accept?
Ms. Skvarla. They will assist us. Yes. We normally get a
piece, and find out the history of it, of why it might be
important. For example, a couple of years ago, we got as a gift
a snuff box once owned by Isaac Bassett, who was the assistant
doorkeeper here in the Senate. The snuff box was actually a
gift to Bassett from the Senators themselves in the 19th
century.
CURATORIAL ADVISORY BOARD
The curatorial advisory board will assist us. They will
also note, if it is a fine piece of silver, we might ask the
curatorial board for their advice. So yes, it very much will
help us in determining the appropriateness of that gift to the
Senate.
Senator Campbell. How many people are on that board?
Ms. Skvarla. We are having 11.
Senator Campbell. Eleven. Emily did mention some of the
acquisitions that have been made. Those will eventually all be
in the Visitor Center, like Vice President Curtis' chair. Is
that the long-range goal that--that's where they will be?
Ms. Skvarla. We are still in the process of that exhibit
design and development. That will be an issue that obviously
will be presented to leadership and the Capitol Preservation
Commission, as time goes forward.
SENATE WEB SITE
Senator Campbell. Thank you. Did I hear you properly when
you said we are getting 150,000 hits per day on the web site?
Ms. Reynolds. Right. It's 115,000.
Senator Campbell. 115,000 per day. Are most of those
students or do you have any way of knowing?
Ms. Reynolds. I am not certain that we have a way of
knowing. That would be an interesting figure to track. I can
tell you, though, just some anecdotal evidence that came in
recently that was fun for us to see, and that is, a university
instructor in Indiana was nice enough to send us his core
syllabus on public law in the United States Senate. He had
encouraged his students to use Senate.gov, and had developed
his syllabus around some of the material on Senate.gov.
If there is a way to track those statistics or to conduct
some sort of a survey of our users, let me get with our
webmaster on that. I will be happy to get back to you. That is
a good question.
Senator Campbell. I thought it might be students. I know
when my own son was in college a few years ago, he was using
different web sites, the Library of Congress, and a number of
opportunities back here to write a lot of his college papers.
Ms. Reynolds. Right. Exactly.
Senator Campbell. It is a wealth of information.
Ms. Reynolds. The other thing, if I might just add one more
note on the web site usage, is we were averaging about 15
requests a day for assistance in navigating the site. Our very
skilled webmaster now, in rearranging the site and making it
more user-friendly, we are now getting to an average of just
about five requests a day for assistance in navigating the
site.
So, this is another area where your committee has been
generous to us in helping us expand the site, some added
enhancements. You will see some additional enhancements even
this year.
RICIN INCIDENT
Senator Campbell. Okay. We will move on to a couple of
other things. How did the February's ricin incident impact your
operation?
Ms. Reynolds. Our office was not most immediately impacted.
But there were a variety of ways in which we responded. The
first is, Senator Frist asked the Sergeant-at-Arms and I to set
up a leadership coordination center, which actually ended up
being physically housed in my office for that week. It was very
helpful for all of us because our staff and the Sergeant-at-
Arm's staff were working in conjunction with each other on that
response.
In addition, as I mentioned, we exercised part of our COOP
plan with the stationery operation, also part of our COOP plan
with public records, and we maintained--they were long days,
but in the evenings then, we would flip over the operation to
the Sergeant-at-Arms emergency operation center for any
questions that came in during late evening hours through
individual offices. But most especially, having that leadership
coordination center, so that we could work hand-in-glove
together to respond, was very helpful.
Senator Campbell. So, you did not feel that you were out of
the loop on anything that you couldn't keep up----
Ms. Reynolds. No, sir.
CAPITOL VISITOR CENTER
Senator Campbell. Okay. And then the last question on the
Visitor Center. I look at it almost every day once or twice.
We're certainly picking up progress on that. I wish it were
faster, very frankly. But what is your assessment of the status
of that? Do you think we are going to have some challenge that
we cannot confront?
Ms. Reynolds. That is a good question. I certainly do not
want to steal Mr. Hantman's thunder, since he is----
Senator Campbell. I am going to ask him the same question.
Ms. Reynolds [continuing]. Our day-to-day person out there.
My role in this has been, and I will tell you, I have been
amazed in the course of my time in the job, even though I
certainly am not the Architect of the Capitol, anything close
to an engineer or a construction person, or an architect
myself, I have been amazed at the time that the leadership
staff and staff from the Capitol Preservation Commission spent
on this, in conjunction with the Architect's Office. Again, it
is a very collaborative effort.
Clearly, we have had some challenges, be it weather-
related, obviously, in the construction of this or even some
construction challenges. I know Alan will address all of that.
The project is making enormous progress, as you said. I
reflected that, Mr. Chairman, 1 year ago, at this time, when
you and I talked about those trucks coming up the hill every
day but coming up to load up dirt, they were excavating and
removing that dirt each and every day.
It is incredible progress in 1 year when you think you can
now actually look out there and see that there is a top going
on. It gives us all a sense, and particularly for those of us,
or laymen, like myself, who do not understand construction
necessarily. But it comes alive all of a sudden, and you begin
to see all of those drawings, and diagrams, and everything we
talked about during the previous year begin to unfold.
There is no doubt that within the course of the next couple
of years, whether it is weather-related issues or other
challenges, that the architect will presumably continue to face
those challenges; but face them well, as they have. We all make
those adjustments together.
That is why it is very important, I dare say, that there is
a weekly meeting that I help to facilitate, along with my
colleague on the House side, the Clerk of the House, so that we
come together in a bicameral, bipartisan way to look at any
issues on the Architect's plate, to address how they impact our
community, both on the Senate and the House side, and hopefully
afford solutions together.
CVC OPERATIONAL DECISIONS
In addition to that, we are also at a time, and it is a
particularly exciting time, as we reference the exhibit design
coming up for the Capitol Visitor Center, where we can begin to
turn our focus to the operational side of the Capitol Visitor
Center. That is when you know there is light at the end of the
tunnel, that it is an exciting place to be.
Clearly, while we are not making strict operational
decisions, we are having very good dialogue, and hopefully
setting some parameters that we can take back to the leadership
and the Capitol Preservation Commission. In adding over 500,000
square feet to the Capitol itself with this Visitor Center,
there are enormous operational issues. But we all keep in mind
the three primary goals, the very reason this center is being
constructed in the first place, and that is to enhance our
security, to improve our visitor amenities, and just as we talk
about on our public web site, to provide greater visitor
education opportunities for those who come here to learn about
this Capitol and this Congress.
Senator Campbell. Thank you.
Ms. Reynolds. Thank you.
Senator Campbell. Senator Durbin, did you have questions of
Ms. Reynolds?
SENATE STUDENT LOAN PROGRAM
Senator Durbin. Very briefly. You have recently conducted a
survey on student loan programs?
Ms. Reynolds. Yes.
Senator Durbin. This is an issue that I initiated several
years ago and found that no one wanted to administer it. We
basically decided to let 1,000 flowers bloom and see what
happened, with some basic guidelines. I have lived in fear ever
since that, not only some wonderful things but some not so
wonderful things, may have occurred under the name of student
loan incentives for recruitment and retention. What have you
found in your survey?
Ms. Reynolds. Our survey, which we conducted last summer,
and we had roughly 58 offices that responded, and I will tell
you a quick summary, obviously. Those offices that responded,
and all 58 participate in the program, the feedback was very
positive about the program.
As you know, and I was not here at the time; but as you
know, the administration of the program was given to us but not
with really a strict set, if you will, of rules and
regulations. Of course, then each office was able to create
their own rules and regulations, if you will.
I will balance with what we found in that survey with
regard to the offices and the administration of the program, is
that some offices, Senator Durbin, will actually set parameters
of service before an individual qualifies for the student loan
repayment program. Others have an open enrollment period. So,
you are not necessarily, as a new hire, automatically entitled
to the program. But everyone does have a little bit of a
different variation on that theme.
One of the questions we asked the offices in that survey
is, would it be helpful to you if there was some additional
guidance. I think about two-thirds of those in the survey said,
leave it as it is. We like making our own determination.
That having been said, I do think--and, again, most of this
is anecdotal evidence, because as you know, the program is now
only about 2 years old, but the anecdotal evidence is still
overwhelmingly positive, in terms of offices who have strong
candidates, and particularly, young lawyers, strong candidates,
who very much wanted a job on the Hill, but because of the size
of their student loans, salary was obviously a real issue. In
more than one instance, offices cited that having the
availability of that program enabled them to attract very top-
flight candidates.
The retention piece of it, again, because the program is
not very mature, and it still somewhat remains to be seen, we
can continue to go back, obviously, and pull those statistics
for you all. I did notice because I know this was one concern
this year at this hearing, that it does not appear as if, from
last year to this year, we dropped--we had a fairly high number
of those who terminated before their year was up, that they
were required of service. It looks like from last year to this
year, that number dropped by about one-third or better. So from
a retention standpoint, you could extract that--that is
obviously a positive going forward.
But we will continue to monitor that program and provide
you with feedback. But again, from the office's standpoint, the
ability to make their own determination and to use it as a tool
to attract and retain, was very positive.
Senator Durbin. Well, we give considerable latitude to
members of the Senate and other offices, within certain
guidelines, to decide salaries, and promotions, and work
assignments. I like that part of the flexibility of it, because
I think each office tries to create its own office atmosphere.
I am going to ask, and I have asked the General Accounting
Office to take a look at this, and see if they have any
recommendations, whether we should be more specific in terms of
guidelines to avoid some things that we did not anticipate. But
thank you for your work on this.
Ms. Reynolds. Thank you very much.
Senator Durbin. Thank you for your testimony today. Thanks,
Mr. Chairman.
Senator Campbell. Thank you. This will be the last hearing
that you appear while I am still here. I just wanted to, for
the record, tell you how much I have enjoyed working with you,
your professionalism, and your friendship, too. When I go back
out West to find different kinds of mountains to climb, I will
be thinking of you here.
Ms. Reynolds. Keep thinking of us. We appreciate it. Thank
you, sir.
ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL
STATEMENT OF ALAN H. HANTMAN, ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL
ACCOMPANIED BY:
DICK McSEVENEY, CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER
AMITA POOLE, CHIEF OF STAFF
GARY GLOVINSKY, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
HECTOR SUAREZ, CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
BOB HIXON, PROJECT EXECUTIVE FOR THE CAPITOL VISITOR CENTER
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL
Senator Campbell. Now, we will hear from Mr. Hantman.
If you would just come up here, and go ahead, and proceed.
Your complete testimony will be included in the record, Mr.
Hantman. I think you can abbreviate your verbal presentation as
you would like.
Mr. Hantman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Durbin. Thank
you for this opportunity to testify here today. I would just
like to introduce a few people who are joining me here today.
Our Chief Operating Officer, Dick McSeveney; our Chief of
Staff, Amita Poole; our CFO, Gary Glovinsky; Chief
Administrative Officer, Hector Suarez; Bob Hixon, our Project
Executive for the CVC; and several other key people who have
supported me in preparing for this hearing and throughout the
year.
What I would like to do, Mr. Chairman, as you indicated, is
just have a few words in terms of an oral review here.
Senator Campbell. Your complete testimony will be in the
record. Just go ahead and summarize as you please.
FISCAL YEAR 2005 BUDGET SUMMARY
Mr. Hantman. As we prepared this budget request, we worked
very closely with our clients to ensure that we were addressing
their needs and those of the Capitol complex in planning for
necessary projects and programs.
This budget request for fiscal year 2005 directly relates
to my responsibilities for facilities management, project
delivery, and the stewardship of the Capitol complex. Over the
past few years, as directed by the Congress, additional
buildings have been added to the AOC's responsibilities. This
includes the new Alternate Computer Facility, the Fairchild
Building, the National Audio-Visual Conservation Center, the
book depositories at Fort Meade, and, of course, the Capitol
Visitor Center.
All told, this amounts to an additional 1.5 million square
feet of buildings and another 91 acres or so under the AOC's
custodial care. That brings us to some 15 million square feet
of building space, Mr. Chairman.
We are requesting $585 million for fiscal year 2005 to
support the maintenance, the care, and operations of all the
buildings and grounds of the Capitol complex. This includes a
number of projects to support and enhance life safety and
security which, as you know, Mr. Chairman, are my top priority.
It also reflects a number of major projects valued at $177
million that have been requested by our clients, including the
Library of Congress and the U.S. Capitol Police. You alluded to
that in your opening statement.
This 2005 request represents a 41 percent increase over the
enacted amount for fiscal year 2004. However, if our client
projects were counted separately from our basic AOC budget, the
fiscal year 2005 request would be less than my fiscal year 2004
budget.
On another note, Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to report that
the AOC has once again cut its total injury/illness rate. We
reduced fiscal year 2002's rate by more than 5 percent, for an
annual rate of 7.9 percent in fiscal year 2003. Since fiscal
year 2000, we have reduced the injury/illness rate by a total
of 56 percent and we still continue to improve. Our goal
basically is to get it down as close to zero as is humanly
possible. We thank you for your support in this.
Many life safety and security improvements have been
implemented or are ongoing in the Senate office buildings. For
example, all Dirksen building entrances have been upgraded to
meet ADA requirements. Mechanical and electrical updates have
been or are being completed on all Senate building elevators.
We also continue to upgrade or install new sprinkler
systems, smoke detection systems, and are making egress
improvements in buildings across the Capitol complex.
In this calendar year, Mr. Chairman, one of our highest
priorities is preparing for the inauguration. We have bid out
the construction of the inaugural stands, which we will be
awarding shortly; and we are in various stages of design,
specification, and bidding for other requirements, such as the
sound system, ramps, and chairs for the swearing-in ceremony.
CAPITOL VISITOR CENTER
Another major undertaking will be the planned start-up of
building systems for the Capitol Visitor Center. At the
direction of the Capitol Preservation Commission, I have
requested as an interim measure, funding for facility
operations and maintenance until it is decided how and by whom
the CVC will be operated and maintained. Ms. Reynolds referred
a little bit to that process that is going on right now.
