    [Senate Hearing 110-245]
    [From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

                                                            S. Hrg. 110-245

             LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARINGS

                                    before a

                              SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE

                COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE

                           ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                       on

                               H.R. 2771/S. 1686

    AN ACT MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH FOR THE FISCAL
             YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2008, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

                                   __________

                 Architect of the Capitol (except House items)
                          Congressional Budget Office
                        Government Accountability Office
                           Government Printing Office
                              Library of Congress
                              Office of Compliance
                          United States Capitol Police
                                  U.S. Senate

                                   __________

             Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations

       Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/
                              congress/index.html

                                   __________

                         U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

    33-929 PDF                 WASHINGTON DC:  2008
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    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

                    ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia, Chairman
    DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii             THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi
    PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont            TED STEVENS, Alaska
    TOM HARKIN, Iowa                     ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania
    BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland        PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico
    HERB KOHL, Wisconsin                 CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri
    PATTY MURRAY, Washington             MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky
    BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota        RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama
    DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California         JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire
    RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois          ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah
    TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota            LARRY CRAIG, Idaho
    MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana          KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas
    JACK REED, Rhode Island              SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas
    FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey      WAYNE ALLARD, Colorado
    BEN NELSON, Nebraska                 LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee

                        Charles Kieffer, Staff Director
                      Bruce Evans, Minority Staff Director
                                     ------

                     Subcommittee on the Legislative Branch

                     MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana, Chairman
    RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois          WAYNE ALLARD, Colorado
    BEN NELSON, Nebraska                 LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee
    ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia        THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi
      (ex officio)                         (ex officio)
                               Professional Staff
                                 Nancy Olkewicz
                        Carolyn E. Apostolou (Minority)
                            Sarah Wilson (Minority)

                             Administrative Support

                                  Teri Curtin

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page

                              Friday March 2, 2007

    Architect of the Capitol.........................................     1

                             Friday, March 16, 2007

    Government Accountability Office.................................    27
    Government Printing Office.......................................    43
    Congressional Budget Office......................................    49
    Office of Compliance.............................................    52

                             Friday, March 30, 2007

    U.S. Senate: Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper.....................    79
    United States Capitol Police.....................................   105

                             Thursday, May 3, 2007

    U.S. Senate: Office of the Secretary.............................   129
    Library of Congress..............................................   203

             LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008

                                  ----------

                             FRIDAY, MARCH 2, 2007

                                           U.S. Senate,
               Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The subcommittee met at 10:30 a.m., in room SD-138, Dirksen
    Senate Office Building, Hon. Mary L. Landrieu (chairman)
    presiding.
        Present: Senators Landrieu and Allard.

                            ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL

    STATEMENT OF STEPHEN AYERS, ACTING ARCHITECT OF THE
                CAPITOL

                 opening statement of senator mary l. landrieu

        Senator Landrieu. Good morning. Thank you all for attending
    this morning's hearing. I'm pleased to be chairing my first
    Legislative Branch Subcommittee meeting and happy to have the
    good support of the staff behind me to prepare for the meeting
    and to, hopefully, get us off on the right foot.
        I look forward to working with Senator Allard, who will be
    here in just a minute. As you all know, we had two votes this
    morning, which is why the meeting had to be delayed.
        We meet today to take testimony on the fiscal year 2008
    budget request for the Architect of the Capitol (AOC). I want
    to welcome Stephen Ayers, Acting Architect of the Capitol.
        Mr. Ayers. Good morning.
        Senator Landrieu. Thank you for the great tour that you
    provided for me, my staff and members of my family last week at
    the new visitor center, which is still under construction. As
    we all know, there are many decisions still pending on this
    project but it is really a magnificent space.

                          capitol visitor center tour

        I appreciate your commitment to this organization and wish
    you good luck in this endeavor, as the members of the selection
    commission search for a candidate to serve as the next
    Architect of the Capitol.
        I want to start again by also thanking Tom Fontana and
    Shalley Kim of your staff for joining us on that tour. It was
    my first time down to the visitor center and I must say, I was
    more than impressed. I had heard a lot of wonderful things
    about the project and some critical things, of course, but I
    for one was not prepared for the grandeur and magnificence of
    the center. I think it will be an excellent addition to this
    historical Capitol Building, a symbol of democracy and an
    expression of the importance that we put on the work of the
    people, which is what this Capitol is about, not just for those
    of us that work here every day, but this Capitol expresses both
    in its architecture and in the work that goes on in this
    Capitol and its surrounding buildings, the great aspirations of
    the greatest democracy in the world.
        I'm looking forward to sharing this building with my other
    colleagues. I have no doubt that once this facility opens, it
    will be a tremendous source of pride to all who visit here and
    will increase the numbers of people who visit here and more
    importantly than the numbers, the quality of the visits of the
    people, both adults and children, who tromp through this
    Capitol regularly in all 12 months.

                      budget increases and project delays

        The Architect's budget request is $482 million, an increase
    of $82 million or 20 percent. There are a number of rather
    large items in your request, such as an additional $20 million
    for the visitor center, $25 million for repairs of the utility
    tunnels, and $87 million for various repairs to the Senate
    Office Building.
        When you testified last month, you announced that the
    schedule had slipped again so I hope you will let this
    subcommittee know how this might affect, either positively or
    negatively, your budget submission.
        Finally, before you begin your statement, I want to thank
    your entire staff for their hard work in maintaining the
    Capitol complex on a daily basis. It's a job larger than most
    people understand and I particularly want to thank Marvin
    Simpson of your staff for the assistance he has provided to me
    over many years since I came to Capitol Hill. He and the others
    on your staff are true professionals and I really appreciate
    their help.
        When Senator Allard gets here, I will ask him for his
    opening statement but why don't you go ahead and proceed,
    Stephen.

                       opening statement of stephen ayers

        Mr. Ayers. Thank you, Madame Chairman and thank you for
    this opportunity to testify today regarding our fiscal year
    2008 budget request.
        Since 1793, the AOC has been responsible for construction,
    maintenance, and preservation of the Capitol Building and the
    growing and evolving Capitol complex. The AOC has evolved as
    well. We have become more strategic in our thinking, more
    transparent in our processes, and more accountable to our
    clients.

                             performance management

        As you know, I recently assumed the duties of Acting
    Architect of the Capitol following the retirement of Alan
    Hantman. I've been working closely with the AOC team to ensure
    a smooth transition over the past few months. We have a new
    senior leadership team in place, made up of experienced,
    senior-level managers. We also have a number of new tools at
    our disposal to help set goals, manage projects, and plan for
    the long-term needs of the Capitol complex.
        Our most important tool is our strategic plan. In January,
    we launched our strategic plan for fiscal years 2007 through
    2011, a performance-based plan, which will help us continually
    enhance the effectiveness in carrying out our mission.
        As a result of these tools, we've had a number of successes
    in recent years. For example, we recently closed out 67 percent
    of the Government Accountability Office's (GAO) general
    management recommendations. We've improved our cost accounting
    procedures and internal controls and we received our third
    annual clean financial audit opinion from an independent
    auditing firm.
        Last year, we reduced energy consumption by nearly 6
    percent over the 2003 baseline, representing a 3.8-percent
    increase over our goal. Most importantly, we've improved our
    delivery of services to our clients, as demonstrated by our
    annual building services customer satisfaction survey. Since
    our 2002 baseline survey was conducted, we've steadily received
    high marks from our clients in areas such as maintenance,
    services provided by our AOC shops, and overall responsiveness.

                        annual operating budget request

        Madam Chairman, we've developed this budget through a
    deliberate planning process. We've reviewed many operating and
    capital project requests and made some difficult choices in our
    effort to be good stewards of the Capitol complex and to
    practice fiscal responsibility.
        Our 2008 annual operating budget request for $341 million
    is in support of our ongoing efforts to be more strategic and
    accountable, as well as other necessary support programs
    including implementation of an emergency preparedness program,
    purchasing utilities, procuring, operating and maintaining
    relevant information technology systems to support them,
    continuing to provide advanced training opportunities for our
    employees, and anticipating the operating costs of the Capitol
    Visitor Center (CVC).
        The second component of our budget for fiscal year 2008 is
    $131 million for capital projects. Chief among our
    responsibilities is maintaining, preserving, and upgrading the
    national treasures entrusted to our care. These include the
    facilities, grounds, artwork, and other assets, determining
    which work is done first and where our limited resources are
    best used involves a deliberate and multiyear planning
    approach.
        A vital tool we rely on during this process is our facility
    condition assessments. They help us prioritize our projects
    based on an objective set of criteria that allow us to evaluate
    the relative merits of each of these projects. Once a condition
    assessment is complete, this information is rolled into a 5-
    year capital improvement plan. This plan is used to evaluate
    projects based on a set of pre-established criteria, including
    fire and life safety, code compliance, historic preservation,
    economics, life cycle cost considerations, physical security,
    and energy efficiency.
        These projects are further evaluated based on the condition
    of the facilities and their components and the urgency in
    correcting the identified deficiencies.

                          capitol complex master plan

        Looking further down the road, we're also developing a
    Capitol complex master plan, which requires executing necessary
    deferred maintenance and renewal work to keep existing
    facilities functioning while planning for major building
    renewals in the future. The master plan and individual
    jurisdiction plans seek to address these growing problems
    through a flexible investment strategy incorporating re-
    investment and new construction.
        Key capital projects in our 2008 request include utility
    tunnel repairs, a Dirksen infrastructure project, and smoke
    detector upgrades in the John Adams Building. In addition to
    these new capital projects, we are committed to completing some
    long-term projects, specifically the Capitol Visitor Center and
    the utility tunnel repairs.
        Madam Chairman, we appreciate the interest you've taken in
    the CVC project and we appreciate your participation on the
    tour we conducted last week. Our 2008 request includes $20
    million for the CVC to cover potential sequence 2 to delay
    costs, CVC administration costs, construction management fees,
    and potential change order funding. The latest billing
    statements show that we are now 91 percent complete and major
    construction activities will begin to wind down in the next few
    months. The tasks left to do largely involve aesthetics and
    functionality of the space.