Construction on the CVC has been progressing at a strong
pace, as crews are increasingly working under the roof deck,
which now covers the entire western half of the project area.
It might be helpful, Mr. Chairman, to just take a look at a
photo showing the progress we made last August on the Visitor
Center, and a photo that was taken just 2 weeks ago.
On the left, of course, you see that the excavation was
well underway. The foundation walls were being put in just last
August, since last summer, completed to what we see basically 2
weeks ago. The deck, again, is fully in place with respect to
the area between the major skylights and the east front of the
Capitol.
All of that area will be part of the plaza that is
necessary to support the inaugural activities. We will have a
completed roof deck. We will have it covered by granite pavers,
from the House steps to the Senate steps; and in May we expect
to see stone masons start to lay granite pavers beginning on
the north side, near the Senate steps. Some 200,000 pavers will
be laid.
Over the past year, the AOC has undergone significant
change. We have added key people. We have reaffirmed our
commitment to providing high-quality service to Congress and
the American people with the implementation of a new strategic
plan. I am dedicated to providing a safe, secure, and
productive environment for all who work at and visit the
Capitol complex each year, as well as for all AOC employees.
We have completed tens of thousands of work orders to our
clients' satisfaction--about 48,000 work orders just in the
Senate buildings this year. We have achieved many of our goals
due to the hard work and dedication of the AOC employees. I am
very privileged and honored to lead such a professional team.
PREPARED STATEMENT
This committee's support in helping us achieve these goals
is greatly appreciated. Once again, I thank you for this
opportunity to testify today. I will be happy to answer any
questions you might have.
Senator Campbell. Thank you.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Alan M. Hantman, FAIA
Mr. Chairman, members of the Subcommittee, I thank you for this
opportunity to testify before you today. The Office of the Architect of
the Capitol (AOC) has been undergoing tremendous change over the past
year as we have finalized and begun implementing our five-year
Strategic Plan. Our Strategic Plan is the blueprint that we are now
following to help us carry out our responsibilities to preserve and
enhance the United States Capitol and the other facilities located
across the Capitol complex as well as guide us as we provide high-
quality service to Congress and the American people.
Our Strategic Plan is linked to our Performance Plan which outlines
specific actions and milestones we will use to achieve our goals. We
also have established a reporting protocol that is tracking the
Agency's strategic initiatives, the General Accounting Office's
recommendations, and the Chief Operating Officer's Action Plan items on
a monthly basis. In addition, we have identified a number of measures
to monitor and evaluate the success of our work efforts over the next
year.
Last July, we added a Chief Operating Officer to the team. Richard
McSeveney is responsible for much of the AOC's day-to-day operations
including programs and initiatives associated with strategic planning,
performance management, worker safety, customer satisfaction, and
service quality. He has submitted his Action Plan to Congress that
outlines how we are implementing change and moving the AOC to the next
level of client service excellence.
As we prepared this budget request, we worked closely with all of
our clients to ensure that we were addressing their needs and those of
the Capitol complex in planning for numerous projects and programs.
This budget request for fiscal year 2005 will allow me to meet my
responsibilities for facilities management, project delivery, and the
stewardship of the Capitol complex. But just as importantly this budget
responds to the needs of our customers, the requirements for improved
fire and life safety, security, and future obligations.
Over the past few years, per the direction of Congress, additional
facilities and projects have been added to the AOC's responsibilities.
A short list of facilities includes the Alternate Computer Facility,
the Fairchild Building, the National Audio Visual Conservation Center
in Culpeper, Virginia, and of course, the Capitol Visitor Center. All
told, this amounts to an additional 1.5 million square feet and 91
acres under the AOC's custodial care. Our budget has been structured
and increased to support the new requirements and responsibilities this
Agency has for these new facilities.
Over the past several weeks, we have worked with the respective
committee staffs and our clients to address possible budget
resolutions. We re-examined priorities and studied how holding our
budget to fiscal year 2004 funding levels would impact our day-to-day
work as well as major projects. We have met the challenge of building a
budget request that balances both fiscal responsibility and my office's
mission to preserve, maintain, and enhance the national treasures and
properties entrusted to us. I want to thank the Subcommittee for its
generous support over the years without which we could not have
completed many critical projects, continued to provide exemplary
service, and assured continuity of operations at the Capitol, in the
Senate Office Buildings and throughout the Capitol complex.
We are requesting $479.3 million (not including items specific to
the House) for fiscal year 2005 to support the maintenance, care, and
operations of the buildings and grounds of the Capitol complex. This
includes a number of projects to support and enhance life safety and
security--my top priority. It also reflects a number of major projects,
valued at more than $136 million that have been requested by our
clients including the Library of Congress (LOC) and the U.S. Capitol
Police (USCP).
The most significant requests are $59.2 million for the
construction of the Library's Copyright Deposit Facility; $39.5 million
for the construction of the third and fourth increments of the
Library's collection storage modules at Fort Meade; $18.4 million to
accommodate office and storage space at the Fairchild and GPO buildings
for the Capitol Police; and another $18.4 million for a USCP firing
range and off-site delivery facility.
This is a $138.7 million or 41 percent increase over the enacted
amount of $340.5 million for fiscal year 2004. This does not reflect
the $12 million transfer of fiscal year 2003 appropriations into the
AOC budget for fiscal year 2004 for the Capitol Visitor Center.
If these specific client requests were not counted in the AOC
budget request, budget growth for fiscal year 2005 for my Agency would
actually show a negative growth from fiscal year 2004.
Other key items in my budget request include $20.1 million for
sprinkler and smoke detector upgrades in the Library of Congress
buildings; $3.7 million for the Hart modular furniture replacement
program; $1.3 million to renovate Senate Office restrooms; $4.5 million
to implement Phase III of the U.S. Capitol Master Plan; $14.5 million
for the preparation of the opening of the Capitol Visitor Center; $5.1
million for the restoration of Bartholdi Park and Fountain; $1.5
million to design the upgrade of the Capitol complex cable television
system; $955,000 for wayfinding signage, renovation and restoration of
street lights and other decorative items on the Capitol grounds, and
$1,065,000 for installation and operations of emergency defibrillators
across the Capitol complex.
project descriptions
Copyright Deposit Facility--$59.2 million
This new, centralized, 180,200 square foot facility would house all
existing and projected copyright collections in a secure, specialized
environment for the Library of Congress. The Copyright Office of the
Library of Congress is required by law to retain all the post-1977
unpublished deposit materials for the full term of the copyright
protection and published deposits for the longest period considered
practicable and desirable by the Register of Copyrights. The design
work has been completed on this two-story building and, if funded,
construction will begin in 2005. If the facility is not built, the
storage of existing and future copyright collections will continue to
be housed in decentralized, privately leased records facilities with
questionable abilities to provide for the future growth of deposits and
records. In addition, the collections will continue to be at risk due
to the inability of existing mechanical systems to provide for the
specialized requirements regarding temperature and humidity.
Fort Meade Book Storage Modules 3 and 4--$39.5 million
This project for the Library of Congress entails the construction
of two buildings to alleviate a shortage of collection storage capacity
at the Jefferson, Adams, and Madison buildings on Capitol Hill. The
third and fourth storage modules are designed to maintain environmental
conditions of 50 degrees Fahrenheit and relative humidity of 30
percent. Scheduled to be constructed in late 2004 and 2005, the
buildings will have two loading docks, a quarantine room, and a vacuum
equipment room, as well as mechanical and electrical rooms to
accommodate the necessary equipment. If construction of these modules
is delayed, the Library's ability to accept new materials into its
collection will be compromised.
U.S. Capitol Police Support (USCP)--$30.9 million
The AOC has recently signed a 10-year lease to occupy a little more
than four floors of the Fairchild Building located at 499 South Capitol
Street, S.W., that will accommodate the interim office space needs of
the U.S. Capitol Police. Funds have been requested for the annual lease
and to cover the costs to fit out the available space. This includes
fixtures, furnishings, equipment, telecommunications, and information
technology infrastructure.
In addition, the AOC is nearing agreement with the Government
Printing Office to utilize some space for the Capitol Police logistical
and storage functions, such as property management and warehousing.
Relocating the USCP to these spaces will free existing space occupied
by the USCP for Congressional use.
Capitol Visitor Center Start-up Support--$14.5 million
In preparation for the opening of the Capitol Visitor Center (CVC),
$6.3 million is requested to procure equipment and supplies, contract
for custodial services, and support, operate, and maintain the
structural, architectural, and utilities infrastructures.
An additional $8.2 million is being requested to cover the
transitional stand-up costs for the operations, administration, and
management supporting guide services, visitor services, food services,
and gift shop services for the CVC.
In addition, the AOC is requesting 35 Full Time Equivalents (FTEs)
in preparation for the opening of the CVC. Eighteen FTEs are being
requested in the Capitol Building appropriation for facility
maintenance; 16 FTEs in the CVC appropriation for project and
operations support necessary for an orderly startup (tour guide
services, restaurant management and gift shops); and one FTE to support
the Office of the Attending Physician.
employee safety
For the third consecutive year, the AOC has cut its injury/illness
rate. According to year-end figures from the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration, we reduced fiscal year 2002's rate of 8.35 by
more than five percent for an annual rate of 7.91 in fiscal year 2003.
Since fiscal year 2000, we have reduced the total injury/illness rate
by 56 percent. These achievements would not have been possible without
the efforts of all AOC employees. In January, we conducted an Agency-
wide survey asking employees about their perceptions, opinions, and
attitudes about safety. The response rate to the survey was 62 percent
when typically these surveys receive a 30 percent response rate.
When asked if they agree with the statement, ``Workplace safety is
very important to AOC,'' 90.8 percent of AOC employees agreed with the
statement. Nearly ninety-four percent of employees stated that they
``think about the safety of my customers and the public,'' and 96.2
percent said they ``think about their own safety on the job.'' Over the
past several years, our workforce has made a commitment to work in a
safe and healthy environment. This commitment has lead to consistent
and notable reductions in our injury/illness rate.
However, any single injury is one too many. I am committed to
providing a safe environment on Capitol Hill. I set high expectations
and communicate them to my Superintendents and employees. I perform
unannounced visits to worksites to observe and discuss safety and
ensure that personal protective equipment is available and worn. Mr.
Chairman, I have requested $64.7 million in project funding to support
life/safety and security projects. It includes upgrading or installing
new sprinkler systems and smoke detection systems; upgrading elevators;
renovating restrooms to comply with ADA requirements; installing
defibrillators across the Capitol campus; and making egress
improvements.
senate office building improvements
Many life/safety and security improvements have been implemented or
are ongoing in the Senate Office Buildings. For example, all Dirksen
Office Building entrances have been upgraded to meet ADA requirements,
and all mechanical, electrical, and cab refurbishing upgrades to the
elevators in the Russell Building have been completed. All mechanical
and electrical updates are completed on the Dirksen Building elevators,
and the cab upgrades are scheduled to be completed this fall. The Hart
Building elevators modernization will begin in May and the completion
date for this project is spring of 2005.
In the area of client services, Senate offices now have a new way
to submit and track work requests, learn about on-going projects, order
furniture, or request assistance from the Senate Superintendent's
Office. The tool is a new intranet site: http://Senate.AOC.gov. This
site is the first AOC client-specific web site focused on customer
service. In addition, building alerts are regularly posted on the site
and updated to provide information about projects such as elevator or
restroom upgrades.
Our new Senate site was rolled out during a demonstration for
Senate staff in December and we have been providing training classes
for office managers. Senate staff members have also been providing us
with suggestions on how to add value to the site and we are making
adjustments to better meet their needs. The site will continue to grow
and evolve in the upcoming months, for example, a client feedback form
was recently added. Similar sites for the House and Capitol
Superintendent's Offices will be online soon.
The AOC continues to make significant improvements in the Senate
Office Recycling Program. Contamination rates have plummeted from a
high of 75 percent in fiscal year 2000 to zero for the first quarter of
fiscal year 2004. We attribute this tremendous progress to three
things: we simplified the program, we have initiated coordination
efforts with the Senate Sergeant at Arms and Senate staff to further
educate them about the program, and we have modified our own work
practices and operations to ensure efficient and effective collection
and separation of recyclable materials. We have also increased the
types of recyclable materials we collect to include items such as toner
cartridges and rechargeable batteries. Ninety-three office suites,
eight committee suites and a number of other Senate offices are
actively participating in the recycling program.
capitol building
In fiscal year 2005, one of our highest priorities concerning the
Capitol Building will be the preparations for the Presidential
Inauguration. We have been updating plans from the last inauguration
and have begun planning the construction of Inaugural stands and
identifying other requirements, such as a sound system, ramps,
crossovers, and chairs for the swearing-in ceremony. We are also
working closely with the U.S. Capitol Police on security issues.
Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to report that as of February 17, 2004,
the Capitol Dome was re-opened for special Member-led tours. As you
know, tours were suspended following the terrorist attacks on September
11, 2001. Since that time, my office completed a number of safety
upgrades in the Dome that included installing exit signs, bump guards,
fire alarms, an evacuation system, improved handrails, and new stair
treads. We also improved the tour route lighting and emergency
lighting. I would like to note, however, that the scheduling and
conducting of these tours now falls under the responsibility of the
Capitol Guide Service.
We have completed a number of other projects throughout the Capitol
over the past year including installing numerous additional life and
fire safety devices throughout the building; continuing to restore and
conserve frescos, historical artwork, chandeliers, and the Brumidi
murals; and upgrading 24 of 28 elevators. The remaining four are
scheduled to be completed between fiscal year 2004 and fiscal year
2006.
Mr. Chairman, a popular service we provide for the American public
is the opportunity to purchase, through Members' offices, flags flown
over the U.S. Capitol. Last fall, my office discovered that several web
sites existed that were reselling flags flown over the Capitol at a
much higher cost than if the consumer had requested one through their
Member's office. We sent out notices to all Congressional offices to
alert Members to this practice and have been developing a web site that
would provide information on flags flown over the Capitol and directing
consumers to contact their respective Senators or Representatives. I am
pleased to report that as a result of our actions, many of these web
sites have ceased reselling flags or have changed their web sites to
clarify their business practices.
As I mentioned earlier, another major undertaking will be the
start-up of the Capitol Visitor Center facility. At the direction of
the Capitol Preservation Commission (CPC), I have requested funding
under the Capitol Building fiscal year 2005 appropriation, as an
interim measure to fund facility operations and maintenance until it is
decided how and by whom the CVC will be operated and maintained.
capitol visitor center (cvc)
Construction on the CVC has been progressing at a strong pace,
especially over the last several months as crews are increasingly
working under cover below portions of the roof deck which now covers
the entire western half of the project area. Sequence 1 and Sequence 2
contractors have been jointly working to coordinate and fully integrate
their schedules to ensure that the project proceeds in the most
efficient manner possible. Additionally, we have augmented our
management team to facilitate the efficient sequencing and execution of
the more than 3,000 project line items that need to be accomplished.
Over the next year, Members will witness the completion of the
western half of the plaza at a level sufficient to support inaugural
activities. That entails the ability of the plaza deck to accommodate a
Presidential motorcade and, if necessary, the landing of a helicopter
on the deck. Specifically, the portion of the plaza supported by the
steel framing will have a completed roof deck covered by granite pavers
from the House Steps to the Senate Steps. In May, Members can expect to
see stone masons on the plaza laying granite pavers on the East Front
Plaza deck beginning on the north side of the deck near the Senate
Steps. A plan describing the plaza finishes and the accessible areas of
the CVC site for the Inauguration has been presented to the CPC and
Rules Committee staff. Other landscape elements will be in place and
some portions of the hardscape elements, including the retaining walls
around the House and Senate grassy oval areas, will be partially in
place. At the same time, all the interior facilities will continue to
be worked on and ultimately commissioned and turned over so those
operating the facility will have time to adapt to the facility and
establish operating procedures before the CVC opens to the public.
The current estimated completion date for the CVC is spring 2006.
After a long and thorough review of project activities and the line-
item schedules of both Sequence 1 and 2 contractors by my office, our
construction manager, and the General Accounting Office, we have
determined this more accurate opening time frame.
The overall base project budget stands at $351.5 million. This
amount includes the $265 million appropriated for the core CVC space
and the shell for House and Senate expansion space; $38.5 million for
additional security enhancements funded after September 11, 2001; and
$48 million to accommodate higher than expected bids, additional
changes in scope and design due to unforeseen site conditions and
weather impacts, and the management and construction costs associated
with the scope and design changes, as well as contingency funds.
Additionally, $70 million has been appropriated for the build-out of
the House and Senate expansion spaces.
As construction continues, we continue to plan the exhibits that
will be featured inside the CVC and work with representatives of the
Capitol Preservation Commission to determine how services such as food
service, gift shops, guide services, and first aid to our visitors will
be provided. Because our 16,500 square foot gallery will be the only
one in the country dedicated to the history and accomplishments of the
Congress and the growth of the Capitol, it will feature a number of
interesting and educational exhibits. It will include a 10-foot tall
touchable model of the Dome with cutaway interior; a curving marble
wall inset with state-of-the-art document cases featuring historic
documents from the Library of Congress and the National Archives
chronicling legislative achievements; a set of six alcoves covering the
history of the House, the Senate, and Capitol Square; virtual House and
Senate theaters allowing historical programs and live access to floor
proceedings; a ``Behind the Scenes'' area covering everything from
subways to grounds-keeping; a photo exhibit featuring the Capitol as a
national stage for important ceremonies; and an interactive area where
visitors can access touch screen programs about ``Your Congress/Your
Capitol.''
Mr. Chairman, I know that we all eagerly await the opening of this
unique, historic, and very necessary visitor center that will offer
free and open access to all people in a safe and secure environment so
that they may witness and learn about the workings of democracy and the
legislative process.
project delivery
As the example of the CVC illustrates, in recent years the number
and complexity of our projects has greatly increased. Therefore, the
AOC has worked to develop core and technical competencies for its
project managers and contracting officers. Specifically, we have
established a competency framework and training assessment for both AOC
contracting officers in line with the Defense Acquisition Workforce
Improvement Act (DAWIA) and AOC project managers in the engineering and
architectural series that mirrors the Project Management Institute Body
of Knowledge.
We are also working more closely with our clients to design and
control the scope of our projects to assure high quality drawings and
specifications, to minimize changes during construction, and to deliver
quality projects on time and on budget. All current projects have been
prioritized and the more critical projects have been assigned to the
Project Management Division. Appropriate levels of support are being
provided to these project managers to assure that they have the
resources necessary to move these high priority projects forward.
The Capitol Complex Master Plan that is under development will help
facilitate consistent management and oversight of all our projects and
assist us in setting priorities. Its key objectives are to document
existing conditions; provide context for site selection and site
development within and near the Capitol Grounds; address cross-
jurisdictional questions of historic preservation, sustainability,
infrastructure renewal, permanent security measures, visitor management
strategies, traffic and parking issues, and landscaping; and identify
facility needs and future building trends, and coordinate planning
efforts with local, regional, and Federal development plans.
The existing master plan is nearly 25 years old and does not
address present-day issues such as increased security, new and
advancing technologies, and future needs. As you know, since September
11, the AOC has undertaken substantial new projects to adjust to a
demand for heightened security. Chief among these projects is perimeter
security which has seen significant progress.
--Capitol Square.--All work on the Senate side of Capitol Square is
complete except the outer perimeter work along Constitution
Avenue, N.W., and the work which is currently impacted by the
Capitol Visitor Center project. The portion near 1st Street and
Constitution Avenue, N.W., which is part of the Capitol
Complex's outer perimeter, is also ongoing. The north entry
will be constructed following the completion of the tunnel work
on the CVC. The work along the Northeast Drive and 1st Street,
N.E., will be completed following the completion of the CVC
itself. The portion of the outer perimeter near 1st Street and
Constitution Avenue, N.W., will be completed as part of the
later phases of the Senate Office Building Perimeter Security
program.
The work on the House side of Capitol Square is largely complete
with the major exception of the work which is currently
impacted by the CVC project and the portion near 1st Street and
Independence Avenue, S.W., which is part of the Capitol Complex
outer perimeter.
--Senate Office Buildings.--A contract has recently been awarded for
the perimeter security work along Constitution Avenue between
Delaware Avenue and 2nd Street, N.E. This work is currently
planned to be completed in November 2004. The remainder of the
perimeter security around the Senate Office Buildings will be
completed in phases over the next two years.
--House Office Buildings.--The work along Independence Avenue in the
front of the House Office Buildings is largely complete with
full completion anticipated this spring. The remainder of the
perimeter security around the House Office Buildings will be
completed in phases over the next two years.
Another project underway that will address the current and future
needs of the Capitol Complex is the expansion of the West Refrigeration
Plant at the Capitol Power Plant. This project replaces the aging and
outmoded East Plant refrigeration machines and provides for additional
heating and cooling requirements. The project is approximately 25
percent complete and, when finished, will enable the Capitol Power
Plant to reliably meet cooling requirements through 2025 and will
significantly increase overall plant efficiency, thereby lowering
annual energy consumption.
human capital
Because the AOC is a service-based organization, our workforce is
our most valuable asset. We continue to look at new and innovative
approaches to better attract and retain highly qualified employees so
that we continue to be in a position to meet the needs of all our
clients.
We have hosted in-service Federal Employees Health Benefits Days to
assist employees with any problems they may have or to answer questions
about various health plans. We plan to host sessions twice a year. We
have also developed a new Leadership Development Program that we plan
to roll out soon. It expands the existing framework to address all
leadership levels of AOC to develop the skills needed to achieve
competencies that are considered to be government-wide standards. In
addition, we have invested in employee training and provide other
incentives, such as transit subsidies.
This past year we established a new Office of Workforce Planning
and Management (WFPM) as approved in our fiscal year 2003 full time
equivalent appropriations request. This office is responsible for
position management, organizational analysis, and succession planning.
WFPM staff has conducted an Administrative Study in which they
evaluated the need of administrative positions, the duplication of
positions, and whether AOC's positions and functions align with the AOC
Strategic Plan.
In September 2003, the AOC launched AVUE, a Digital Services
Recruitment and Staffing Module that lists all AOC vacancy
announcements and allows job applicants to apply online. In addition,
all position descriptions are developed in AVUE. Its implementation has
significantly reduced the time it takes to generate and issue a
referral list of qualified candidates to managers, thereby reducing the
time to fill vacant positions.
With the assistance of the Office of Information Resources
Management, kiosk computer stations were established in every
jurisdiction so AOC employees can have access to computers to develop
their employment profiles, view vacancies, and apply for AOC vacancies
at any time. In conjunction, we opened an AOC Employment Center. The
center is open every Tuesday and Thursday and by appointment. AOC Human
Resources staff members are available to assist employees in developing
their employment profiles and providing instruction to apply for
positions online.
information technology
Our budget request for the Office of Information Resources
Management (OIRM) has increased as a result of our efforts to
centralize all information technology (IT) functions under OIRM. In the
past, individual jurisdictions controlled some portions of IT funds.
In addition to bringing AVUE online, OIRM successfully managed a
number of projects this past year including: developed and published
the AOC's Enterprise Architecture; completed the foundation for the
upgrade to AOC's network, AOCNET; completed the infrastructure build-
out at the Alternate Computer Facility (ACF); implemented the Financial
Management System fixed assets module on schedule which provides the
AOC with automated records of its fixed assets and enables the
Accounting Division to record automated depreciation entries in the
general ledger (proper accounting of fixed assets is required to
receive an unqualified audit opinion); developed and launched the
Senate's web site; and completed the AOCNET Fiber-optic Ring Project.
senate restaurants
Another area in which we provide client service is in the Senate
Restaurants. We have been making strides in reducing economic
dependency over the past few years through cost reductions and the
marketing of our services.
Our management has taken a number of steps to help resolve some
issues regarding its billing procedures including: sending out bills to
collect unpaid balances; implementing a detailed code system to explain
charges and verifying who authorized such charges; and billing on a
more regular cycle.
The Senate Restaurants offer services designed to provide Senate
Offices with new menu options when planning small, in-office functions
that are less expensive than fully catered events. 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.
This year we upgraded our cash registers in both the North Servery
and Senate Chef to accept credit cards. Shortly we hope to institute a
discount debit card for use in the North Servery as well.
Finally, I am especially pleased to inform you that for the sixth
straight year, independent auditors have found no reportable conditions
or material weaknesses in financial controls.
conclusion
The Office of the Architect of the Capitol has been serving
Congress since 1793 and continues to provide client services through
hurricanes, ice storms, anthrax, and ricin incidents.
Over the past year, we have undergone significant change and have
reaffirmed our commitment to providing high-quality service to Congress
and the American people. Our request for funds is in direct response to
our customers' requests for important projects and programs. In
addition, we continue to strive to achieve the level of safety,
security, preservation, and cleanliness, expected across the Capitol
Complex.
I am dedicated to providing a safe, secure, and productive
environment for all who work at the AOC and for those who work and
visit the Capitol Complex each year. We have completed thousands of
work orders, have met our clients' expectations, and have achieved our
goals due to the hard work and dedication of all our AOC employees. I
am very privileged and honored to lead such a professional team.
The Subcommittee's support in helping us achieve these goals is
greatly appreciated. Once again, thank you for this opportunity to
testify today. I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have.
CVC LANDSCAPING
Senator Campbell. Once the pavers are on the plaza, is
there going to be an automobile parking lot, or is that going
to be a garden look?
Mr. Hantman. Certainly, from the perspective of the front
yard to the Capitol, Mr. Chairman, my recommendation would
certainly be that parking would be extremely limited to those
people who really need to bring cars up onto the east plaza.
But that is clearly an administrative decision for the----
Senator Campbell. Are we going to replant the grass and
some of the trees that were there?
Mr. Hantman. Absolutely. Absolutely. We will, in fact, have
more trees----
Senator Campbell. There will be enough soil, on top of the
roof of that, to be able to hold trees?
Mr. Hantman. The areas that have been directly adjacent to
the Capitol, say, between the central rotunda steps and the
Senate steps, between the central rotunda steps and the House
steps, those panels will be there. We will be having grass,
just as Mr. Olmstead originally planned it. The concept was not
to have heavy trees or gaudy planting that would detract from
the building itself at those locations.
So, those will be replaced. We will have adequate room for
growing the grass that we need in those panels, as well as on
the eggs. The House and the Senate eggs will be replanted.
Trees, the alle of trees leading down East Capitol Street will
be fully replaced with trees that are in line with the original
design of Mr. Olmstead.
Senator Campbell. And you feel confident that the surface
is going to be done before the 2005 inaugural activities?
Mr. Hantman. We will have that surface ready for--if there
is a motorcade for the President, if the helicopter, the
Presidential helicopter has to land, it will be in place, the
troops need to pass in review, that will be all ready for that.
FISCAL YEAR 2005 FUNDING REDUCTIONS
Senator Campbell. We have big problem with money this year,
as you know. AOC has requested a 41 percent increase. That is
large and it may be very well needed, but it will be tough to
accommodate. I have asked everyone who has come before our
committee, what happens if we cannot fund that request? Have
you prioritized what is the most important thing that we need
to be aware of if we need to trim some money from your request?
Mr. Hantman. Well, within my agency, Mr. Chairman, I have
really reviewed both operations and the capital improvement
requirements that were requested by the superintendents of each
of our jurisdictions; a separate jurisdiction for the Senate
office buildings, the House, the Capitol, Library of Congress.
And we balanced their priorities for fire, life safety,
security, and operational requirements, against the fiscal
realities; to ensure that we could fulfill our responsibilities
without significant budget increases.
In addition to refining the AOC needs for maintenance
operations and funding for capital projects, we also worked
very closely with our clients to ensure that we were addressing
their needs as part of the requirements of the overall Capitol
complex.