                              schedule adjustments

        Although we are continuing to make progress, the contractor
    continues to miss milestones developed by the contractor to
    prioritize the work needing to be done. The fact that a
    significant number of milestones were missed, in my mind,
    indicates that the overall schedule is not realistic, given the
    risks and uncertainties associated with the integration of fire
    and security systems and the building systems in general. The
    project team has been working aggressively to mitigate risks
    but it would be prudent to factor these risks and contingencies
    into the schedule.
        Specifically, these risks include commissioning of building
    systems and the overall acceptance and testing of the fire and
    life safety systems. After carefully evaluating past contractor
    performance schedules and the nature of the issues that remain,
    I have directed the project team to evaluate these potential
    risks into the current schedule to determine an adjusted
    completion date, since these risks are not in the current
    schedule.
        When we finish that assessment, we will notify the
    subcommittee as to our conclusions and recommendations. At this
    time, due to these outstanding factors, in my opinion, a
    certificate of occupancy for the Capitol Visitor Center will
    likely occur in the spring of 2008.

                       capitol visitor center operations

        Madam Chairman, at this time, I would like to briefly
    update you and the subcommittee on the CVC construction
    progress made over the last few months. Finishes are now being
    put in place in both the visitor center and House and Senate
    expansion spaces. In the great hall, all of the floor and wall
    stone is complete. Masons are finishing their last remaining
    stonework on the water features at the base of the two grand
    staircases. In the two orientation theatres, carpet and chair
    installation is complete. Workers are now completing the
    detailing on the millwork and fabric wall panels.

                                exhibition hall

        Work continues in the exhibition hall as workers continue
    to install glass floor panels around the wall of aspirations.
    All four escalator units have been set in place in the east
    front transition zone. With the escalators now in place, masons
    have resumed floor stone installation in the upper level lobby.

                            east front rotunda level

        At the Rotunda level of the east front, in the past week,
    the contractor has tasked five crews with setting sandstone
    blocks to the interior walls. These teams are now setting 80
    stones per day, exceeding our daily goal of 70 stones per day
    on the east front.
        Outside, all of the stone is complete along the curving
    walls, along the main entrance ramps and the foundations for
    light poles are now being installed. As the weather gets
    warmer, landscaping activities will begin in earnest, to
    include the planting of 53 new trees.

                     capitol visitor center management team

        In conclusion, Madam Chairman, the AOC has a rich history
    since the cornerstone of the Capitol was laid in 1793. We have
    become more strategic, transparent, and accountable. We've
    developed our 2008 budget request through a deliberate planning
    process. We've reviewed our priority list and made some
    difficult choices to be good stewards. We've accomplished much
    and experienced numerous successes in the last year, and these
    achievements are directly attributed to the dedicated,
    professional individuals that make up the AOC team.

                               prepared statement

        In my role as Acting Architect, I'm honored and privileged
    to work along side them. Because of their efforts and
    commitment to excellence, we will continue to provide
    exceptional service to the Congress and the visiting public. We
    greatly appreciate the subcommittee's support and will
    continually work to achieve our goals to transform the agency
    to be more strategic and accountable.
        That concludes my statement. I'm happy to answer any
    questions you may have.
        [The statement follows:]