I recently requested that the Library of Congress and the
Capitol Police review and formally reconfirm their needs and
requests, and they have done so. I have letters for the record
submitted on March 23, from Dr. Billington, and April 5, from
Chief Gainer, which really talk to their projects and the need
for those very important projects.
[The information follows:]
The Librarian of Congress,
Washington, DC, March 23, 2004.
The Honorable Alan M. Hantman, FAIA,
The Architect of the Capitol,
Washington, DC.
Dear Alan: In response to your March 10 letter, I am writing to
reaffirm the Library's mission-critical need for the following projects
in the Architect of the Capitol (AOC) fiscal year 2005 budget.
Fort Meade Modules 3 and 4: $39,500,000
There has already been a delay of more than five years in obtaining
this desperately needed space.
Failing to fund Modules 3 and 4 in fiscal year 2005 would adversely
affect library materials.
--The special format collections that are scheduled to fill Modules 3
and 4 and the four specially designed cold vaults total
approximately 26.2 million items, and include: 500,000 reels of
microfilm masters, many of which are in imminent danger of
deterioration that will render them unusable unless they are
transferred to cold storage; 10 million manuscripts; 340,000
maps; 750,000 print and photographic negatives; and 500,000
boxes of special collections from the collections of Prints and
Photographs, Music, Law, Rare Book and Special Collections,
Folklife and rare bound volumes from Serials and Government
Publications.
Many of these materials are stored in conditions that do not meet
preservation standards. Others are stored in better environmental
conditions, such as Iron Mountain, but are not readily retrievable for
processing or consultation by researchers, seriously hampering core
Library activities.
Copyright Deposit Facility: $59,200,000
A delay in funding would: add more time of storing copyright
deposits in unsuitable conditions, further advancing the deterioration
of these deposits; and continue the risk of public criticism that
copyright deposits are not being preserved to meet the requirements of
the law.
We are currently storing more than 135,000 cubic feet of copyright
deposits.
Copyright's capacity requirements will grow, particularly with the
1999 Copyright term extension, which means the Office will have to
store unpublished deposits for an additional 20 years.
Collections Security (Secure Storage Rooms): $860,000
In compliance with the Library's congressionally approved
Collections Security Plan, funding is needed for the construction of 12
secure storage vaults within the Library's three Capitol Hill buildings
to house all ``platinum'' and ``gold'' collections.
Current funding allowed the construction of five vaults; fiscal
year 2005 funding will support an additional three vaults, with the
remaining four vaults built in fiscal year 2006.
A delay in the construction of the vaults could result in a life
expectancy of about 20 percent of what it would be if the collections
were stored under proper environmental conditions.
Cafeteria Equipment: $210,000 (Price Correction from Memo)
The continued maintenance problems of current cafeteria equipment
(dishwashing machine) add service cost through staff downtime and
additional use of paper products.
If not funded, the condition of the equipment will continue to
deteriorate, consuming additional AOC maintenance labor hours needed
elsewhere.
With machinery not fully operational, it creates a safety hazard
with operators and health concerns with Library staff and patrons.
Study--Book Conveyor Integration/Upgrade: $400,000
Without this funding to study the alternatives for correcting
numerous deficiencies with the existing book conveyor systems, service
levels will continue to decrease. This may ultimately lead to a
complete failure of the book conveyor systems.
The decreased service levels will impact the Library's ability to
efficiently deliver materials to its staff and other customers, and
severely impact staff resources by eventually forcing the manual
delivery of books and research materials.
Funding is not required for the Madison Loading Dock Expansion
($125,000), and should be deleted from the fiscal year 2005 budget
request.
If you have any questions regarding the Library's fiscal year 2005
AOC budget requirements, please contact Budget Officer Kathryn Murphy
on 707-5186.
The Library appreciates the AOC's continued support with its
buildings and grounds requirements.
Sincerely,
James H. Billington,
The Librarian of Congress.
______
United States Capitol Police,
Office of the Chief,
Washington, DC, April 5, 2004.
The Honorable Alan M. Hantman, FAIA,
Architect of the Capitol, SB-15, The U.S. Capitol, Washington, D.C.
Dear Mr. Hantman: This is in response to your letter of March 10,
2004, requesting that we validate the inclusion, and provide a
statement as to the effect on our operations of deferring the three
USCP facility projects contained in your fiscal year 2005 budget.
Firing Range Design and Construction $12,000,000
The original partnership with the Federal Law Enforcement Training
Center (FLETC) on the new training facility in Cheltenham, Maryland
included 26 agencies. With the creation of Department of Homeland
Security and subsequent merger with Treasury/FLETC, the facility now
serves 70 plus agencies but the size of the range has not grown
proportionally. We continue to work with FLETC regarding issues on
availability of the facilities as well as funding requirements. We have
also been working with the Appropriations Committees regarding the
resolution of the issues. However, the issues remain unresolved. If the
scheduling requirements for all USCP firearms training and re-
certification can be accommodated by the FLETC, the USCP will not
require the facility requested by the AOC. However if the facility
availability issues are not worked out to our satisfaction, the
construction of a new firing range is critical to the operations of the
USCP.
Fairchild and GPO Build-Out $12,500,000
It is our understanding that the AOC only has funding for fit-out
of one of the four plus floors leased on behalf of the USCP in the
Fairchild building. Without the $12.5 million, renovations necessary to
occupy the remaining three floors could not be made. Without occupying
this space, the USCP cannot relieve exiting overcrowded conditions and
provide for current growth of personnel and equipment. We therefore
request that this item remain in your budget.
Off-Site Delivery $6,400,000
The current off-site delivery facility at P Street S.E. is in
dilapidated condition. It no longer sufficiently meets the operational
needs of the Congressional community nor does it address the growing
security requirements of the Congress. A new facility is critical to
the operations of the Congress. Given the current real estate market,
we need to be ready to immediately respond when an acceptable site is
identified. Therefore, we request that you continue to support this
funding in fiscal year 2005.
Thank you for requesting our input in these facility related issues
that so critically impact our operations. If you have any operational
questions please do not hesitate to contact Captain Morris, on 224-
4161.
Very Respectfully,
Terrance W. Gainer,
Chief of Police.
FISCAL YEAR 2004 SPENDING LEVELS
Mr. Hantman. Our goal, Mr. Chairman, would be to maintain a
steady state of operations at the same level as fiscal year
2004, providing essential services, as expected, levels of
safety and security throughout the Capitol complex. Our new
capital projects requested by our clients, which are valid and
important needs, would have to be deferred, if we, in fact,
were left at the fiscal year 2004 level.
Senator Campbell. Okay. I interpret that to mean they are
all high priorities?
Mr. Hantman. All of them, sir.
Senator Campbell. I understand that you have unobligated
funds from last year and prior years. Can we reprogram any of
those unobligated funds to projects planned for fiscal year
2005?
Mr. Hantman. We do have a large balance of unobligated
funds, as you mentioned. This includes a number of long-term
projects, some of them being built in phases, some of them
allocated towards the Power Plant, towards the CVC. But there
are several parts of that unobligated balance that could be
reprogrammed and reused, assuming that they would be
replenished in future years.
For instance, there is some $63 million to purchase the
Alternate Computer Facility. If we wanted to continue renting
for a period of time, that might be a possibility. There is $16
million in unobligated funds for the National Audio-Visual
Conservation Center. That is the Government's share of the
funding that is being provided by the Packard Foundation. If
that were replenished in a timely way to give that money
towards that project, that might potentially be used.
We do have other large unobligated balances for security,
and for the Cheltenham training facility, all of these issues.
But there would be things we certainly could talk to for
possible reprogramming, if, in fact, they were replenished in a
timely way.
Senator Campbell. We have given you an awful lot of work to
do. Should we consider perhaps a 1-year moratorium in on any
new projects?
Mr. Hantman. Mr. Chairman, we have effectively, in our
budget preparation timeframe, pretty well scrubbed--we
essentially incorporated a moratorium within the AOC for our
basic projects, already. When our superintendents came to us
with their requests, we basically said we are going to have--
and I think you referred to it in your comments--about an 18
percent increase in cost of living, in life-safety projects,
and the cost of utilities. We have absorbed that within our
total budget amounts.
By doing that, by absorbing that 18 percent, we essentially
already cut back on capital projects that we were trying to
achieve within our fiscal year 2004 levels. So, we have started
doing that already, sir. But as you have indicated, we
certainly do have a very significant workload, and we are
trying to work through that.
CAPITOL POWER PLANT
Senator Campbell. Okay. Thank you. You also mentioned the
Capitol Power Plant. Eighty-two million dollars has been
provided in the last several years for that. What is the status
of the project? I did not remember hearing if it is on time or
on budget.
Mr. Hantman. We are definitely on budget. That project is
proceeding well. There have been delays. The delays are the
same issues that we faced on the Visitor Center: weather-
related delays, utility-related delays; about 120 days, to
account for that.
But one of the things that we are doing, because the east
plant--the east refrigeration plant is in such poor shape right
now and that is, of course, why you have granted us the ability
to expand the west refrigeration plant and upgrade it, is we
are taking two 3,000-ton chiller units and putting them
temporarily in the east refrigeration plant; so that we can, in
fact, make sure that we meet all the requirements for heating
and cooling at the Capitol.
Those two refrigeration units will be moved into the west
plant as we move ahead. So, the fact that we are behind
schedule should not impact the operation and supply of
utilities to the facilities themselves; and if we want to buy
back some of that lost time, it would be fairly expensive. So,
we think that the solution of having these temporary machines
put into the existing east plant, moving them over is the more
financially appropriate way to proceed.
Senator Campbell. Okay. Thank you. Senator Durbin, I will
yield to you for some questions.
CAPITOL VISITOR CENTER MANAGEMENT
Senator Durbin. Thank you very much, Mr. Hantman. We thank
you and your staff for being here today, and I want to
particularly thank Matt Evans, the landscape architect, for his
cooperation and work with our staff on the Rain Garden project,
which we talked about last year. They are giving me good
reports and I thank all of you for your work in that regard.
I would like to make a statement for the record that there
have been some suggestions that the Capitol Visitor Center
needs a new bureaucracy, that we need to create a new office to
manage the Capitol Visitor Center. I think that is a very bad
idea. I think the Capitol Visitor Center should be administered
by your office. There may be a particular element that requires
someone on your staff to be assigned to that. But to make that
a separate operation, as someone suggested, I just think adds
another layer of bureaucracy and confusion that is expensive
and unnecessary.
WORKER SAFETY
I would like to ask you about a few things that have been
recurring topics. One was worker safety. Several years ago, the
reports were not too good in terms of workers' compensation and
injuries on the job. We brought in some people to give some
advice on that. What is the status today?
Mr. Hantman. Senator Durbin, I think with your impetus and
the help with this committee, we have really addressed that
tremendously. As you probably recall, we essentially had the
worst safety record in the Government at that point, something
like 17.3 percent injury rate per year. We have cut that down
tremendously with a very active life-safety program going on;
and every year, we continue to make more progress on that.
As of now, again, since the year 2000, we have cut down 56
percent in terms of the injury rates. We are down to 7.9
percent, which puts us approximately in the middle of Federal
governmental agencies. Again, given the fact that we are
largely a blue-collar, shop-oriented organization, that is
saying an awful lot compared to some of the white-collar
oriented groups. But I share your concerns. I continue to make
this a very high priority and make sure that all of our people
have the right protective gear, and that they have training.
We are about to initiate a new program, in fact, where we
have all of our supervisors and front-line people with new
buttons that they have to put on and wear in the field every
day to assure that they recognize that safety is one of our
highest priorities, and that they talk to their people about it
on a day-to-day basis. So it is very active, a lot of good
movement, and we still have a ways to go.
RECYCLING PROGRAM
Senator Durbin. On the recycling program, it is my
understanding that there were 90 offices that were involved in
the recycling program.
What are we doing to encourage offices to enroll in the
recycling program?
Mr. Hantman. We have a dedicated team, Senator, that goes,
essentially, to visit every committee as well as every Member's
office. As you know, this is a voluntary program. We do
encourage it. We encourage it also by making it as simple as
possible to recycle.
One of the recommendations from the outside consultants,
that we had brought in on this, was the fact that we combine
the mixed paper and the high-grade paper together so that we do
not have two separate bins at the desk for people to use. It
makes it easier for them. Hopefully, the education process we
are using, that says please do not drop your lunch into the
recycling bins, because that gives us essentially bales and
bales of material that cannot be recycled and effectively used.
We have essentially cut back almost to a zero percent
rejection by our vendors, because the amount of garbage that
has gone into these bales has been cut down to such a great
extent. So, we are making an awful lot of progress on that.
Again, your support has been critical to that.
PROJECT TIMELINES
Senator Durbin. I did a little research--or my staff did,
about how long it takes to do things. I asked them, how long
did it take to build the Dirksen building. It turns out it was
3 years and 9 months. How long did it take to build the Hart
Senate Office Building? It turns out it was 6 years and 8
months, 80 months compared to 45 months. The reason I asked
that was because I have been watching the progress on the north
end of the Dirksen building restroom remodeling. I can remember
the exact day that the remodeling started. It was Halloween. So
some 6 months ago, we started remodeling the bathroom.
I remembered what happened on the south end. It seemed like
1 year. Was it?
Mr. Hantman. I would have to check on the timeframe,
Senator.
Senator Durbin. Who monitors that, to make certain that
things are actually being done each day, and that they are on
schedule.
Mr. Hantman. Our superintendent of the Senate office
buildings and his staff monitor those projects internally. I
will check immediately on what the issues are on that specific
area.
Senator Durbin. Could I suggest that the Architect put up a
sign where they announce that the restroom was closed,
construction began October 31, 2003, as kind of an incentive to
maybe complete it? Now, I have had kitchen remodeling and
things, and I know that it goes on, and on, and on; but it just
seems like an extraordinarily long time to remodel a bathroom.
Six months. I know that they are doing it several floors at a
time but, if you could look into that, I would appreciate that
very much.
Mr. Hantman. I absolutely will.
[The information follows:]
Dirksen Bathroom Remodeling
Question. Why is it taking so long to remodel the bathrooms
at the North end of the Dirksen building? Is it possible to
place a sign depicting when work commenced as an incentive for
completion?
Answer. The Dirksen Bathroom Renovation is proceeding on
schedule and on budget. The duration of this project is a
function of many constraints, specifically, hazardous materials
abatement, constrained working environment and restricted work
hours. Hazardous materials abatement requires the construction
of containment areas to ensure environmental and OSHA
compliance while limiting specific trades progress. The
physical size of the space restricts the amount of manpower
which can safely work at any one time thus extending the
critical path of the project. Finally while working in an
occupied building a significant number of activities are
limited to night work to minimize disruption to the clients.
As of April 19, 2004, the Senate Superintendents Office
replaced the existing signs with signs that included the
project start date and completion date.
SENATOR OFFICE BUILDING ENTRANCES
Senator Durbin. Let me ask you about the entrance ways. You
made reference to them. There are times when employees come to
work or there are large groups of visitors, when people are
standing outside, waiting to get in to go through security,
sometimes in bad weather. Are there any design changes that you
are considering to accommodate that possibility, where people
might be out in the rain, or the snow, or cold weather, or
heat, that are visiting our buildings?
Mr. Hantman. We do have a plan at the Russell Senate Office
Building on Delaware Avenue, just to the north of the major
steps entering that building. We have a project in place to
build a larger vestibule outside the face of that building,
where people can be screened outside of the structural
framework of the building itself, so if an incident does occur,
it will be less damaging to the building itself.
This will facilitate the ability of people in a very tight
entrance to be able to come in and back up a bit. That would be
the major entrance for ADA, as well as a security perspective.
Senator Durbin. And that is for the other buildings, Hart,
Dirksen?
Mr. Hantman. The first--this was the first pilot project.
We wanted to do this first. We were looking at the possibility
of doing Dirksen on the D Street side, as well as taking a
look--Hart already has the canopy out on the Second Street
side. But Dirksen would be the next.
CVC COST TO COMPLETE
Senator Durbin. With regard to the Capitol Visitor Center,
do you believe the current estimated cost of completion, $351.3
million, is accurate?
Mr. Hantman. These are the dollars that we have had come
up. As you know, the original project budget was $265 million.
We had $38 million added, after the 9/11 timeframe, and some
$48 million added to the project as the result of the General
Accounting Office's analysis of the project to complete.
We believe that--we are working very diligently towards
making sure that we can work within these budget guidelines. We
are at a very delicate point in the project, Senator, which
says that our second major contractor, which is Manhattan
Corporation, is just about to come on-site. The integration of
the 3,000 elements that have to be integrated between our
first-phase contractor and our second-phase contractor are
still being worked out in terms of their overall scheduling.
If we can get them together most effectively, and that is
one of the reasons we brought on Bob Hixon as our executive on
the project. People in the field need to coordinate this most
effectively. It is a very tight budget and we are working very
effectively towards trying to mitigate any claims and issues
that the contractors may have, and we will have a better handle
on that in the next several months.
CVC PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Senator Durbin. When did you decide you needed a new person
to manage the CVC project?
Mr. Hantman. There were a series of issues, Senator. One of
the issues certainly was the fact that because of the weather-
related delays, and the other site surprises that our sequence
one contractor had, it became evident that we were going to
have to have our sequence two contractor work side by side with
them, as opposed to turning over the work at one point in time
for the second firm to start.
When it became very clear that the integration of all of
this work in the field would become even more critical, we
recognized that further field support would be necessary. In
fact, we asked Gilbane to bring on people who were less
administrative but more field-oriented, so that we could
coordinate the work.
RESTAURANT OPERATIONS
Senator Durbin. Are you under any timetable or plan to
privatize any of the restaurants in the Capitol complex?
Mr. Hantman. We have no plan to do that.
[The information follows:]
Senate Restaurants
In reference to my statement regarding privatization of the
Senate restaurants I would like to clarify my response. My
original response of ``no'' is correct, although ongoing
deliberations with the Capitol Preservation Commission about
dining facility operations in the Capitol Visitor Center has
raised the issue of privatization. In fact, the consultants
reviewing the proposed operations for the CVC have recommended
privatization of the dining facilities to the Capitol
Preservation Commission. In the context of a new contract for
food service operations there have also been discussions of
including options for potential inclusion of both the existing
Senate and House Restaurants. If this decision is made in the
future, I anticipate that it would include provisions for
current restaurant employees.
RETAIL SALES
Senator Durbin. Can you tell me if there has been any idea
of starting a retail sales operation at the Botanic Garden?
Mr. Hantman. We have been looking for some kind of
authority to do that from the Joint Committee on the Library.
As you know, the Botanic Garden, for purposes of security, was
made part of the Capitol grounds, for the first time in the
last year or so. We think that having a sales facility in the
Botanic Garden makes an awful lot of sense. We do not have the
authority to accept funds, to augment our income through such
facilities but we would like to have that, pretty much as the
Library of Congress has.
Senator Durbin. I understand that there may be some gift
shops in the Capitol Visitor Center. Is that correct?
Mr. Hantman. There will be gift shops. In fact, the
committee that Ms. Reynolds referred to before, the Capitol
Preservation Commission, is looking at how that will be
operated, who will operate the gift shop, what kind of
organizational structure, that you referred to, would be put in
place to manage it. That has not been settled yet.
CVC EXHIBITS
Senator Durbin. One of the other things that I have talked
to a number of Members about, and there seems to be interest
in, is perhaps in the Capitol Visitor Center, creating a new
opportunity for the States to honor some person. Statuary Hall,
with the two statues from most States, generally date to heroes
and heroines of a long time ago. There are some notable
exceptions to what I just said. But in my State's case, it goes
back to quite a few years. I was wondering if we could work
with you to try to set up the situation where it might not
involve a statue or plaque, where States could, again, at their
own expense, honor a more contemporary person from each State
in that new Capitol Visitor Center.
Mr. Hantman. I would be more than happy to work on that
with you, Senator, and your staff. One of the things we have
been looking at, by the way, is, as you are aware, there is a
great hall, a major space in the Capitol Visitor Center. We
have been talking at the Capitol Preservation Commission
meetings about the possibility of moving some existing statues
from the Capitol Building into the Visitor Center, to give it a
sense of scale, a sense of tradition, to tie it into the
Capitol Building itself.
As you are aware, for the first time in the history of the
Capitol, one of the States recalled a statue of one of their
people. This was Kansas. They recalled Governor Glick and put
in a statue of General Eisenhower, which now stands in our
Capitol Rotunda. We have been getting several other suggestions
from states and indications that they want to recall statues,
and bring in Amelia Earhart, or other people, from their States
that might, in fact, give us a better sense of the diversity
and history that our country has.
So, we do have room in the Capitol Visitor Center for
statues; and clearly, some of them are not very well displayed
in the Capitol Building at this point in time. They are kind of
tucked into corners and not paid the kind of respect that
they----
Senator Durbin. Well, there is some talk in Illinois about
Michael Jordan, but I do not know if that would be the honoree.
I will just wait and see. I will let somebody else make
that decision.
CAPITOL FENCE
The last thing I would like to weigh in on is the great
fence around the Capitol, like the Great Wall of China. Can you
tell me where you stand on the great fence proposal?
Mr. Hantman. Well, clearly, I sat here, Senator, last week,
along with the Capitol Police Board and Chief Gainer on that. I
think that both of you gentlemen spoke eloquently to the need
to balance security and openness. It is not an easy question.
The Capitol Police Board has certainly given the freedom,
and the police should be taking the freedom, to bring
recommendations and concerns to the police board and take a
look at all the options that are on the table. That is, in
effect, what the Chief was doing.
There has been no formal movement on that. It has been an
issue that has been on the table, as you know, for a generation
at this point in time. So, we continue to look at all the
alternatives that the Chief presents to us and try to determine
what needs to be recommended to the Congress. But no official
movement has been made on that.
Senator Durbin. My concern is then, and I share the
feelings of the chairman, that I just do not think that this
ought to be something that we push forward unless we are shown
that it is absolutely the only alternative. But it seems like
the belt-and-suspenders approach, having put in all these
bollards to deal with traffic, and then to establish a
perimeter fence, and keep traffic away from the bollards. I am
not quite sure what the thinking is there. But I will keep an
open mind, because we want everyone to be safe in the Capitol
complex; but from an aesthetic viewpoint, I think it would be a
disaster.
Thank you for your testimony.
SENATE RECYCLING
Mr. Hantman. My staff just slipped me a note, sir, and it
indicates that the Senate Appropriations Committee does
recycle. I will be happy to provide you with additional
information on that.
[The information follows:]
Recycling
Question. Does the Senate Appropriations Committee
participate in the recycling program?
Answer. The Appropriations Committee was provided with
recycling bins, instruction and training to implement the new
combined paper recycling program on March 12, 2004 and they are
currently participating in the program.
CLOSING STATEMENT
Senator Campbell. Mr. Hantman, I have several other
questions I am going to submit in writing, if you would get the
answers back to the committee. I have one that is not really an
important question but just to settle it in my own mind, if you
would. You talked about the fire alarms in your testimony, new
fire alarms being put in the building some years ago. I have
been in the same office for the last 12 years, over in the
beautiful older building, the Russell. I love it over there. I
never wanted to move from there, in fact. I have one of those
old offices that has a fireplace, and there have been logs in
that fireplace for 12 years, and I have been dying to light
them up. Do those things work?
Mr. Hantman. There is always a balance, Mr. Chairman,
between the need for fire security and in fact, as you are
probably aware, there have been an awful lot of requests in the
Capitol Building itself for activating fireplaces, which
sometimes have had ducts run through them, or wiring run
through them over the past number of years. We kind of look at
that as a one-on-one type of situation. Clearly fireplaces,
especially when you have alarm systems in the building, are not
wonderful.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
Senator Campbell. No, not a good thing. Okay. I guess I
will have to leave the Senate then never having been able to
use that fireplace. But I will have to live with 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
capitol visitor center
Question. What is the status of the Capitol Visitor Center?
Answer. Overall, Sequence 1 is approximately 60 percent complete
and Sequence 2 is underway--with 10 percent of the value of their
fabrication work underway--largely of stone.
Significant progress has been made throughout the CVC site.
Specifically, the roof deck now covers the entire western half of the
project area and most of it has been waterproofed. Crews have begun
placing the topping slab on the north side of the site and we will
begin setting granite pavers on the deck in May.
Our project team continues to integrate the schedules of Sequence 1
and Sequence 2 contractors and we are reconciling a number of issues.
Gilbane has added resources in the areas of management, change
resolution, scope-gap identification and engineering support. As a
result of these partnering efforts, we have seen tangible progress and
results.
Most importantly, we are on track to meet the requirements to
support the inauguration in January 2005 and to complete and open the
Visitor Center in spring 2006. The overall base project budget stands
at $351.3 million. This amount includes the $265 million appropriated
for the core CVC space and the shell for House and Senate expansion
space; $38.5 million for additional security enhancements funded after
September 11, 2001; and $47.8 million to accommodate higher than
expected bids, additional changes in scope and design due to unforeseen
site conditions and weather impacts, and the management and
construction costs associated with the scope and design changes, as
well as contingency funds. Additionally, $70 million has been
appropriated for the build-out of the House and Senate expansion
spaces. An issue we are currently working through is the significant
increase in steel prices which might impact portions of the work that
have not yet been procured.
Question. What are the most significant problems you have
experienced in this project to date?
Answer. Any project that requires a massive excavation has the
potential to encounter unforeseen conditions, and our project, has been
no exception. During our preconstruction effort, before actual site
excavation began, we encountered many difficulties during our utility
relocation effort. Every utility line running through our project
footprint had to be relocated and, more often than not, the drawings
that were available to us, some dating back to the early 1900s, were
inaccurate and unreliable. The utility relocation effort took months
longer than expected.
Another significant problem arose after the events of September 11,
which prompted a full project design review. While the general layout
of the facility did not change, we were required to provide for more
robust mechanical systems, which in turn, required some structural
changes. Increased on-site security also made delivery of materials
more challenging.
Most problematic was that at the height of our excavation process
in January 2003, we endured the second wettest year on record for this
region. It is very difficult to move heavy equipment in the mud, it is
difficult to excavate, and the material becomes undesirable as backfill
at other project sites. Further, crews cannot erect steel in the rain
and they cannot weld, so structural work was also hampered. On top of
the persistent wet weather, we lost several days due to heavy snowfall
and several more days preparing, and then restoring the site, after
Hurricane Isabel.
Finally, we also experienced unforeseen conditions during the main
excavation of the site. One example is the discovery of an old well
approximately 40 feet below the original House wing, directly in the
path of our perimeter wall. To clear the path for our perimeter wall,
the large stones around the well had to be crushed and removed and a
stable base for our perimeter wall had to be established. In short,
what should have taken one week to place three perimeter wall panels in
that location took close to eight weeks.
Question. What are the biggest challenges ahead of you?
Answer. Our most significant challenge is coordination between the
Sequence 1 and Sequence 2 contractors. There remain more than 3,000
project line items to be accomplished between the two contractors and
these activities need to be closely coordinated and sequenced so that
work can be accomplished efficiently and expeditiously.
Also, there is still a potential for unforeseen site conditions
related to excavation of the Library of Congress tunnel and our main
utility tunnel down East Capitol Street, which could result in schedule
delays. Other unknowns related to changes in scope, changes in the
security environment (such as those that occurred after September 11),
severe weather conditions, or other external factors could present
further challenges.
Question. Are you confident you will be able to complete the
project within the funds appropriated to date?
Answer. The CVC budget is very tight, but barring any significant
unexpected site conditions, scope changes, or other unknown issues, we
will continue to work diligently to stay within the available funding.
Once the Sequence 2 contractor begins working on the site, this will be
much easier to gauge. Until now, most Sequence 2 work has been
preparatory in nature as the contractor waits for space to be turned
over by the Sequence 1 contractor.
Question. The western half of the plaza is to be sufficiently
complete to support 2005 inaugural activities. Are you confident you
will meet this critical milestone?