                     Prepared Statement of Stephen T. Ayers

        Madam Chairman, Senator Allard, and members of the subcommittee,
    thank you for this opportunity to testify today regarding the fiscal
    year 2008 budget request for the Office of the Architect of the Capitol
    (AOC).
        Since 1793, the Office of the Architect of the Capitol has been
    responsible for the construction, maintenance, and preservation of the
    Capitol Building and the growing and evolving Capitol complex. The AOC
    has grown and evolved as well, particularly over the past several
    years. We have become more strategic in our thinking, more transparent
    in our processes, and more accountable to our clients.
        As you know, I recently assumed the duties of Acting Architect of
    the Capitol following the retirement of Alan Hantman on February 4. I
    have been working closely with Mr. Hantman and the rest of the AOC team
    to ensure a smooth transition over the past few months.
        In addition to my taking on the role of Acting Architect, we have a
    new senior leadership team in place made up of experienced, senior-
    level managers with diverse skill sets, including the Chief
    Administrative Officer; Chief Financial Officer; Director of
    Congressional and External Relations; the Director of Planning and
    Project Management; and several others. They have brought new ideas and
    practices to the table and are committed to the continued
    transformation of the agency. In addition to these new ideas, we have a
    number of new tools at our disposal to use to help set goals, manage
    projects, and plan for the long-term needs of the Capitol complex and
    our clients.
        Our first and most important tool is our Strategic and Performance
    Plan. In 2003, we implemented our first Strategic Plan to become more
    strategic, transparent, and accountable. It was the blueprint we used
    in our efforts to deliver exceptional services to Congress and the
    visiting public. Throughout 2006, as one of my responsibilities as
    chief operating officer, our team worked to revise our Strategic Plan
    to reflect our priorities and goals for the next 5 years. In January,
    we launched our second, updated Strategic Plan for fiscal years 2007-
    2011--a performance-based plan--which will help us to continually
    enhance our effectiveness in carrying out our mission. By setting
    goals, objectives, and measurable milestones we can better focus our
    efforts, set priorities, allocate resources, and facilitate
    decisionmaking throughout our organization.
        As a result of these new tools and processes, we have achieved a
    number of successes over the past year. For example, we recently closed
    out 67 percent of the Government Accountability Office's general
    management recommendations and we are on our way to closing out others
    over the next few months. We have improved our cost accounting
    procedures and internal controls and have seen our efforts pay off when
    we recently received our third-consecutive clean financial audit
    opinion from independent auditors. Last winter, we increased our
    efforts to improve energy efficiency Capitol Hill-wide. Following the
    passage of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, and thanks to the continued
    cooperation of congressional offices and hard work of AOC staff, last
    year we reduced energy consumption by nearly 6 percent over the 2003
    baseline, exceeding the fiscal year 2006 goal by 3.8 percent.
        Internally, we have been working to foster a results-oriented
    workplace and encourage communication and teamwork throughout the
    agency. This involves holding regular staff or shop meetings,
    conducting annual town hall meetings with all AOC employees to
    encourage open dialogues and feedback, and providing a variety of
    training opportunities. These efforts have also borne fruit, for
    example, our injury and illness rate decreased for the sixth year in a
    row. We dropped to 4.88 cases per 100 employees in fiscal year 2006
    from a high of 17.9 in fiscal year 2000.
        To establish greater accountability throughout the organization, we
    created a ``dashboard'' that summarizes AOC's performance. It contains
    a series of tactical or operational indicators that are tracked on a
    monthly basis and are for use by the chief operating officer and
    architect as well as superintendents and division heads to monitor the
    AOC's performance in several key areas. The dashboard also includes
    performance measures for each strategic goal area.
        In addition, 2 years ago we re-organized and established the
    Planning and Project Management Division to align project management
    staff and resources with our mission-critical goals and to consolidate
    project and construction management functions. This created a single
    point of responsibility for every project and provides ``cradle-to-
    grave'' oversight. We implemented new processes designed to improve
    project tracking and reporting, including developing written procedures
    and manuals to follow throughout every step of the design, engineering,
    and construction stages of a project. We have modeled our work on
    industry's best practices and have joined a variety of professional
    organizations to keep up to date on the latest information and
    practices. Today, our design and construction teams interact daily by
    holding a variety of briefings and meetings to share experiences and
    increase communication to ensure that projects are done well, are done
    on time, and done within budget.
        Most importantly, we have improved our delivery of services to our
    clients as demonstrated by our annual Building Services Customer
    Satisfaction surveys. Since our baseline survey was conducted in 2002,
    we have steadily received high marks from our clients on areas such as
    maintenance, services provided by AOC shops, and overall responsiveness
    to their needs.
        We have developed this budget through a deliberate planning
    process. We reviewed many operating and capital project requests and
    made some difficult choices in our efforts to be good stewards of the
    Capitol complex and practice fiscal responsibility.
        The AOC's total budget request for fiscal year 2008 is $481.7
    million ($431 million without items specific to the House). A good
    portion of the fiscal year 2008 increase is the result of using fiscal
    year 2006 levels as the baseline in this budget request. For example, 2
    years worth of pay raises for our employees are included, as well as 2
    years of inflation on the other goods and services we procure. In
    addition, most of the increase in utilities is the result of using the
    fiscal year 2006 appropriation value for the Capitol Power Plant,
    before the impact of the 2006 reprogramming and the adjustment made by
    the House and Senate appropriators in our fiscal year 2007 continuing
    resolution levels.
    Annual Operating Budget Request
        Our fiscal year 2008 annual operating budget request for $341.6
    million is to support our on-going efforts to be a strategic and
    accountable organization as well as support other necessary programs
    including the implementation of a new emergency preparedness program;
    purchasing utilities; procuring, operating, and maintaining relevant
    information technologies and the systems to support them; continuing to
    provide advanced training opportunities for employees, and anticipating
    operating costs of the Capitol Visitor Center (CVC) until the
    governance issue is determined.
        Specifically, the annual operating request would provide funding
    for minimal operational start-up costs, exhibits, gift shops,
    telecommunications, and information technology infrastructure support.
    It also covers the increased payroll costs resulting from the opening
    of the CVC and the need to hire additional full-time staff to support
    operations and maintenance functions.
        This request also would provide funding for the purchasing of
    supplies required for installation, conservation, and maintenance of
    the exhibits, rotation and preparation of documents, and conservation
    and artifact insurance required for those exhibits on loan to the CVC.
        We are also looking to increase our investment in information
    technology (IT) in fiscal year 2008 to re-establish base resources that
    have been reallocated to cover other budget shortfalls in past years.
    With today's ever-changing technologies, we are looking to protect our
    IT systems by installing the latest technology security programs,
    prepare for future technological needs, and install automated systems
    to include the Financial Management System, Human Resources Management
    System, and Computer-Aided Facility Management System.
    Capital Project Budget Request
        The second component of our fiscal year 2008 budget request is
    $131.1 million for capital projects. Chief among our responsibilities
    is maintaining, preserving, and upgrading the national treasures
    entrusted to our care by Congress. This includes the facilities,
    grounds, art work, and other assets. Determining which work is done
    first and where our limited resources are best used involves a
    deliberate approach and multi-year project planning.
        A vital tool that we rely on during this process is our Facility
    Condition Assessments (FCAs). An independent contractor, using common
    industry standards, has been conducting FCAs throughout the Capitol
    complex since 2004. The FCAs help us to prioritize our projects based
    on a set of objective criteria that allow us to evaluate the relative
    merits of each of these projects. FCAs provide us with a method for
    measuring the current condition of all facilities in a uniform way to
    assess how much work is necessary to maintain or upgrade their
    conditions to acceptable levels to support organizational missions and
    help to determine when this work should occur.
        It is important to try to meet the infrastructure needs for these
    facilities within appropriate timeframes in order to prevent their
    conditions from deteriorating further, resulting in the costs to
    correct these deficiencies to rise. Therefore, it is key to look at a
    multi-year, fiscally-responsible, holistic plan to attend to these
    issues. Once an FCA is completed on all the facilities, this
    information is rolled into a 5-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). The
    CIP is used to evaluate projects based on a set of pre-established
    criteria. These criteria include whether the work addresses fire and
    life-safety issues; code compliance; preservation of historic or legacy
    elements; economics and life cycle cost considerations, physical
    security and other considerations, such as environmental and energy
    efficiency. The projects are further evaluated based on the conditions
    of the facilities and their components, and the urgency in correcting
    the deficiencies.
        Looking even farther down the road, we are also developing the
    Capitol Complex Master Plan (CCMP) which requires executing necessary
    deferred maintenance and renewal work to keep existing facilities
    functioning while planning for major renewal projects. The CCMP and
    individual Jurisdiction Plans seek to address these growing problems
    through a flexible investment strategy incorporating reinvestment and
    new construction. Each Jurisdiction Plan is being evaluated to ensure
    sequencing of short- and long-term priority work is properly expedited
    and aligned to ensure successful execution and avoid duplication of
    efforts. Ultimately, the CCMP will establish a framework that will help
    the AOC to prioritize the maintenance, renovation, and construction of
    facilities over the next 5, 10, and 20 years while allowing for prudent
    budgeting of the costs for necessary upkeep and construction.
        Using the CIP process, we are able to comparatively vet the
    projects to ensure that the most urgent get addressed most quickly.
    Setting these priorities and setting limits resulted in some projects
    not rising to the top of the list based on the objective criteria used
    as part of the CIP process. It is not that these projects are not
    important. They are all needed and are mission critical, but the
    fiscally responsible thing to do is address the urgent needs first.
    This multi-step methodology was used to produce the project priority
    list included in our fiscal year 2008 budget request submitted for the
    subcommittee's consideration.
        As in previous budgets, our focus is on ensuring that fire and
    life-safety deficiencies are corrected and that significant resources
    are devoted to protecting the people who work and visit the Capitol
    complex. Safety is one of the AOC's top priorities.
        Key capital projects included in the AOC's fiscal year 2008 budget
    request are:
      --utility tunnel repairs and improvements ($24.8 million). The multi-
            year project addresses safety issues in the utility tunnels and
            improves conditions relating to egress, ventilation,
            communications, and asbestos.
      --Infrastructure improvements in the Dirksen Senate Office Building
            ($8 million). Second phase of a three-phase project to replace
            aged and deteriorated air handling units to maintain
            ventilation and occupant comfort.
      --Emergency lighting upgrades ($4.4 million). Correct emergency
            lighting deficiencies in the Rayburn House Office Building by
            modernizing existing systems.
      --Smoke detector upgrades ($6.5 million). Upgrade the LOC's John
            Adams Building to current code requirements for smoke detection
            systems.
        In addition to these new capital projects, we are committed to
    completing some long-term projects, specifically the Capitol Visitor
    Center (CVC) and repairing the utility tunnels.
    Capitol Visitor Center Budget Request and Project Update
        Our fiscal year 2008 budget request for the CVC includes $20
    million to cover potential Sequence 2 delay costs, CVC administration
    costs, construction management fees, and potential additional change
    orders.
        The latest billing statements and schedule show that the project is
    91 percent complete. Major construction activities will begin to wind
    down over the next few months. The tasks now left to do largely involve
    the aesthetics and functionality of the space such as painting and
    installation of carpet, lighting fixtures, hand railings, decorative
    woodwork, as well as the tie-in of building systems.
        Although we are continuing to make progress, the contractor
    continues to miss scheduled activities or ``milestones''--interim
    target dates from the schedule developed by the contractor to
    prioritize work needing to be done to complete the project. The fact
    that a significant number of milestones were missed, in my mind, serves
    as an indicator that the overall schedule is not realistic given the
    risks and uncertainty associated with the integration of the fire and
    security systems and the building systems. The project team has been
    working aggressively to mitigate several risks, but it would be prudent
    to factor these risks and contingencies into the schedule.
    Specifically, they are (1) commissioning of building systems, and (2)
    acceptance testing of fire, security, and life-safety systems to
    include testing to ensure the building systems and fire and life-safety
    systems are integrated and work together properly.
        After carefully evaluating past contractor performance, schedules,
    and the nature of issues that remain, I directed the project team to
    evaluate the potential risks to the current schedule to determine an
    adjusted completion date since the two risks I discussed were not built
    into the current schedule or into the fire and life-safety acceptance
    testing plan. When we finish this assessment, we will notify the
    subcommittee as to our conclusions and our recommendations. At this
    time, due to the outstanding factors we are dealing with, in my opinion
    the certificate of occupancy will likely occur in spring 2008.
        Madam Chairman, at this time, I would like to briefly update the
    subcommittee on the construction progress that we have made over the
    past few months on the CVC.
        Work is ongoing to put the finishes in place in both the Visitor
    Center and House and Senate expansion spaces. In the Great Hall, all of
    the floor and wall stone is complete. Masons are finishing the last
    remaining stonework in the water fountains at the base of the
    staircases.
        In the two orientation theaters, carpet and chair installation is
    complete. Workers are completing the detailing on the millwork and
    fabric wall panels. Many of the wall lighting and speaker elements have
    been installed and crews are now putting in the bronze railings. Work
    continues in the Exhibition Hall as workers continue to install glass
    floor panels around the Wall of Aspirations.
        In the East Front transition zone, all four escalator units have
    been set into place alongside the central stair connecting the CVC to
    the Capitol. The escalators had occupied floor space in the upper level
    lobby between the two orientation theaters. With this space now clear,
    masons have resumed floor stone installation at this location and will
    soon complete this last remaining major block of floor space in the
    CVC.
        At the Rotunda level of the East Front, in the past week, the
    contractor has tasked five crews with setting the sandstone blocks to
    the interior walls. The teams are setting approximately 80 stones per
    day, exceeding the daily goal of setting 70 stones in the East Front.
        Outside, almost all of the stone is complete along the curving
    walls along the main entrance ramps and the foundations for light poles
    are being installed. As the weather gets warmer, landscaping activities
    will begin in earnest, including the planting of 53 new trees.
        Madam Chairman, the Office of the Architect has had a rich history
    since the cornerstone of the Capitol was laid in 1793. Over the years,
    the AOC has grown and evolved much like the complex which we maintain
    and preserve. As I noted previously, we have become more strategic in
    our thinking, more transparent in our processes, and more accountable
    to our clients.
        We have developed our fiscal year 2008 budget request through a
    deliberate planning process. We reviewed our priority list and made
    some difficult choices in our efforts to be good stewards of the
    Capitol complex and practice fiscal responsibility. Using tools we
    developed based on industry's best practices, we have determined which
    projects are done first and where our resources are best used.
        As I discussed earlier, as a result of putting plans into place,
    creating new and innovative tools and processes, and setting
    priorities, we have accomplished much and experienced numerous
    successes. These achievements can be directly attributed to the
    dedicated, professional individuals that make up the AOC team. In my
    role as Acting Architect, I am honored and privileged to work along
    side them. Because of their efforts and commitment to excellence, we
    continue to provide exceptional service to Congress and the visiting
    public.
        We greatly appreciate this subcommittee's support as we continually
    work to achieve our goals and transform our Agency into a results-
    oriented workplace. Madam Chairman, once again, thank you for this
    opportunity to testify today. I'd be happy to answer any questions you
    might have.

                               ADDITIONAL FUNDING

        Senator Landrieu. Thank you for that excellent although
    brief statement. Can you be as specific as possible about any
    additional funding that your office may need in 2007 or 2008,
    based on the completion estimates of the visitor center? Have
    you submitted that in your testimony this morning any
    additional funding that might be necessary?
        Mr. Ayers. We don't believe that additional funding is
    necessary in 2007. I think the continuing resolution, the way
    it was structured, gave us the necessary flexibility to carry
    us through 2007. In addition, we've requested $20 million in
    our 2008 request. We believe that's sufficient to carry us
    through 2008.

                       CAPITOL VISITOR CENTER GOVERNANCE

        Senator Landrieu. Thank you. I understand that Bob Hixon,
    the Project Executive, is planning to retire at the end of the
    month. Do you have plans to provide comparable leadership at
    this critical stage or could you talk for a moment about that?
        Mr. Ayers. Yes, ma'am. Mr. Hixon is retiring. We do
    continue to twist his arm but he is holding steady at the
    moment. We developed a transition plan several months ago and
    we'll be moving Doug Jacobs, our current Project Design
    Manager, into the Project Executive role. Doug has been on the
    project for nearly 7 years and is well respected throughout the
    Congress and is well versed in the in's and out's of the
    project. We're comfortable and confident that his leadership
    skills will bring it to conclusion.