Answer. Yes. The western half of the plaza from the large skylights
to the face of the Capitol, from the House Steps to the Senate Steps,
will have a completed roof deck covered by granite pavers. This portion
of the plaza will be able to accommodate pedestrian and vehicular
traffic, including the presidential motorcade, and if necessary,
support the landing of Marine One. Presently, we are placing the top
slab on the plaza on the north side of the roof deck and we expect to
see stone masons placing the first of 200,000 granite paving stones in
May.
Since last year, the CVC project team has had discussions with
Capitol Preservation Commission staff and senior staff of the Senate
Rule Committee regarding the requirements and expectations for the
January 2005 Inauguration ceremony.
Question. You have recently changed the management team of the CVC.
Can you explain how the new team will change the way the project is
managed?
Answer. I would characterize the recent personnel changes, in
particular, the additions of Messrs. Bob Hixon and Gary Lee from GSA to
the AOC, as well as the addition of a new construction manager by
Gilbane, not so much as a change in management approach, but more as a
strengthening of the management team with greater ``in-the-field''
experience, made necessary by the intensive coordination efforts that
are required to closely integrate the Sequence 1 and Sequence 2
activity schedules.
Bob Hixon has provided knowledgeable advice and assistance to me
informally for several years while GSA has been actively working with
the AOC on the procurement side of the CVC project. As Director of the
Center for Construction and Project Management at GSA, Mr. Hixon has
been responsible for GSA's Construction Excellence Program, bringing
the highest possible standards of construction management to a
portfolio of more than 160 projects worth more than $5 billion. Mr.
Hixon joined the AOC effective March 7, 2004, and has assumed
responsibility for the project. He has begun conducting an in-progress
review of the construction management of the CVC, including
recommending changes and best practices to be followed in the
construction management area involving both the Sequence 1 and 2
contracts.
Question. You have requested 51 CVC-related staff in your budget
request. Are all of these staff really needed in fiscal year 2005 if
the facility will not open until 2006? Will any of the 16 FTE
authorized for the current year be utilized?
Answer. Many options related to the startup of the operations of
the CVC are still being considered. These numbers are based on the best
information available provided by the J.M. Zell Company, the operations
startup contractor, working with the Capitol Preservation Commission.
Once the decision regarding how and by whom the CVC will be operated,
some refinements may be appropriate. The Capitol Preservation
Commission requested that, in the interim, we submit this request in
our budget.
Ten of eleven currently authorized FTEs are working on project
management and other directly related tasks for the CVC and one
position is currently vacant. The remaining 5 FTEs are not being
utilized in the current year. We have requested that the funding to
support these FTEs be reprogrammed to fund other activities within the
project.
capital improvement plan
Question. Several years ago this Committee directed AOC to develop
a master plan for the Capitol complex as the existing master plan is
nearly 25 years old. What is the status of the master plan? What is
your Capital Improvement Plan and how does it relate to the Master
Plan? What are the most significant construction requirements we can
expect will emerge from this planning process? Do you have any estimate
of how much funding might be required for maintenance and repair
projects over the next 5 years?
Answer. In the fiscal year 2004 budget, $4.2 million was
appropriated for the development of the Capitol Complex Master Plan. We
have narrowed the list of prospective architectural engineering firms
to four, and have conducted extensive interviews with these firms. A
final selection is expected to be made in May, after which we will
undertake a negotiation with that firm. Contract award and project
kick-off are scheduled for July. The draft Master Plan will be ready
for review by the Committees in 2006.
The Capitol Complex Master Plan provides the umbrella provisions
and guidance under which all project planning and land use will occur
over the next 20 years, and therefore is a critical prerequisite to a
fully functional Capital Improvements Plan (CIP). The Master Plan will
identify major capital projects that are needed whereas our ongoing
Condition Assessments focus exclusively on projects needed to maintain
our existing facilities and include smaller projects falling below the
Line Item Construction Program (LICP) threshold (currently $250,000).
Together, they will be the basis for our future CIPs.
The CIP describes how the Master Plan can be implemented through a
series of achievable planning and programming steps. It presents an
achievable Capital Plan by identifying the projects necessary to
satisfy the goals and objectives of the Master Plan. The CIP implements
the Master Plan in that all known and valid projects are evaluated
against established criteria in the following five categories: Safety,
[Physical] Security, Preservation, Impact on Mission, and Economics
(Cost payback, savings). The inclusion of projects in future CIPs will
be based on a more detailed development and analysis of projects'
requirements, identification of prerequisites, development of
appropriate sequencing, and establishment of priorities. This will be a
principal basis for assignment of projects to a specific fiscal year
LICP. As the Master Plan and the condition assessment are completed,
subsequent CIPs are likely to reflect some changes in project
identification.
We are still in the process of developing our CIP. Until such time
as our condition assessment and Capitol Complex Master Plan are
completed, we will not be able to give the Committee a total list of
projects nor a cost associated with these projects. However, based on
the current draft CIP, the Dome restoration project, additional
elevator modernization, the Fairchild and GPO build-out, high voltage
switchgear, logistics warehouse facility, campus-wide roof repairs, and
the Library's storage modules at Fort Meade and the Copyright Deposit
Facility are among the list of significant construction projects for
the next five years.
condition assessments
Question. AOC planned to award building condition assessment (BCAs)
contracts to assess the House and Senate Office buildings and the
Capitol in 2003. Since these BCAs are an integral part of the Capitol
Hill master plan (expected to be issued in April 2006), what is the
current status of these BCA efforts?
Answer. The Building Condition Assessment (BCA) contract for the
Capitol, House and Senate Office Buildings was awarded on February 26,
2004. BCAs are planned for other jurisdictions as well. The AOC will
begin receiving information from the current BCAs in July 2004--in time
to potentially include projects in the fiscal year 2006 LICP, if an
urgent undertaking is needed. If not urgent, identified projects will
be included in subsequent fiscal year LICPs, as appropriate. Completion
of the BCAs for the House and Senate is scheduled for September 2004.
Upon review, BCA information will be available to the Congress soon
thereafter. The timing of the BCAs is such that they will appropriately
feed into the Capitol Complex Master Plan.
project management
Question. One of the major areas cited by the General Accounting
Office as needing improvement within the AOC in its 2003 management
review was project management. How is project management being handled
differently today in an effort to deliver projects on time and within
budget?
Answer. Project management has instituted significant positive
changes in the last year. These changes include: strengthening and
modifying the perimeter security project team to increase its
effectiveness; establishing project priorities; developing a simplified
project summary reporting method that continues to be refined to assure
it provides required information in a concise manner; conducting a
workload analysis; holding staff meetings and monthly Planning,
Coordination and Scheduling (PS&C) meetings to discuss relevant project
issues and encourage teamwork. In addition, there has been an increased
emphasis on use of established procedures, such as best practices. The
roles of the Contractor Officer Technical Representative (COTR) and
their interaction with project managers have been clarified, and there
is greater cooperation between the Procurement, Architecture,
Engineering and Construction Divisions due to increased management
oversight. We have determined core competencies for project managers
and we have developed contract modification management procedures.
customer service
Question. AOC has identified improving customer service as an
important goal. What strategies are being developed to become more
responsive to customer complaints and improve building conditions and
cleanliness?
Answer. The Senate Superintendent's Office is implementing a number
of initiatives to proactively address customer complaints and improve
customer service. In the past year, we have initiated meetings with all
Senate office managers and Committee chief clerks to provide
information on the services provided by the Superintendents Office,
project status, and points of contact for programs such as ergonomics
and ADA issues, as well as personally address and resolve specific
issues with clients. This effort has proved successful as the Senate
Superintendents Office realized an 11 percent increase in pro-activity
as seen in the annual Buildings Services Customer Satisfaction Survey.
In addition, we have initiated our Annual Business Planning effort
with a focus on client service, performance management, and bench
marking. Through execution of the business plan our responsiveness
rating increased 8 percent. While these initiatives have been
productive, we continue to strive to improve our responsiveness to
clients' needs. Current initiatives include the implementation of the
Senate Superintendent's web site which provides a direct link to the
Superintendent's Office, instant feedback on work order status, an on-
line furniture catalog, building information alerts, and project status
updates. Client surveys will be generated automatically and sent to
clients upon completion of a work order to obtain instant feedback
regarding quality and timeliness of service. This survey data will be
analyzed and action plans developed to address common themes and bridge
gaps in service.
With regard to building cleanliness, the annual Buildings Services
Customer Satisfaction Survey indicated a 13 percent increase in
satisfaction with the cleanliness of Member suites. This is a direct
result of the implementation of the quality assurance program which
requires custodial staff to follow comprehensive cleaning checklists,
integrates management quality inspections, and establishes clear lines
of accountability. This year the program has been expanded to include
the public restrooms and integrated into a performance based contract
for cleaning and policing of public areas and restrooms. We also have
intensified our focus on daily inspections of public areas and
restrooms. Through this inspection process we quickly assign the
resources necessary to address building ``hot spots.'' The Senate
Superintendent's Office is currently analyzing the floor care program
and researching best practices and modern equipment to provide world
class maintenance for the various floor surfaces in the Senate Office
Buildings.
With regard to building conditions, the recent award of the
Facility Conditions Assessment contract will provide a comprehensive
assessment of the condition of buildings structures and systems, a 10-
year prioritized plan to address deficiencies, and a complete inventory
and bar coding of systems to complete our current Preventative
Maintenance initiative. Use of this information will ensure the
strategic care of the facilities and world class preventative
maintenance resulting in improved building conditions and performance.
Concurrent with our improvement initiatives, we are promoting a
culture of customer service within our workforce through the use of
implementation tools, best practices, accountability, and employee
recognition.
management improvements
Question. In order to improve management of the agency, the fiscal
year 2003 legislative branch bill language was included establishing a
Chief Operating Officer position, and requiring the development of a
strategic plan. Now that AOC's strategic plan has been finalized by the
agency's Chief Operating Officer and he has submitted an action plan as
mandated, what changes can we expect to see in AOC's management
approach and priorities? What milestones have been established to help
the COO and AOC track progress in the development of its strategic
management and accountability framework?
Answer. The AOC is following the actions identified and published
in its Annual Performance Plan and the COO Action Plan as the
foundation for its organizational business priorities. Specific
milestones are published as a part of the Annual Performance Plan and
the COO Action Plan.
The Strategic Plan is linked to more detailed, functional planning
through the AOC Performance Plan. The Performance Plan outlines the
specific actions and milestones planned to achieve our goals. In order
to track progress implementing AOC's strategic initiatives, the COO has
instituted a monthly management reporting requirement. To ensure that
the Strategic Plan is a living document, the Senior Leadership Team
uses the monthly reports to continually assess the Agency's strategic
priorities and make adjustments as needed. The Architect, COO, and the
Senior Leadership Team hosted its first quarterly management review of
AOC's newly-published Strategic and Performance plans with the Agency's
Management Council.
Question. Performance measures are also important to help an agency
manage its progress in achieving its goals, what is the status of the
development of AOC's specific performance measures and how are they
being used to manage the agency? Some areas that AOC designated in its
strategic plan as performance measures to be developed are: client
satisfaction, employee satisfaction, on-time projects, on-budget
projects, project quality, facility maintenance, asset preservation,
employee safety, clean audit, recycling, budget execution.
Answer. While many of the jurisdictions track measures that are
specific to their daily work, AOC does not currently have an Agency-
wide approach to collecting and analyzing this data as it relates to
the Strategic Plan. Over the course of the year, AOC will be developing
a process for cascading the high-level measures identified in the
Strategic Plan down and across the organization. Once that work is
completed, AOC will develop a systematic approach to tracking results
using the measures.
Since 2002, the AOC has conducted an annual Building Services
Customer Satisfaction Survey among occupants of the Capitol, the House
and Senate Office buildings, and the Library of Congress buildings.
Last year occupants of the U.S. Capitol Police Headquarters were also
invited to participate. This year the scope will be expanded to include
Supreme Court building occupants. Respondents are asked to indicate
their satisfaction level regarding 61 areas that cover services
provided by the AOC that range from the effectiveness of the Office of
the Superintendent to the maintenance of sidewalks. Questionnaires are
tailored to each jurisdiction so customers are asked only about
services relevant to them. AOC jurisdictions integrate customer input
in the annual business plans and use survey results to draw specific
action plans. For 2004, the survey period is June 1-20.
Jurisdictions have been implementing a web-based on-going customer
satisfaction survey to assess customers' satisfaction with the on-
demand work order process, from task request to work completion. This
effort is now being implemented in the House and Senate jurisdictions.
Other jurisdictions will follow as they establish websites.
The AOC is assessing the satisfaction of its internal customers
with provided services through focused surveys. The Architecture,
Engineering, and Project Management Divisions and the Safety, Fire, and
Environmental Programs Office have surveyed their internal customers,
and are taking actions based on the results. The Human Resources
Management Division will issue its survey next summer. Other AOC
organizations will join this effort in a coordinated manner to ensure
that action plans are drawn to respond to internal customers' input. We
also will be conducting an AOC-wide employee focus group survey later
this year.
Question. In his action plan, the Chief Operating Officer (COO)
states that he has established a Senior Leadership Team to help lead
AOC's transformation and he also envisions a flatter organizational
structure to facilitate decision making in a more timely manner. What
have been the results of this new structure?
Answer. A new organizational structure was proposed for Committee
review as part of our fiscal year 2005 budget submission. We have been
piloting the new structure and find it has streamlined decision making
and more clearly delineates Senior Leadership lines of authority and
responsibility. Unless directed otherwise, with the approval of the
fiscal year 2005 budget, we will implement an organizational structure
that will assist us in clarifying lines of supervision and
communication throughout the AOC.
Question. One of the Architect's and COO's priorities is improving
communication with employees and stakeholders. What efforts are being
made to communicate agency progress and project status with
stakeholders? What is being done to obtain input from employees? How
will this information be used to help better manage the agency?
Answer. The Architect and the COO have been holding periodic
meetings with stakeholders and have been meeting with employees as part
of their daily business meetings or at special functions within the
jurisdictions. We also have a number of employee workgroups and
committees that provide program and operational information and input
to Agency management. In addition, we are planning to complete an AOC
employee survey later this year. The input from these sources assists
management in the evaluation of Agency policies, programs, priorities
and overall business operations. Employees also make valuable
suggestions for changes/improvements in business processes and delivery
of services.
The AOC recognizes that communication is a powerful tool to affect
change, educate, and empower employees by helping to deploy AOC's
strategic goals throughout the organization.
To effectively reach our audiences and develop the Agency's
message, we have crafted a Communications Plan to establish regular
processes, forums, and mechanisms for employee communication, which are
aligned with efforts to obtain and respond to employee feedback and
other outreach efforts to external audiences.
Through the publication of the employee newsletter, ``Shop Talk'',
and distribution of the electronic newsletter, ``AOC This Week'', and
postings on the AOC Intranet site, messages are frequently communicated
with employees regarding project status, program and policies changes,
and safety messages.
AOC uses a variety of creative vehicles to communicate internally
since our employees work different shifts in many buildings across the
Capitol complex, and not everyone has ready access to electronic tools
such as e-mail and voicemail.
Part of the communication loop is to receive feedback from
employees. We are doing so by the use of surveys, town meetings, and
focus groups regarding specific areas. For example, in January we
conducted an Agency-wide survey asking employees about their
perceptions, opinions, and attitudes about safety. The response rate to
the survey was 62 percent when typically these surveys receive a 30
percent response rate.
This input is used to develop and enhance our safety communications
efforts, identify deficiencies in training, and establish programs to
reward employees for jobs well done.
Externally, the AOC is stepping up efforts to communicate with
Members of Congress, their staffs, community leaders, and visitors
through a variety of vehicles. The strategy for communicating with
these audiences involves the use of personal mailings; reports;
briefings; testimony; press releases; stakeholder surveys, and
meetings. In addition, a quarterly newsletter from the Architect to
Members of Congress reporting on major projects has been developed.
Methods for communicating with other external audiences such as the
visiting public; dignitaries; Capitol Hill community; Federal
government agencies; architects and engineers; historians; vendors; and
the media include: postings/stories on the AOC Internet site--
www.AOC.gov; public meetings; press releases; media interviews; news
stories; speeches; Capitol seminars; targeted mailings; scholarly
articles; trade shows; and small meetings.
Question. Please describe the significant accomplishments to date
completed as a result of AOC's three financial management action plans.
What is the status of AOC's first financial statement audit? How is AOC
leveraging the financial statement preparation and audit processes to
improve financial control and accountability?
Answer. We made significant strides in meeting each of our
strategic financial management objectives. For example, we established
an Audit Committee; we produced our first financial statements and
initiated a Congressionally-mandated financial statement audit; and we
compiled values for all Capitol Hill real property. We also completed
our first external reporting via FACTS I and FACTS II; developed
written accounting policies and procedures; improved our major
consumable inventory process and measurement techniques; and
streamlined critical accounting functions.
According to John Webster, CFO of the Library of Congress (LOC) and
an AOC Audit Committee member, the AOC accomplished in two years
achievements that took the LOC seven years to accomplish.
In 2003, we accomplished the following:
--Drafted and implemented the Audit Committee charter and recruited
highly-qualified and respected independent Audit Committee
members.
--Within two years of establishing an integrated trial balance, we
produced full sets of comparative, OMB-compliant, financial
statements and instituted year-end procedures to record all
adjustments and accruals and closed within 10 days of the end
of fiscal year 2003.
--Wrote the Statement of Work and performed all necessary
administrative functions to award a five-year audit contract of
our first financial statement audit of AOC balance sheets.
--Researched and resolved issue regarding ownership of Capitol Hill
real property and directed massive effort to properly identify,
classify, and value all AOC land, buildings, software,
construction work-in-progress, and personal property.
--Implemented fixed asset module by converting all manual property
records into electronic asset tracking records and reconciling
to manual data and developed written policies and procedures
for capitalization of assets and construction work-in-progress.
--Produced comprehensive written accounting policies and procedures
for the first time and devised new accounting procedures to
accommodate MIPR imputed funding and various reimbursable
projects in accordance with appropriations law.
--Managed a major effort to resolve long-outstanding Fund Balance
with Treasury issues. The un-reconciled balance is now zero. We
also installed new processes for accurately measuring and
reporting liabilities on the AOC balance sheet never previously
considered.
--Completed 18 months of negotiations with OMB and Treasury regarding
proper accounting treatment for the Thurgood Marshall Federal
Judiciary Building and also obtained Auditor concurrence of the
transactions and valuation.
--Communicated regularly with GAO, GSA, OMB, and Treasury staff to
improve AOC processes at every level.
--Improved the accuracy rate of the AOC inventory from the 2002 rate
of 54 percent to 83 percent for 2003. This represents a one
year improvement of more than 50 percent.
--During fiscal year 2003, no complaints were received, either
internally or externally, and on average we processed and paid
more than 1,000 invoices totaling more than $25 million per
month, accurately and on time, in support of the AOC's mission.
--Took decisive action to correct deficiencies in credit card
processing and controls.
--Issued AOC Funds Control Administration Order which establishes
procedures to improve internal controls and integrated program
planning, budgeting, and financial control processes. It places
control of financial resources at appropriate management level
and provides for documented Delegation of Authority down
through the management chain to operating officials.
--Produced internal fiscal guidance for budget execution establishing
obligation goals.
--Developed Agency tracking procedures for bill and report directives
which establishes responsibility and monitoring, sets timelines
for completion, and provides for quarterly status updates.
--Hired Business Financial Analysts (BFAs) in several jurisdictions
to provide hands-on financial direction and guidance in the
field, as well as acting as a liaison between the AOC Budget
Office and the jurisdiction.
The AOC is undergoing its first financial audit. We expect to
conclude the audit by June 30 and receive the auditor's opinion in
July. This performance tracks with the experience of other agencies
undergoing their first audit. The accomplishments listed are examples
of how we leveraged the financial statement preparation and audit
process to improve financial control and accountability.
Question. GAO's January 2004 status report on AOC's implementation
of management review recommendations states that the hiring of the
first group of financial managers in AOC's various operating
jurisdictions is underway. What benefits have resulted from these
increases in staffing?
Answer. Business Financial Analysts (BFAs) have been hired to
provide day-to-day financial procedures, support, and advice for
programs, projects, and activities at the jurisdictional level while
supporting the Jurisdiction Account Holder's financial objectives. Some
of the readily identifiable benefits that have resulted and that are in
process include:
--Produced a Zero Based Budget Review of Facilities Maintenance and
personnel for the Senate and House Office Buildings that was
included as a supplement to the fiscal year 2005 Budget
Submission to Congress.
--Working directly with the jurisdiction to develop and streamline
procedures using best business practices to meet Agency
obligation goals.
--Provides guidance and advice on fiscal policy, procedures, and
regulations to all levels of staff within the jurisdiction.
--Establishing a method to accurately track and monitor FTEs
including Construction Management project labor at the
jurisdiction level.
--Forecasting material and equipment expenditures against current
budget amounts.
--Closing out completed projects funded in prior years and preparing
documents to move any remaining available funding.
--Streamlining day-to-day procurement procedures at the jurisdiction
level.
--Tracking and documenting final invoices in order to monitor
unliquidated obligations and deobligate funds that are no
longer valid to enable execution of the funding for other
purposes within the program as appropriate and within
reprogramming guidelines.
--Provides financial guidance to field personnel entering financial
documents in the Financial Management System (FMS).
--Developed a process in the jurisdiction to track funding
reallotments within program groups or activities.
--Designing a program to track reimbursable collections and spending
at the Capitol Power Plant.
--Comparing historical spending data to current spending to identify
trends.
Question. In its January 2004 status report, GAO indicates that the
use of interim dates by AOC for monitoring progress on individual
financial management action items would be beneficial because many
completion dates are not scheduled until fiscal years 2006 and 2007.
Has AOC begun to use interim dates for monitoring progress? If so,
please provide examples.
Answer. The financial management actions items have been updated to
incorporate additional interim action items. The current CFO action
items with status are provided for the record.
information technology project management
Question. AOC had identified a software package that would produce
a unified schedule and show staff resources that would allow it to
better manage its projects. Has AOC obtained such a capability? If so
how is it working?
Answer. This software package has been received from the supplier
and the workstation components have been loaded on 2 personal
computers. The preparation of the work ``templates'' is currently being
developed to tie the software to AOC processes for projects. The vendor
representatives are scheduled to configure the server portion of the
software along with assisting us in refining use practices/definitions.
worker safety
Question. Efforts to improve worker safety and create a world class
occupational health and safety program will require full involvement
and cooperation from jurisdictions--what steps has AOC taken to solicit
buy-in from the jurisdictions and to hold jurisdictions accountable for
their responsibilities in helping to transform AOC's occupational
health and safety program? Besides injuries and illness rates, what
other key measures are you using to assess your overall performance in
moving towards a culture of safety at the AOC?
Answer. The AOC has involved key jurisdiction personnel in
developing safety policy requirements, identifying resource
requirements, and establishing goals and planning documents. In
addition, ad-hoc working groups comprised of central office safety
staff and jurisdiction staff have been utilized to examine specific
issues and develop recommended solutions.
For each safety policy, a jurisdiction is assigned to serve as
lead. As a policy is developed, central safety staff and the safety
specialist from the lead jurisdiction provide input into the policy's
requirements. The draft policy is then distributed to various central
and jurisdictional personnel for review; this includes safety
professionals, management, Jurisdiction Occupational Safety & Health
Committee (JOSH) representatives, and union representatives. Each
comment submitted is addressed and documented, with the final draft
submitted to Senior Policy Committee for review and approval.
The AOC has also drafted an Occupational Safety & Health Program
Plan (OSHPP) to guide the Agency through the policy implementation
process and undertake other safety-related initiatives. The initial
goals and objectives were developed during a Senior Leadership Safety
Workshop facilitated by DuPont Safety Resources. This was used as the
framework for drafting the OSHPP. Further development of the OSHPP
included a review and input process similar to the one followed for
policy development.
Ad-hoc working groups and steering teams have been used to focus on
specific issues and provide recommendations to management. Some of the
issues these groups have addressed include: assessing workload impacts
of implementing and maintaining safety policies, reviewing safety
training requirements, and developing a safety communications plan.
Accountability for the jurisdictions begins with a clear
delineation of responsibilities in each of the safety policies and the
OSHPP. Software--such as the Facility Management Assistant (FMA) used
to track safety inspection findings, and the Incident Analysis Module
(IAM) used to investigate injuries--provides the AOC with tools to
monitor progress on improving safety and providing feedback on
performance. For individual employees, the AOC's Performance
Communication and Evaluation System includes safety as one of the four
performance evaluation criteria for non-supervisory employees, and as
one of five criteria for supervisors and managers. In a similar manner,
performance requirements for exempt personnel are addressed by the
AOC's Performance Review Plan, which includes safety as one of five
performance evaluation criteria.
While injury and illness statistics have served as a key indicator
of safety performance for the AOC--with our rate dropping from 17.90 in
fiscal year 2000 to 7.91 in fiscal year 2003--it is not the only
measurement used. The OSHPP establishes a number of performance
milestones against which success is measured.
information technology
Question. AOC has developed version 1 of its existing and target
enterprise architectures and a transition plan to move the agency to
the target. What steps is AOC taking to ensure that proposed systems
and systems under development will be aligned with the agency's
architecture?
Answer. The AOC/OIRM Business Systems Modernization Office (BSMO)
has established procedures to ensure that new IT proposals are aligned
with the AOC's Enterprise Architecture (EA). All proposals for new
technologies are presented in a business case format to BSMO for review
and approval. No project can be initiated or funded without approval.
For projects under development, BSMO periodically reviews them in
the capacity of the Project Management Board to ensure they remain in
alignment with the architecture as well as meet project milestones.
BSMO operates under the guidelines of our Information Technology
investment management process of which alignment with the EA is a
critical piece.
Annual reviews of the architecture are scheduled and releases of
the baseline EA, target EA and sequencing plan follow such reviews.
This is another way in which BSMO reviews systems in development and in
operation and assesses their continued alignment with the AOC's target
EA.
Question. AOC contracted for a new information technology system
life-cycle methodology, due for delivery on January 31, 2004, and
planned a two-month pilot to refine the methodology for implementation
as an agency-wide standard by March 31, 2004. Was the methodology
delivered, and did AOC conduct the planned pilot? Has the methodology
been implemented as an agency standard, and how many projects are now
being managed using the new methodology?
Answer. Systems Development Life Cycle (SDLC) guidelines and
procedures were delivered on schedule on January 31, 2004. The
methodology is aligned with the Capability Maturity Model Integrated
(CMMI) as recommended by GAO in their latest audit findings. The SDLC
guidelines address configuration management, risk management,
requirements management, acquisition management, test management, and
quality assurance throughout the life cycle of a project from inception
to implementation.
A pilot was conducted from February 1 to March 31, 2004, with
projects for facilities management systems, web-based systems, hardware
acquisitions, and information technology (IT) support systems. The
guidelines were revised based on lessons learned during this pilot.
The methodology was implemented on April 1, 2004, and the
guidelines are now available Agency-wide on the AOC intranet. Quality
Assurance oversight procedures are being implemented to ensure that
projects are managed in accordance with these established guidelines.
These procedures will include audits to determine if proper procedures
are being used and supporting documentation is present, as well as
document review, management systems review, systems monitoring, data
analysis, and participation in the deployment of new and modified
systems.
Quality Assurance oversight procedures will determine the number of
systems that are being managed using the new methodology. At this
point, few projects other than the 10 that were piloted are currently
using the methodology due to the brief time it has been available. This
number is expected to increase over time to include all major projects
within AOC as the methodology becomes institutionalized.
Question. AOC's plans include revising its comprehensive
information technology security plan by June 2004 and then implementing
the plan's elements. Currently, AOC plans to contract for an
independent security audit of AOC systems by September 30, 2004. In the
interim, what steps has AOC taken or does it plan to take to ensure the
security of the agency's systems is not being compromised?