                          FIRE ALARMS AND HVAC SYSTEMS

        Senator Landrieu. I understand that GAO has expressed
    concerns about the fire alarms and heating, ventilation and
    air-conditioning systems and I understand there will be several
    months of actually testing these systems, which is contributing
    to the extension of the opening. And you mentioned it briefly
    in your opening statement but could you add a few thoughts
    about where we are in terms of the progress we are making on
    this particular aspect of the building?
        Mr. Ayers. Yes, ma'am. We believe most of the delay for the
    fire alarm systems are behind us now, with essentially all of
    our submittals for the fire alarm system approved or in the
    approval process. So work is ongoing on the installation of the
    fire alarm system in earnest. It has contributed to significant
    delay thus far. There is risk that remains as, once it's
    installed, we have to pretest it and then go through an
    extensive acceptance testing process to ensure it works as it
    is designed. There is risk remaining in that and we're working
    now to accommodate that risk in the construction schedule.

                       FIRE ALARMS SYSTEM DIFFERENTIATION

        Senator Landrieu. For the lay people among us, can you
    explain the difference between the fire alarm system in the
    visitor center and the current fire alarm system in the Capitol
    Building itself? Are we trying to have the same system or is
    this one far superior to what is in the current building?
        Mr. Ayers. This system is far more superior and more
    sophisticated than the current system in the Capitol Building,
    absolutely, because the CVC is a below-ground, assembly
    facility. It involves a significant matrix that includes the
    control of doors and operating equipment and various other
    security features are all tied into the fire alarm system that
    makes it a little more unique than the system we currently have
    in the Capitol Building.
        Senator Landrieu. And there will be ways, as we're testing
    this, to make sure that at the end, it will actually work? So
    you can see, stage by stage, if something needs to be fixed?
    Because I've seen these design systems in other aspects of our
    Government and the theory of the design is terrific but when
    you get down to actually making it work, you end up producing
    something that actually fails to work appropriately. We would
    not want that to happen in this center.
        Mr. Ayers. Yes, ma'am, you're absolutely right. The
    critical phase of that is the final acceptance testing of all
    of these fire alarm systems. That is where it is put through
    its paces and all of these individual systems are tested
    together in that final stage, to be sure that it does work. We
    expect that process to take at least 6 months, so it's a very
    extensive testing program to validate that it works as
    designed.

                           LIBRARY OF CONGRESS TUNNEL

        Senator Landrieu. Okay. So while we're anxious to get
    things done, we don't want to short circuit this testing
    period, which I think is important for the complexity of the
    system. The Library of Congress--the status of the work on the
    Library of Congress tunnel and the associated connection of the
    Jefferson Building--have delays been encountered? If so, why
    and what steps have been taken to ensure the cost of all the
    work will not exceed the statutory $10 million limit?
        Mr. Ayers. We're comfortable with that at the moment. We
    believe we'll be $200,000 or $300,000 below that requirement. I
    think the work is now 65 or 68 percent complete, so the
    unforeseen site conditions are out of the way. We have a clear
    understanding of the work that remains and that work is behind
    schedule by a number of months. We do believe it will be
    finished in the May or early June timeframe. We're watching
    that very closely. You may have heard us talk about our action
    plan. The work that is going on in the tunnel as well as the
    space in the Jefferson Building are all part of the action
    plan. We look at that schedule very carefully in a separate
    schedule meeting on that particular piece of the work alone so
    we understand that there is some risk there, but we're steadily
    focused on it and we're comfortable that we'll be able to
    complete it under the $10 million cap.

                              VISITOR TRAFFIC FLOW

        Senator Landrieu. Well, one of the exciting things about
    the expansion, when I made the tour, was thinking about the
    improvement in the quality of the tour for our visitors and our
    citizens. To be able to move freely between the Capitol and the
    Library of Congress, which I think is one of the most beautiful
    buildings in the whole complex and actually under visited
    because there is no system for visitors to access it easily. So
    I'm very excited about this. And, I think the way that you
    indicated how people will flow from one part of the Capitol,
    through the visitor center, and to the Library of Congress, I
    think it will help encourage visitors to the Library of
    Congress. Not that it does not have a very high profile among
    visitors generally, but this will really raise its profile,
    because it's truly an extraordinary building on its own.

                          FORT MEADE LOGISTICS CENTER

        The Library of Congress is requesting $44 million in the
    2008 budget for a logistics center at Fort Meade. I understand
    that that is not included in your priority of requests at this
    time. Could you comment about that? In your view, it is a high,
    medium, or low priority and what are your views about the needs
    for additional storage?
        Mr. Ayers. I am very familiar with that project, as I was
    previously the superintendent for the Library buildings and
    grounds, so I was intimately involved in its development. There
    is no question it is an important project, one that the Library
    of Congress thinks is an immediate need. From our perspective,
    when it shook out in the overall priorities, throughout the
    Capitol complex, it did not make what we thought was a
    reasonable budget request.

                      CAPITOL POLICE CONSTRUCTION REQUEST

        Senator Landrieu. I'm looking forward to hearing a bit more
    from the Capitol Police about this and I understand that you
    have to prioritize and make those decisions. Do you support the
    Capitol Police request for construction that is included in
    this budget? Could you comment about the Capitol Police
    construction request?
        Mr. Ayers. Yes, ma'am. We have a couple of initiatives on
    the capital side for the Capitol Police. One is the vehicle
    barriers on Independence Avenue. They have expressed that
    that's an important matter and we do have that in our budget.
    In addition, we have our standard Capitol buildings and grounds
    request, including a minor construction component that we
    believe will meet the needs of the Capitol Police. We do work
    and partner with them very closely in our budget development.

                   CAPITOL COMPLEX MASTER PLAN REVIEW PROCESS

        Senator Landrieu. Who approves the Architect's master plan
    and could you review, from your perspective, the role of this
    subcommittee and the Senate Rules Committee, relative to your
    master planning process?
        Mr. Ayers. Yes, ma'am. We believe ultimately that the
    Capitol complex master plan should be approved by the
    leadership of the Congress. Certainly this subcommittee and the
    Rules Committee need to play an integral part in the
    development of that plan but from our perspective, the plan
    will be much more significant once it is finally approved by
    the leadership of the Congress.
        Senator Landrieu. I have been joined by Senator Allard, who
    served as chair of this committee for many years. So I would
    like to turn to him right now and I will come back to my
    questions. I'll ask Senator Allard if he has an opening
    statement and I thank you for your leadership and your guidance
    through the expansion of--one of the largest expansions of the
    Capitol in the Capitol's history, if not the largest.

                   OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR WAYNE ALLARD

        Senator Allard. Well, thank you, Senator Landrieu and I
    look forward to working with you over the next couple years.
    We're going to continue to have some challenges, I can see that
    already and I think you'll be a very able chairperson.
        Also, before we make an opening statement, I would like to
    recognize Bob Hixon. You know, Bob Hixon has graciously been
    showing up at my hearings for 2 years. We've kept him busy. He
    has testified many times before this subcommittee and it's my
    understanding that this could be his last Senate subcommittee
    hearing. I hear a sigh of relief when I mention that.
        I understand Bob is retiring March 31 and so I wanted to
    recognize him in a public way. He has been a driving force on
    the CVC project. As Project Executive, he has tackled many of
    the challenges in making it a reality. Bob has regularly
    juggled thousands of tasks associated with the project and he's
    done it very well and he has provided exceptional service, I
    think, to the Architect of the Capitol and to the Congress.
    He's had a long, successful Government career with the majority
    of his career spent at the General Services Administration,
    where he served for several years as Director for the Center
    for Construction Project Management. So we appreciate Bob's
    commitment to the CVC project and his leadership. He's been a
    consummate professional, in my view, through his service. So
    thank you, Bob.
        Senator Landrieu. Bob, why don't you stand up and we'll
    give you a round of applause?
        Senator Allard. Well, thank you, Madam Chairman and
    congratulations again on your chairmanship for this
    subcommittee. Some members of our committee view this as the
    least desirable post but I believe it is one of the most
    important, frankly and I think we need to take care of our
    backyard. You and I have that responsibility, ensuring that the
    legislative branch is positioned, through adequate funding, to
    fulfill its constitutional duties. I think it is very critical
    and I look forward to working with you.
        Mr. Ayers, it's good to see you here. This is your first
    hearing before this subcommittee as the Acting Architect.
    You're wearing two hats, I understand, right now and I don't
    know how you keep up with that kind of a schedule because those
    two positions are demanding.
        Last year, you came before us as the Acting Chief Operating
    Officer. You've held many positions at AOC just within the past
    several years. Superintendent of the Library buildings and
    grounds, Deputy Superintendent of the Senate office buildings,
    before becoming the Chief Operating Officer. I believe you've
    done a good job and I wish you the best as the Acting
    Architect.
        Mr. Ayers. Thank you, sir.

                         LEGISLATIVE BRANCH COMPLIANCE

        Senator Allard. Madam Chairman, one of the initiatives I
    pursued as chairman of this subcommittee was to bring the
    legislative branch into compliance with the spirit and intent
    of the Government Performance and Result Act. This act
    encourages greater effectiveness, efficiency, and
    accountability in the Federal Government. It requires agencies
    to set goals and use meaningful measures for management and
    budgeting. While the legislative branch is not statutorily
    required to do so, we require that of all other branches
    outside the legislative branch. I believe the legislative
    branch should be held to the same standards. We shouldn't have
    two sets of standards. I feel strongly about that so you can
    expect me to bring up how it is that we're managing and are we
    setting goals and objectives and are we meeting those, to be
    held accountable for our actions.
        And I will lend my support to programs that have proven to
    be effective by meeting or exceeding those performance goals.

                             OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT

        I was pleased to see in your written testimony, Mr. Ayers,
    the discussion about the importance of setting goals,
    objectives, and measurable milestones and the need to establish
    greater accountability within the agency. There is more work
    that needs to be done in this area. The AOC has made progress
    over the past several years in using performance measures and
    developing budgets based on objective criteria, particularly
    through the capital improvement plan.
        Finally, I'd like to thank the AOC and GAO for providing
    the Lessons Learned report on the Capitol Visitor Center
    construction project on time and with jointly agreed upon
    recommendations from the two agencies. I believe this was a
    very useful exercise. It should keep the Architect of the
    Capitol from repeating problems it has experienced on the
    Capitol Visitor Center project in future construction projects.
    From what I saw from the wish list that came out of the House
    side, there is going to be major construction going on around
    here for some time and I hope we can implement those lessons
    learned.
        This report points out the need for better methods for
    incentives for contractor performance, improved coordination
    and communication, maintaining a solid project schedule, and
    clarifying the role of the construction management contractor.
        Madam Chairman, this concludes my statement. What time
    would you like to wind up? I have a lot of questions. We may
    not have time to address of all them and I would submit some of
    those but I have them prioritized and I'll ask them in their
    order, depending on how much time I may have.
        Senator Landrieu. I think we have sufficient time, you may
    take 15 minutes for questions if that is good. If not, I will
    be happy to have you submit those for the record.
        Senator Allard. Very good.
        Senator Landrieu. Would you like to ask a few now? Go right
    ahead.
        Senator Allard. Let me take a few. I will, Madam Chairman,
    if you don't mind.

                                UTILITY TUNNELS

        I want to first discuss the utility tunnels. It has been
    over 1 year since the Office of Compliance filed a complaint
    for the AOC's failure to remedy safety concerns in the utility
    tunnels. Congress approved $27.6 million in emergency
    supplemental funding last year to begin to remediate these
    problems. What has been accomplished in the last year on the
    remediation of the tunnel problems? I believe some of the
    tunnels that we thought were the greatest risk perhaps aren't
    as great as a risk and some of the tunnels we thought were
    relatively safe aren't as safe as we assumed. So I think there
    has been some readjustment on priorities and I wish you would
    address that.
        Mr. Ayers. Yes, sir. Thank you. In terms of the emergency
    supplemental that the subcommittee was able to provide, we have
    now obligated nearly $25 million to make headway on the repairs
    to the utility tunnels. We have completed, as of the end of
    December, I think, December 29, the comprehensive facility
    condition assessment of all of the walkable tunnels. That's the
    document that outlines exactly what the problems are and
    exactly what needs to be completed. As the result of that, we
    were able to award much of that emergency supplemental money.

                          TUNNEL CONDITION ASSESSMENT

        There are some things that have changed since our initial
    look in April 2006. Chief among them are the condition of the
    ``Y'' tunnel versus the condition of the ``R'' tunnel. Clearly,
    the condition assessment noted that the ``R'' tunnel is in
    worse structural condition than the ``Y'' tunnel. In addition,
    one of the things we learned recently in the ``R'' tunnel is
    that not only does the roof of the ``R'' tunnel need to be
    replaced, much of the walls along that tunnel also need to be
    replaced. That's something that we had not anticipated.
        Similarly, the condition assessment noted some
    deterioration in the ``G'' tunnel that we had not anticipated
    as well.
        In terms of what has been accomplished, we have abated
    asbestos in the ``B'' tunnel and in the ``V'' tunnel. We've
    found the presence of mold in the ``B'' tunnel and we have
    abated that. Currently under construction is one new egress
    point in the ``Y'' tunnel and we have recently awarded a
    contract for a second egress portion on the ``Y'' tunnel. As I
    noted, we completed the condition assessments and we're
    currently in the ``Y'' tunnel, cleaning the dust and debris out
    of that tunnel.

                               SCHEDULING DELAYS

        Senator Allard. Thank you, Mr. Ayers. I'd like to move to
    the CVC.
        I understand that you are reassessing the schedule and plan
    to get that done by early April. Is the project continuing to
    miss 2 weeks in the project schedule every month and is this a
    problem we're going to continue to see under your leadership?
        Mr. Ayers. Well, there's no question if you look back at
    the history of the project, in the last year, we've lost 2
    weeks in every month. Clearly to me, that indicates that our
    schedule is not realistic. So what we're doing now is we're
    going back and re-evaluating that schedule to ensure it is
    realistic and re-baseline that so that we don't continue to
    slip 2 weeks every month.

                   GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE TESTIMONY

        Senator Allard. Well, Madam Chairman, I've had the
    Government Accountability Office sitting here in prior
    hearings, giving us a report and how they feel about CVC
    progress. They have been our eyes and ears and I'm not saying
    that we necessarily have to have them at this particular point
    in time but it does bring to my attention our tunnel problem. I
    might suggest to you, in considering on the tunnel issue, where
    I think we're going to perhaps run into similar delay problems
    that we ran into with the CVC that we have the GAO to monitor
    the project. They act as our watchdog.
        Senator Landrieu. I most certainly will consider that
    because I know this tunnel issue has been something that has
    taken a great deal of time of Senator Allard in the past and we
    want to make sure the issues, from health issues to
    construction issues to safety issues are properly addressed. So
    I'll consider that.

                               PROJECT MANAGEMENT

        Senator Allard. Mr. Ayers, will the recent slip in schedule
    require you to amend your budget request for CVC operations
    since opening will be 6 months later than was assumed in your
    budget?
        Mr. Ayers. Yes, sir. We are doing that re-evaluation now.
    We have a team that is looking at all of the operational costs
    that we had projected, based upon a February completion date.
    We are re-evaluating those costs now to determine if there are
    impacts to that.
        Senator Allard. Now, what will you do to institutionalize
    the lessons learned from the CVC project so as to improve
    project management in future construction projects because I
    can see us using those lessons learned when we get to the
    tunnel construction.
        Mr. Ayers. Yes, sir. That's a great point and in order to
    institutionalize them, we will take them and we will hold a
    series of training seminars with all of our project managers.
    We have to communicate what those lessons were. We've already
    begun that process. In recent months, we've started an
    Architect's briefing, where we pull out one of our independent
    or one of our ongoing construction projects, and brief that to
    our senior leadership team. We've had people like Bob Hixon
    come as well and offer some advice on current projects, lessons
    learned on projects, and how this issue on the CVC has been
    handled and how we could better handle the issue on a different
    project. So that cross pollerization is already underway.
        Senator Allard. I appreciate you keeping that in the
    forefront because there definitely are lessons to be learned
    there, things that we can correct in future projects.

                            PERFORMANCE-BASED BUDGET

        Last year, we were told that the fiscal year 2008 budget
    would be the Architect of the Capitol's first performance-based
    budget. Could you tell us how the 2008 budget is different from
    previous budgets in this regard?
        Mr. Ayers. Well, our 2008 budget is not necessarily a
    performance-based budget. I think that is planned for fiscal
    year 2009. In 2008, our budget is currently based on our
    strategic plan but it doesn't ultimately get to a complete
    performance-based budget yet. We have to roll out and complete
    our cost accounting system before we are able to achieve that
    goal. We've had some slowdowns in that process over the last
    year. The continuing resolution is affecting us right now with
    our ability to retain consultants to help us with that, but we
    have developed a strategic plan. The budget does follow the
    strategic plan but ultimately, the costs that are associated
    with each of the individual elements in the strategic plan are
    not quite in our budget yet. So we anticipate that will happen
    in the 2009 budget request.
        Senator Allard. I felt all along that we've been more than
    agreeable as far as meeting your budget needs that you've
    requested and so you're saying that you need more money for
    this? Or is it the cost accounting problem that is delaying
    this?
        Mr. Ayers. No, I don't think we need more money for the
    cost accounting system. It's the fact that we have a continuing
    resolution this year that affects our ability to spend that
    money this year. So it is--I guess it is a money problem this
    year, which is slowing down the implementation of our cost
    accounting system.
        Senator Allard. All along, we've made sure you had the
    money and kept the project going. We didn't want any money tied
    up that wasn't available so I do hope that we can get the cost
    accounting lined up quickly so that we can begin to apply some
    logical approach to your budget. So I'd encourage you to get
    that put together without delay. If you can do this in the next
    budgeting cycle, that would be good. I'd be very pleased.

                              CAPITOL POWER PLANT

        Madam Chairman, let me go to one other issue that's been a
    problem we've had to deal with, again on meeting timelines and
    budget, and that's the west refrigeration plant project. Last
    year, we were told that the $100 million west refrigeration
    plant expansion would be finished by last summer. I understand
    you are now projecting completion for this summer. Why do we
    have continued delays there?
        Mr. Ayers. Yes, sir. The west refrigeration plant--it's
    really two projects in one. First is the west refrigeration
    plant that we are expecting completion in June of this year. We
    have taken beneficial occupancy of the chillers. They've been
    running for several weeks now effectively, so we're comfortable
    with the construction. We're going through the final checks and
    balances and the closeout process over the next month. It has
    been delayed through significant problems found during the
    commissioning process. Contractors have had to go back and redo
    some work and retune the systems.
        Similarly, we found significant differing site conditions
    and underground utilities. An 8-inch gas line has caused
    several months delay in that project so similarly, it's delayed
    until June.
        The second portion of that is the digital control system on
    our boilers. That project we expected, similarly, to have done
    this fall. But, an outage on one of our boilers through most of
    last year, from January through October, delayed the
    implementation of the control system on those boilers. So as
    soon as the winter months are past us, we'll begin the
    implementation of that control system on the boilers and expect
    that to be done in December.

                GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE RECOMMENDATIONS

        Senator Allard. The GAO recommended the Architect of the
    Capitol develop a staffing plan for significantly reducing and
    then retooling the staffing at the Power Plant. What has been
    done to meet those recommendations?
        Mr. Ayers. We do have a staffing plan in place. With the
    delays that are present in the west refrigeration plant as well
    as the digital control system of the boilers, we believe it's
    important not to implement those staffing reductions until
    those automated control systems are in place and employees are
    ready to use them. Doing so now, we think would be premature.
    It's unfortunate we faced the delays and the breakdown in one
    of our major boilers but we think it would be premature to do
    it now until we have those automated controls. I think those
    staffing reductions were based on the automated controls.