Answer. AOC's mission critical systems have already undergone two
significant Information Technology Security audits. The first
assessment was performed by a vendor contracted by AOC. They provided a
``pre-audit'' review to identify conditions within the AOC's
information systems that would have resulted in findings during future
compliancy audits. Forty-four findings resulted in the vendor's
assessment. The vendor's findings were codified and incorporated into a
risk mitigation plan.
The second assessment was a financial audit, performed by a vendor
contracted by the AOC Inspector General. The financial auditors
reviewed AOC's current security posture to include people, processes,
and technology, as well as the previous 44 findings. The financial
audit resulted in 20 additional findings.
OIRM developed a risk mitigation plan to address the 64 findings
and any future findings. The 64 findings were incorporated into the
Chief Information Security Officer's Plans of Action and Milestone
schedule. The status of the Plans of Action and Milestone schedule is
monitored by the OIRM Director. On a monthly basis, the Chief
Information Security Officer and the OIRM Director report on the status
to the Deputy Chief of Staff and the AOC Inspector General. To date, 93
percent of the 44 findings from the first assessment have been
mitigated. Of the 20 findings that resulted from the financial audit,
50 percent have been mitigated. The Inspector General is seeking
contractor support to independently verify and validate the work
already performed to mitigate the 64 findings.
The AOC is in the process of selecting a vendor for the purpose of
performing a risk assessment on the applications currently in
production. Where the previous risk assessments concentrated on IT
infrastructure, policies, and processes, this third assessment will
focus on mission critical and mission essential applications and
databases. Any findings that result from the next round of assessments
will be incorporated into the Chief Information Security Officer's
Plans of Action and Milestone program and the mitigation of the
findings will be tracked accordingly.
The net effect of the financial audit and the two risk assessments
will place the AOC in a better position for the upcoming external audit
in September 2004. It also ensures that the security of the Agency's
systems are not compromised in the interim. We have a plan in place to
identify risk and to effectively mitigate those risks in a determined
and positive direction.
CONCLUSION OF HEARINGS
Senator Campbell. Thank you for your testimony. I
appreciate your being here.
Mr. Hantman. Thank you.
Senator Campbell. With that, the hearing is recessed.
[Whereupon, at 11:55 a.m., Thursday, April 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
Billington, Hon. James H., The Librarian of Congress, Library of
Congress....................................................... 47
Prepared Statement of........................................ 51
Campbell, Senator Ben Nighthorse, U.S. Senator From Colorado:
Opening Statements of......................1, 47, 81, 113, 135, 207
Questions Submitted by........................28, 36, 109, 128, 226
Campbell, Laura, Associate Librarian for Strategic Initiatives,
Library of Congress............................................ 47
Cylke, Frank Kurt, Director, National Library Services for the
Blind and Physically Handicapped, Library of Congress.......... 47
Czerwinski, Stanley J., Controller, General Accounting Office.... 1
Dey, Chris, Chief Financial Officer, Office of the Sergeant at
Arms and Doorkeeper, U.S. Senate............................... 81
Dodaro, Gene L., Chief Operating Officer, General Accounting
Office......................................................... 1
Durbin, Senator Richard J., U.S. Senator From Illinois:
Prepared Statements of...................................18, 48, 82
Questions Submitted by......................................76, 130
Statement.................................................... 82
Gainer, Terrance W., Chief, U.S. Capitol Police, Capitol Police
Board.......................................................... 113
Prepared Statement of........................................ 118
Statement of................................................. 115
Glovinsky, Gary, Chief Financial Officer, Architect of the
Capitol........................................................ 207
Hantman, Hon. Alan M., Architect of the Capitol, and Member,
Capitol Police Board.........................................113, 207
Prepared Statement of........................................ 209
Harper, Sallyanne, Chief Administrative Officer, General
Accounting Office.............................................. 1
Hixon, Bob, Project Executive for the Capitol Visitor Center,
Architect of the Capitol....................................... 207
Holtz-Eakin, Douglas, Director, Congressional Budget Office...... 41
Prepared Statement of........................................ 42
James, Bruce R., Public Printer, Government Printing Office...... 31
Prepared Statement of........................................ 32
Summary Statement of......................................... 31
Jenkins, Jo Ann C., Chief of Staff, Office of the Librarian,
Library of Congress............................................ 47
Jones, Mary Suit, Assistant Secretary, Office of the Secretary,
U.S. Senate.................................................... 135
Kennedy, Keith, Deputy Sergeant at Arms, Office of the Sergeant
at Arms and Doorkeeper, U.S. Senate............................ 81
Levering, Mary, Acting Director, Integrated Support Services,
Library of Congress............................................ 47
Livingood, W. Wilson, Chairman, Capitol Police Board............. 113
Prepared Statement of........................................ 114
Statement of................................................. 113
Lopez, Kenneth E., Director of Security, Library of Congress..... 47
Marcum, Deanna, Associate Librarian for Library Services, Library
of Congress.................................................... 47
McSeveney, Dick, Chief Operating Officer, Architect of the
Capitol........................................................ 207
Medina, Rubens, Law Librarian, Library of Congress............... 47
Mulhollan, Daniel P., Director, Congressional Research Service,
Library of Congress............................................ 47
Prepared Statement of........................................ 60
Murphy, Kathryn B., Budget Officer, Office of the Chief Financial
Officer, Library of Congress................................... 47
Nichols, Marc, Inspector General, Government Printing Office..... 31
Peters, Marybeth, Register of Copyrights, Library of Congress.... 47
Prepared Statement of........................................ 63
Pickle, Hon. William H., Sergeant at Arms, Office of the Sergeant
at Arms and Doorkeeper, U.S. Senate, and Board Member, Capitol
Police Board..................................................81, 113
Prepared Statement of........................................ 85
Summary Statement of......................................... 83
Poole, Amita, Chief of Staff, Architect of the Capitol........... 207
Reynolds, Hon. Emily J., Secretary of the Senate, Office of the
Secretary, U.S. Senate......................................... 135
Opening Statement of......................................... 136
Prepared Statement of........................................ 140
Robinson, Elizabeth, Deputy Director, Congressional Budget Office 41
Scott, Donald L., Deputy Librarian of Congress, Library of
Congress....................................................... 47
Shedd, Steve, Chief Financial Officer, Government Printing Office 31
Skvarla, Diane, Curator, Office of the Secretary, U.S. Senate.... 135
Stevens, Senator Ted, U.S. Senator From Alaska, Statement of..... 48
Suarez, Hector, Chief Administrative Officer, Architect of the
Capitol........................................................ 207
Turri, Bill, Deputy Public Printer and Chief Operating Officer,
Government Printing Office..................................... 31
Walker, David M., Comptroller General, General Accounting Office. 1
Opening Remarks of........................................... 2
Prepared Statement of........................................ 3
Webster, John D., Chief Financial Officer, Library of Congress... 47
Wineman, Tim, Financial Clerk, Office of the Secretary, U.S.
Senate......................................................... 135
SUBJECT INDEX
----------
ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL
Page
Additional Committee Questions................................... 226
Capital Improvement Plan......................................... 228
Capitol:
Building..................................................... 212
Fence........................................................ 225
Power Plant.................................................. 220
Visitor Center (CVC)..................................208, 212, 226
Cost to Complete......................................... 223
Exhibits................................................. 224
Landscaping.............................................. 216
Management............................................... 220
Project Management....................................... 223
Condition Assessments............................................ 229
Customer Service................................................. 229
Dirksen Bathroom Remodeling...................................... 222
Employee Safety.................................................. 211
Fiscal Year 2004 Spending Levels................................. 219
Fiscal Year 2005:
Budget Summary............................................... 207
Funding Reductions........................................... 216
Human Capital.................................................... 214
Information Technology.........................................215, 239
Project Management........................................... 239
Management Improvements.......................................... 230
Project:
Delivery..................................................... 213
Descriptions................................................. 210
Management................................................... 229
Timelines.................................................... 221
Recycling........................................................ 225
Program...................................................... 221
Restaurant Operations............................................ 223
Retail Sales..................................................... 224
Senate:
Office Building Improvements................................. 211
Recycling.................................................... 225
Restaurants................................................215, 224
Senator Office Building Entrances................................ 222
Worker Safety..................................................220, 239
CAPITOL POLICE BOARD
Additional Committee Questions................................... 128
Budget Freeze.................................................... 122
Escape Hood Replacement.......................................... 125
Fairchild Building Lease......................................... 123
Fence............................................................ 126
Firing Range..................................................... 123
Hiring of Fiscal Year 2004 New Civilian Employees................ 123
LOC Police Merger................................................ 124
Meeting...................................................... 113
Mounted Horse Unit............................................... 124
Overtime Hours................................................... 122
Recruiting Officers.............................................. 127
Security Fence................................................... 121
Staffing Justification........................................... 122
Sworn Personnel Requested........................................ 127
Training Hours................................................... 124
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE
Increased Productivity........................................... 44
Overview of CBO's Request........................................ 41
Program Changes.................................................. 44
Retention of Employees........................................... 44
Staffing in Difficult Areas...................................... 43
GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE
Additional Committee Questions................................... 28
Appendix I: Serving the Congress--GAO's Strategic Plan Framework. 15
Appendix II: GAO Accomplishments That Helped Change Laws, Improve
Services, or Promote Sound Management.......................... 15
Effect of Funding Freeze......................................... 21
Federal Deficit.................................................. 25
Fiscal Year 2003 Performance and Results......................... 4
GAO:
Fiscal Year 2005 Request to Support the Congress............. 13
Human Capital Flexibilities.................................. 20
Travel Patterns.............................................. 21
Maximizing GAO's Effectiveness, Responsiveness, and Value........ 11
Pay-for-Performance.............................................. 19
Rating Performance............................................... 19
Return on Investment............................................. 27
Source of Pay-for-Performance.................................... 24
Strategic Human Capital Management............................... 19
Student Loan Repayments.......................................... 27
Tax Forgiveness of Student Loans................................. 28
Technology Assessment............................................ 23
Training GAO Employees........................................... 20
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
Additional Committee Questions................................... 36
Business-like Operations......................................... 35
Investment Request............................................... 35
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
Acquisition and Preservation of Library Materials................ 50
Additional Committee Questions................................... 76
Aging Workforce.................................................. 70
Collaboration With the Archives.................................. 71
Construction Impact on Security.................................. 77
Copyright:
Deposit Facility............................................. 74
Office....................................................... 55
Cost Containment Efforts......................................... 61
CRS:
One-Time Financial Adjustment................................ 80
Science and Technology Capacities............................ 78
Staff Capacity...............................................54, 71
Digital Talking Book Machine..................................... 55
Embassy Construction--Budgetary Impact........................... 75
Fiscal Year 2003:
Accomplishments.............................................. 53
Highlights in CRS Legislative Support........................ 61
Fiscal Year 2005:
Budget Request...............................................62, 65
Offsetting Collections Authority Request..................... 67
Flexible:
Hiring Tools................................................. 50
Workforce.................................................... 71
Fort Meade Projects.............................................. 50
Funding Priorities and Challenges................................ 69
GAO Review of Open World Leadership Program...................... 68
Human Capital.................................................... 77
Infrastructure Support........................................... 57
Introduction of the Associate Librarian for Library Services..... 49
Leased Space..................................................... 73
Legislative Initiatives.......................................... 58
Library Buildings and Grounds.................................... 58
Budget Request............................................... 73
Mass Deacidification............................................. 55
Meeting Congressional Requirements............................... 63
Meeting Uncontrollable Inflationary Increases for Essential
Research Materials............................................. 63
National Audiovisual Conservation Center (NAVCC)................. 53
National Film Preservation Program............................... 51
NAVCC--Culpeper.................................................. 50
Donation..................................................... 72
Open World Leadership Program....................................68, 78
Opening Statement of the Librarian............................... 49
Police:
Force........................................................ 77
Merger....................................................... 50
Preservation of:
CRS Research Capacity........................................ 62
The Collections.............................................. 75
Retail Sales..................................................... 76
Review of Copyright Office Work and Accomplishments.............. 64
Security......................................................... 55
Sustaining the Collections....................................... 54
The Library of Congress Today.................................... 52
21st Century Library............................................. 52
Veterans History Project......................................... 55
U.S. SENATE
Office of the Secretary
Acquisition of Artifacts That Once Belonged to the Senate........ 200
Administrative Offices........................................... 170
Capitol Visitor Center.........................................142, 202
Operational Decisions........................................ 203
Continuity of Operations and Emergency Preparedness Planning..... 142
COOP and COG Planning............................................ 138
Curatorial Advisory Board........................................ 201
Curtis Chair..................................................... 138
Financial Management Information System.......................... 136
Financial Operations: Disbursing Office.......................... 152
Implementing Mandated Systems.................................... 141
Legislative:
Information System........................................... 137
Offices...................................................... 143
Maintaining and Improving Current and Historic Legislative,
Financial and Administrative Services.......................... 143
Portrait of Margaret Chase smith................................. 138
Presenting the Fiscal Year 2005 Budget Request................... 140
Ricin Incident................................................... 201
Senate:
Historical Office............................................ 138
Library...................................................... 138
Preservation Fund and Curatorial Advisory Board.............. 137
Student Loan Program......................................... 203
Web Site..................................................... 201
Succession Planning and Cross-training........................... 139
Office of the Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper
A Comprehensive Approach to Security and Preparedness............ 86
Additional Committee Questions................................... 109
Effect of Budgetary Freeze....................................... 102
Effects of Irradiation........................................... 104
GAO Computer Security Review..................................... 106
Information Technology........................................... 90
Judiciary Committee Probe........................................ 104
Library of Congress Security..................................... 108
New Mail Handling Protocols...................................... 104
New Telephone System............................................. 103
Operational Support.............................................. 94
Security for Capitol Visitor Center.............................. 108
Senate Computing Technology...................................... 107
Staffing Levels.................................................. 103
Status of Warehouse.............................................. 102
-