                             PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

        Senator Allard. Madam Chairman, as you can tell from our
    line of questioning, we've got three major projects out here:
    the tunnels, the Capitol Visitor Center and the Power Plant
    that have been plagued with delays. I don't envy you in the
    position that you're in right now because I think you have some
    real challenges. I think this subcommittee has some real
    challenges ahead of us to oversee these, to make sure we can
    keep these delays to a minimum at the very least. So thank you,
    Madam Chairman.
        Senator Landrieu. Thank you, Senator Allard, for your
    knowledge and interest in this subject and I really appreciate
    your assistance as I get started on this subcommittee.

                        POWER PLANT OPERATIONS EXPENSES

        Let me follow up on the Capitol Power Plant for a minute.
    What is the estimate for the reduction of operating expenses
    when the new Power Plant is operational as opposed to the last
    Power Plant? Are we going to reduce the workforce, be able to
    reduce the workforce by 40 percent or 50 percent or more, in
    terms of operating staff?
        Mr. Ayers. Madam Chairman, I'll have to respond to that for
    the record. We do expect to be able to achieve some reductions
    in staff. The new chiller plant is significantly more energy
    efficient than the old plant so there will be some operating
    reductions there as well. I'll have to research those and pull
    those percentages together for you.

                         COMMUNITY GROUP RELATIONSHIPS

        Senator Landrieu. Okay, if you would. And as a resident of
    Capitol Hill myself, as some of you may know, I understand that
    there are several civic organizations on Capitol Hill,
    including Moms on the Hill, CHAMPS, which is the Capitol Hill
    Association of Merchants and Professionals, that are concerned
    about the environmental impacts of the Power Plant and also the
    aesthetics of the plant, relative to the neighbors and
    neighborhood. Can you comment about what your relationship is
    with those community groups? How do you interface with them and
    would you define that relationship as open and cordial or in
    another way?
        Mr. Ayers. Yes, ma'am. I do believe the relationship with
    the Moms group is open and cordial. We have met with them as
    recently as this December and understand their concerns and we
    are responsive to their concerns. Unfortunately, I'm not
    familiar with the CHAMPS group. I don't know if we've met with
    them or not--I'll have to research that and let you know that
    for the record.
        We've communicated to these groups that the Power Plant is
    in compliance with its title 5 permit. So we do maintain open
    relationships, we do occasionally get phone calls that we
    respond to immediately and we do think that relationship is
    open and communicative.
        Senator Landrieu. I just think it is very important.
    Sometimes I think that it's overlooked that this complex has
    major impacts on the neighborhoods surrounding the Capitol.
    While the neighbors are generally more than pleased and honored
    to live in proximity to the Capitol, we have to realize that it
    does impact these neighborhoods. We are a big player in a
    relatively small sized city. Not that Washington, DC, is by any
    means a small town, but it is less than 600,000 people and the
    Federal Government has a huge impact on the residents of the
    city. So I would urge you all to be as sensitive as you can be
    to the neighborhood groups.

                       CAPITOL IMPROVEMENT PRIORITIZATION

        Senator Allard talked about the tunnels, which is
    important. I am interested to know, Mr. Ayers, are you directed
    by any particular law that is on the books as to prioritizing
    the improvements of the Capitol or are you asked to give your
    professional judgment about the improvements at the Capitol
    that are necessary? I'm not talking about operation and
    maintenance. I'm talking about improvements. Or is it a
    combination of that or is it requests from Members of Congress
    to consider major improvements? Could you describe that for the
    record, the process of beginning to consider major improvements
    to the complex?
        Mr. Ayers. Yes, ma'am, we certainly do have a series of
    building codes and laws and regulations which with we comply.
    That certainly is part of our project planning process and our
    long-term process is to be in compliance with those laws.
    Similarly, as we've developed the Capitol complex master plan,
    it's been a deliberative process that we've gone out and
    reached out to Members and committees to get input of what the
    long-term vision of the Capitol complex is. So we do get input
    from Members and committee staff as to what the needs are.
        Senator Landrieu. And it's all wrapped up into the 5-year
    planning process or a 5-year master plan?
        Mr. Ayers. It's wrapped up into the 20-year master plan
    that we are working to budget in 5-year increments.
        Senator Allard. Madam Chairman, may I?
        Senator Landrieu. Yes, please. Go ahead.

                     CAPITOL COMPLEX MASTER PLAN FOLLOW UP

        Senator Allard. I'd just like to follow up on that question
    a little bit, if I might. I just want to point to one specific
    example. I'm not questioning your priority setting. I just want
    to understand your process, like the chairman does here. This
    has to do with the warehouse of the Library of Congress. Last
    year, your budget included funds for a new warehouse at Fort
    Meade for the Library of Congress and I noticed that this
    project did not make the cut in your budget request for 2008
    and I'd like to know why. I'm not questioning your decision.
    I'd just like to know your process on that.
        Mr. Ayers. Certainly. Last year, our project prioritization
    included importance, project importance, and we evaluated every
    project against these five pre-established criteria that noted
    project importance, including historic preservation and mission
    and economics and life safety and security elements and each
    project was given a relative score and that's how we
    prioritized the project in our budget.
        We've enhanced that process in the last year to not only
    look at project importance but we also look at project type,
    such as deferred maintenance, capital renewal, capital
    investment, and capital construction. We generally will put
    deferred maintenance and capital renewal projects toward the
    top of our list and capital construction to the bottom, as we
    want to take care of what we have before we build new. That's
    the second element.
        And the third element, project urgency, is now part of our
    evaluation process. As we go through with condition assessments
    from our independent vendor, looking at all of our buildings
    and systems, each of those is given an urgency rating. We
    determine whether it needs to be done this year, or in 5 years,
    or in 7 years. So those two layers of project type and project
    urgency had been overlaid on our budget process and
    prioritization process this year, which puts that particular
    project further down the list.
        Senator Allard. That's because that is a new construction
    project and based on that, it got moved down some and it was
    less urgent than some of the other things that you had, is that
    basically what you said?
        Mr. Ayers. That's exactly correct.

                         FORT MEADE LOGISTICS WAREHOUSE

        Senator Allard. The Librarian has gone and requested that
    the warehouse be in his own budget. Do you support that
    approach?
        Mr. Ayers. I think there may be some merit to that. In my
    judgment, the Architect is often placed in a very tenuous
    position of passing judgment on the Librarian of Congress'
    projects and the Chief of Police's projects and the Senate
    Sergeant at Arms and the Chief Administration Officer of the
    House, among others. We have tried to develop an objective
    process but certainly, we think the logistics center at Fort
    Meade for the Library of Congress is a very important project.
    I know the Librarian believes that it is absolutely critical
    and it needs to be done this year. So from my perspective, I
    think if those things were in their own individual budgets,
    there would be a more collaborative approach to those projects.
    I think those individual organizations may be more accountable
    for the projects that they submit and they can even do
    tradeoffs in their own budgets about what they may prioritize
    and what they push off to a different year in order to get a
    particular project.
        Senator Allard. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
        Senator Landrieu. Thank you. Senator Allard, I have
    completed my line of questioning. Did you have anything else
    that you would like to get onto the record before we close the
    meeting?
        Senator Allard. Madam Chairman, I have one more issue.
        Senator Landrieu. Go right ahead.

                        INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROJECTS

        Senator Allard. I hope it doesn't take too long. It has to
    do with information technology. Your budget includes $22
    million for information technology. Now, that's a 60-percent
    jump in resources over fiscal year 2006. It kind of catches our
    attention. This includes $3.7 million for your financial
    management system and then $1.7 million for an inventory
    control system. Can you explain the need for a large increase
    in IT projects?
        Mr. Ayers. Yes, sir. We believe that increase is absolutely
    vital to our success, vital to our ability to close out the
    remaining GAO recommendations that are from our general
    management review. Similarly, our ability to sustain and
    institutionalize our financial management practices and
    continue our clean audit opinions, we think are based on this
    financial management request we've made.
        Similarly, in the last 3 years, we've been underfunded in
    our information technology systems. It is a significant
    request. We understand that. But we think it is vitally
    important to our continued success.
        Senator Allard. As a result of not keeping up your IT, has
    there been any degradation in agency services?
        Mr. Ayers. Absolutely, sir. This year, for example, we
    planned to do our Project Information Center. It's our ability
    to track all of our ongoing projects in one comprehensive
    electronic information system. We don't have such a system now.
    It's a recommendation by GAO that we produce one. We have that
    money in our 2007 budget. We're not able to do it because of
    the continuing resolution and you'll now find that in our 2008
    budget. So similarly, in our ability to achieve project success
    and manage schedules, we think it is an important part of that
    request.
        Senator Allard. The GAO in their management review state
    that AOC made progress in improving your IT management controls
    and accountability but they say that work remains to fully
    implement an effective agencywide approach to IT management. In
    light of GAO's findings, are any of your 2008 budget requests
    for information technology projects premature?
        Mr. Ayers. No, sir, I don't think so. I think the money
    that is in our 2008 request will enable us to achieve those
    recommendations.
        Senator Allard. You haven't prioritized all your IT
    investments as the GAO recommended, have you? Or did you
    prioritize those?
        Mr. Ayers. I'd have to answer that for the record.
        Senator Allard. Would you get us a written response on
    that?
        Mr. Ayers. Yes, sir.
        [The information follows:]

                     Management Controls and Accountability

        Yes, the AOC is working with the GAO to reach a resolution
    on the IT investment management recommendations. The AOC has
    made significant progress and continues to work with the GAO to
    resolve remaining issues. The GAO recommended that the AOC
    develop and implement IT investment management processes. The
    AOC has implemented processes and assigned specific roles and
    responsibilities to senior-level review boards. The AOC has
    begun to implement portfolio-based investment decision-making
    processes, including developing criteria to select investments
    that best support AOC goals, objectives and mission. The AOC is
    continuing to work towards prioritizing all of the necessary IT
    investments.

        Senator Allard. Madam Chairman, thank you.

                               DIVERSE MANAGEMENT

        Senator Landrieu. Thank you. This has been an excellent
    hearing. I will close with a comment and a thank you on a
    lighter but important note. I understand that over one-half of
    your positions have been filled by women, your senior positions
    and I want to commend you for that. Many of our agencies within
    the legislative branch are trying to make sure that they are
    seeking diverse and professional talent in their hiring
    practices. And I hope that might be reflective of the tour that
    I took of the Capitol Visitor Center, where I was told and
    happy to hear that the lavatory space is doubled or tripled for
    the women visitors to the Capitol center. So since this is an
    issue in public buildings everywhere, let me say as a new
    chairman, I thank you for that consideration.
        Mr. Ayers. You're not the only one to be concerned about
    that.
        Senator Landrieu. That is correct because a lot of men do a
    lot of waiting as well.

                         ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

        If there are any additional questions, they will be
    submitted to your Office for response in the record.
        [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 Mary L. Landrieu
                           operation and maintenance
        Question. Please provide a graph of the percentage of AOC funds
    spent on operation and maintenance relative to new construction over
    the last 20 years.
        Answer. The attached chart (Attachment 1) outlines funds for
    operations and maintenance relative to projects for the past 15 years
    and our fiscal year 2008 budget request. Over the last 20 years, the
    AOC's financial systems and budget process have changed several times.
    The information gathered from fiscal year 1993 to present provides the
    most concise budget numbers related to maintenance relative to new
    construction.

                            west refrigeration plant
        Question. Please provide a detailed explanation for the West
    Refrigeration Plant Expansion delays, and a schedule for completing all
    elements including the Digital Control System.
        Answer. There are three major items that adversely affected the
    construction schedule of the West Refrigeration Plant Expansion
    Project; differing site conditions, contractor technical complications
    and Government delays.
        Differing Site Conditions.--The two most significant differing site
    conditions that were discovered on this project were the 8 inch high
    pressure Washington Gas main and the WASA sewer reconstruction.
      --The 8 inch high pressure gas main was not detailed on the
            construction documents. Once the gas main, which exclusively
            serves the U.S. Capitol Power Plant boilers, was discovered, it
            had to be relocated so that the new WASA sewer could be
            constructed. The relocation of the gas line took place from
            May-September 2003, an approximate 5 month project delay.
            Washington Gas insisted that the gas line be relocated, and it
            had to be executed while maintaining service to the boiler
            house, as the U.S. Capitol Power Plant could not operate the
            boilers reliably without natural gas service.
      --The 100 year old WASA sewer as-built details did not accurately
            depict all of the conditions. This differing site condition
            necessitated the need to redesign the sewer tie-in points.
            Different soil conditions in this area also caused delays.
        Contractor Technical Complications.--The contractor experienced
    delays due to the WASA sewer work. This contributed to the contractor's
    inability to complete the fire sprinkler system installation and the
    functional testing of the mechanical equipment.
      --The WASA sewer tie-in was more difficult to construct than the
            contractor had anticipated, resulting in an execution of a by-
            pass pumping solution. The by-pass pumping solution took place
            from March-August 2004, an approximate 6 month delay.
      --The contractor did not complete the project's life safety systems;
            fire sprinkler, fire alarm and elevator in accordance with the
            negotiated milestones, which resulted in concurrent delays.
      --The contractor had to repeatedly perform control function testing
            to document reliable chilled water systems.
        Government Delays.--The delays that were caused by the Government
    were related to project redesigns, the inability to isolate old
    equipment because of faulty valves, control integration between the new
    and old refrigeration plants, and additional AOC operational
    coordination and training.
      --Fire sprinkler/fire alarm redesign issues.--In March 2006, the
            contract scope increased to install the revised sprinkler
            system. Several new sprinkler design criteria were added to the
            West Refrigeration Plant Expansion Project, resulting in
            additional pipe risers, changes to branch piping layouts,
            reclassification of the sprinkler zones, adding side wall
            sprinklers at the east face of the new cooling towers and
            increasing the pipe thickness to schedule 40 pipe for sprinkler
            piping inside the cooling towers.
      --Water chemical treatment system.--The water chemical treatment
            system was revised to allow for compatibility with the type and
            quantity of chemicals for the treatment of both the existing
            West Refrigeration Plant and the new condenser water systems.
            The objective was to reconfigure the size and type of chemical
            storage tanks that are being provided under the West
            Refrigeration Plant Expansion Project. As part of this
            revision, the pump skids, controllers and associated fill
            piping for the system were revised for safety and operational
            reasons.
      --Control integration.--The distributed control system control logic
            and sequence changes were revised in the contract, providing
            controls to reconfigure and automate the existing West
            Refrigeration Plant and tie into the new West Refrigeration
            Plant Expansion project.
      --AOC operational coordination.--Piping connections between the new
            and existing refrigeration plants were reconfigured to ensure a
            reliable means of sending chilled water out to the U.S. Capitol
            campus. The scope of work involved short outages to the
            existing West Plant, and could only be performed during winter
            months. During the first two initial short outages, the Capitol
            Power Plant was unable to isolate the systems due to faulty
            valves, causing some of the outages to be delayed until the
            2006-2007 winter period when the valves and piping could be
            replaced.
        Boiler Plant Distributed Controls System.--This scope of work in
    the boiler plant is part of the base contract under bid option 1, and
    was originally contracted to be completed by September 1, 2005. In
    January 2005, the distributed control system project was significantly
    changed from control logic and data collection spread throughout the
    boiler plant to two centralized data collection and processing rooms,
    also called rack rooms. The distributed control system data, via hard
    wire control points, was also redesigned in such a way that loss of
    either rack room would still enable the plant to be functional and meet
    the heating and cooling requirements of the U.S. Capitol complex.
        The complete redesign was further amended in May 2006 to match the
    existing burner management systems that remained in place. The redesign
    also integrated the existing boiler plant master control systems.
    Follow-on coordination between the Capitol Power Plant operations staff
    and the contractor to maintain operations was more difficult than
    anticipated and impacted the overall contract schedule. In addition,
    boiler repairs, boiler maintenance schedules and operational
    reliability limited the time frame that the boilers could be taken off-
    line for control integration.
        Schedule.--We are currently negotiating a revised contract
    completion date with the contractor. The projected schedule for
    completing the remaining elements of the contract is depicted on the
    attached time line (Attachment 2). The new West Refrigeration Plant
    Expansion chiller systems were turned over on January 26, 2007. Between
    now and April 16th, the contractor will be working on piping and
    controls integration between the new and old refrigeration plants. The
    existing West Refrigeration Plant is currently off line while the
    contractor connects the large bore piping between the two plants. The
    remainder of the time will be used to complete other work such as:
    Transfer electric panel loads to new load centers; Commission the new
    fuel oil system; Correct deficiencies and; Close-out the West
    Refrigeration Plant Expansion Project.
        We have experienced a number of design and operation delays that
    have impacted the completion of the distributed control system for the
    new boilers. To ensure Capitol Power Plant boiler plant reliability to
    the U.S. Capitol campus we will begin the integration of the boilers to
    the new Distributed Control System in July 2007, during the summer
    months. This integration is scheduled to be completed not later than
    spring 2008.

                              SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS

        Senator Landrieu. The meeting is recessed. Thank you.
        [Whereupon, at 11:30 a.m., Friday, March 2, the
    subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of
    the Chair.]

             LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008

                                  ----------

                             FRIDAY, MARCH 16, 2007

                                           U.S. Senate,
               Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The subcommittee met at 10:08 a.m., in room SD-138, Dirksen
    Senate Office Building, Hon. Mary L. Landrieu (chairman)
    presiding.
        Present: Senator Landrieu.

                        GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE

    STATEMENT OF HON. DAVID M. WALKER, COMPTROLLER GENERAL
                OF THE UNITED STATES
        Senator Landrieu. The subcommittee will come to order. Good
    morning, and welcome to everyone.
        Regrettably, Senator Allard is attending a family funeral
    in Colorado this morning and will not be able to join us. So,
    our thoughts, prayers, and condolences are with him and his
    family this morning.

                   PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR WAYNE ALLARD

        But I do understand that he's prepared a statement for the
    record, and, at this time, I will submit it on his behalf.
        [The statement follows:]
                   Prepared Statement of Senator Wayne Allard
        Madam Chairman, I regret that I cannot attend this morning's
    hearing with the Government Accountability Office, the Government
    Printing Office, the Congressional Budget Office and the Office of
    Compliance.
        There are many important issues before these agencies, not the
    least of which is the large percentage increase being requested by
    each--especially the Government Printing Office with a 49 percent
    increase over the fiscal year 2007 continuing resolution level.
        The Government Accountability Office is requesting $523.8 million
    for fiscal year 2008, which will return GAO to the fiscal year 2006
    operating level. Thanks to Comptroller General David Walker and his
    staff, our subcommittee has received excellent assistance in overseeing
    legislative branch agencies, particularly the Architect of the Capitol
    and the Capitol Visitor Center, as well as the Capitol Police
    management issues.
        An issue I would like GAO to address is its capacity to continue to
    undertake technology assessment work. I understand there is interest in
    starting up the old Office of Technology Assessment, and frankly I'm
    very concerned about that idea. GAO had a pilot project to do
    technology assessment projects several years ago, which was very
    successful. GAO subsequently completed three additional projects on
    technology assessment which were requested on a bi-partisan and
    bicameral basis, and were well-received as I understand it. I would
    like to know whether GAO can continue to perform such work, on a bi-
    partisan, bicameral basis, with appropriate peer review, and whether
    this is consistent with GAO's mission. The notion of starting up a new
    agency at a time when we have extraordinary budget constraints does not
    make sense.
        With respect to the Government Printing Office, I would note that
    Bruce James retired at the end of last year and the Acting Public
    Printer, Bill Turri, has been ably filling his shoes. GPO's request of
    roughly $182 million is a 49 percent increase, as I mentioned earlier.
    I understand that this increase is in part due to the need to re-pay
    the revolving fund for shortfalls in Congressional printing and binding
    costs, and the 2006 updating of the U.S. Code. GPO is able to use the
    revolving fund for these shortfalls, but we must pay those funds back.
        In addition, GPO has numerous information technology improvements
    which have been deferred or are nearing completion and need the final
    infusion of funds to complete. Having said that, we know your full
    request likely will be difficult to fully accommodate, so we look
    forward to seeing a prioritization of your request.
        The Congressional Budget Office has a new director, Dr. Peter
    Orszag, who comes to CBO with excellent credentials and I look forward
    to working with him. CBO is requesting a steady-state budget of almost
    $38 million and 235 employees, but is now asking for additional funds
    for health-care related work. I look forward to getting more
    information on the need for that additional work.
        Finally, the Office of Compliance, represented by Ms. Tamara
    Chrisler, is requesting just over $4 million. The office is in the
    midst of completing a settlement with the Architect of the Capitol on
    the complaint OOC filed over a year ago on the utility tunnels. That is
    a precedent-setting case and that has taken tremendous resources. We
    look forward to that coming to conclusion shortly so that AOC can move
    ahead expeditiously with its repairs and improvements in the tunnels.
        Madam Chairman, this concludes my statement.

                 OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR MARY L. LANDRIEU

        Senator Landrieu. Today, we meet to take testimony on the
    fiscal year 2008 budgets for the Government Accountability
    Office (GAO), the Government Printing Office (GPO), the
    Congressional Budget Office (CBO), and the Office of Compliance
    (OOC). Since we have four agencies testifying this morning, I
    ask that each of you just present your remarks in summary form.
    I've read all of your statements, and they will be included for
    the record.
        We're looking at some pretty substantial increases in your
    steady budget requests. While I realize the continuing
    resolution held you to 2006 dollars in fiscal year 2007, we
    really need you to think about the priorities that you have as
    we move forward in this process. Priorities in this context may
    mean overall lower dollars that we have to work with, but we
    will explore this as the subcommittee moves forward.
        I want to welcome today's witnesses: David Walker, Bill
    Turri, Peter Orszag, and Tamara Chrisler. Thank you all for
    attending, this morning.
        The Government Accountability Office budget request totals
    $523 million, which is an increase of 8 percent over the
    current year and would fund an increase of 104 full-time
    employees. I appreciate the oversight your agency has provided
    to this subcommittee, on both the Capitol Visitor Center and
    the utility tunnel repair work. I want to particularly thank
    Bernie Ungar, Terry Dorn, and Gloria Jarmon, of your staff, for
    their hard work and assistance to me and to my staff on these
    complicated and time consuming projects.
        I hope to have a detailed conversation with you today, Mr.
    Walker, about a number of workforce issues, including the
    implementation of the GAO Human Capital Act of 2004,
    legislation you requested from Congress. Some of the promises
    that you made have not yet been completely fulfilled, and we'll
    talk about where we are in that process a little later.
        The Government Printing Office budget request totals $182
    million, a 49-percent increase over fiscal year 2007 and would
    include 86 additional employees.
        Mr. Turri, I hope you're prepared to defend this request,
    which is literally doubling your current budget. I understand
    that there are some expansions and changes in technology, and
    we'd like to hear more about that today.
        The Congressional Budget Office budget request totals $38
    million, which is an 8-percent increase over current year, and
    would support the current level of 235 employees. I understand
    the CBO is looking into expanding the scope of their work to
    include identifying and analyzing ways to control healthcare
    spending. I look forward to hearing more about that proposal
    this morning.
        And, finally, the Office of Compliance is requesting $4.1
    million, which is an increase of $1 million, or 32 percent,
    over the current year, and would fund four additional
    employees.
        Ms. Chrisler, I appreciate the fact that your organization
    has had an increased workload over the last year because of the
    problems in the utility tunnels, and I look forward to hearing
    an update on the progress being made by the Architect of the
    Capitol (AOC) in addressing the issues in the complaint filed
    by your agency.

     GAO deg.GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICES' FISCAL YEAR 2008
                                 BUDGET REQUEST

        Now, Mr. Walker, if you would begin. And let me thank you
    for your visit to my office. I found it extremely enlightening
    and insightful. I want to begin by commending you on what I
    consider to be an excellent job that you're doing. I want to
    help you to continue to achieve more of the goals that you
    outlined to me. But I'd like to allow you to make your
    statement. We will then question some of the increases in your
    budget.
        Mr. Walker. Sure.
        Senator Landrieu. Thank you.
        Mr. Walker. Thank you, Madam Chair. It's a pleasure to be
    here today to talk about GAO's fiscal year 2008 budget request.
        I would like to thank you and the subcommittee for your
    past support of GAO. I'm especially appreciative of your
    efforts to try to provide us some additional funding above
    fiscal year 2006 levels, rather than just a flat-line
    continuing resolution, which we had been under. That helped us
    to avoid unpaid furloughs, but, as you know, because we still
    had a shortfall, we could only make our pay raises retroactive
    to February 18, 2007, rather than January 7.
        I'm particularly pleased with the results that GAO achieved
    for the Congress and the American people. For fiscal year 2006,
    we returned $105 for every $1 invested in GAO--number one in
    the world. Second place in the world is 24 to 1. I think it's
    important--and I know you believe this--to consider results,
    not just resources, because the U.S. Government needs to do a
    better job, I believe, in linking resources to results.
        While 2006 was a record year for us in many regards, we've
    had to delay and cancel a number of items, because we're
    operating under constrained resource levels. As you undoubtedly
    know, since 2003 GAO's budget has not kept pace with inflation.
    Our purchasing power is down 3 percent since 2003, which
    concerns me because about 80 percent of our budget is for
    payroll costs, and, needless to say, you have to pay people
    more than inflation, especially top performers. The other 20
    percent of our budget is primarily nondiscretionary costs which
    are subject to inflationary increases. So, that's a real
    concern.
        Candidly, Madam Chair, my concern is we've done a lot of
    things to improve our economy, our efficiency, and our
    effectiveness, but they're about played out. I'm very concerned
    that unless we receive a more reasonable resource allocation
    that's better aligned with our results, it's going to start to
    have an adverse effect on employee morale, on our ability to
    serve the Congress, and on our ability to generate the type of
    unparalleled return on investment that we've delivered to the
    Congress and the country in recent years.
        We have, and will continue to take steps to try to deal
    with constrained resource levels. We are asking for about an 8-
    percent increase for next year, which is designed to try to
    help deal with some of the deterioration in our purchasing
    power in recent years, and to be able to fund some of the
    projects that we've had to defer for quite a number of years.

     GAO deg.REBUILDING GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE OVER THE
                                  NEXT 6 YEARS

        Looking beyond fiscal 2008 I promised the Congress, when I
    came in, in 1998, that I would do everything that I could to
    improve the economy, efficiency, and effectiveness of GAO.
    Nonetheless I was asked virtually every year, ``What's the
    optimum staffing level for GAO?'' I've always said, ``I'm not
    going to ask for any more, at this point in time, until I
    believe that we've accomplished the first objective.'' I
    believe we've accomplished that objective now. I have 6\1/2\
    years left until the end of my 15-year term. Based upon
    preliminary estimates, and based upon the many challenges that
    the Congress and the country face, I believe we and the
    Congress need to think about taking GAO, over the next 6 years,
    from about 3,200 personnel to potentially up to about 3,750,
    for a number of reasons, which I will provide in detail as a
    supplement for you to consider in the future. This does not
    relate to our fiscal 2008 budget request. It is an attempt to
    try to look longer-range and to try to help begin the
    discussion over our longer-range role and resources, because I
    think it's important to do so.

                               PREPARED STATEMENT

        Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and I'm happy to answer
    any questions that you may have.
        Senator Landrieu. Thank you very much.
        [The statement follows:]
                     Prepared Statement of David M. Walker
        Mrs. Chairwoman and members of the subcommittee: I am pleased to
    appear before the subcommittee today in support of the fiscal year 2008
    budget request for the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO). The
    requested funding will help us continue our support of the Congress in
    meeting its constitutional responsibilities and will help improve the
    performance and ensure the accountability of the Federal Government for
    the benefit of the American people. An overview of GAO's strategic plan
    for serving the Congress and our core values is included as appendix I.
        I would also like to thank you and your subcommittee for your past
    support of GAO. I am especially appreciative of your efforts to help us
    avoid a furlough of our staff during fiscal year 2007. Had we not
    received additional funds this year and not taken other cost
    minimization actions, GAO would have likely been forced to furlough
    most staff for up to 5 days without pay. At the same time, due to
    funding shortfalls, we were not able to make pay adjustments
    retroactive to January 7, 2007.
        It is through the efforts of our dedicated and capable staff that
    we were able to provide the Congress with the professional, objective,
    fact-based, nonpartisan, non-ideological, fair, and balanced
    information it needs to meet the full range of its constitutional
    responsibilities. I am extremely pleased and proud to say that we
    helped the Federal Government achieve a total of $51 billion in
    financial benefits in fiscal year 2006--a record high that represents a
    return on investment of $105 for every dollar the Congress invested in
    us. As a result of our work, we also documented 1,342 nonfinancial
    benefits that helped to improve service to the public, change laws, and
    transform government operations. The funding we received in fiscal year
    2006 allowed us to conduct work that addressed many difficult issues
    confronting the Nation, including U.S. border security, Iraq and
    Hurricane Katrina activities, the tax gap and tax reform, and issues
    affecting the health and pay of military service members. Our client-
    focused performance measures indicate that the Congress valued and was
    very pleased with our work overall.
        While fiscal year 2006 was a record year, we will be required to
    constrain vital support to our staff and engagements in fiscal year
    2007 in order to manage within available funds. Although the additional
    funding provided by the subcommittee allows us to avoid a furlough of
    our staff, we must implement a number of actions to cancel, reduce, or
    defer costs in order to manage within fiscal year 2007 funding
    constraints. In fact, our fiscal year 2007 budget for most programs and
    line items retains funding levels at or near fiscal year 2006 funding
    levels--requiring that we absorb inflationary increases, which in turn
    reduce our purchasing power, erode progress toward our strategic goals,
    and ultimately affect our client service and employee support. For
    example, in our travel account--a critical element in our ability to
    conduct firsthand evaluation of federal funding and program
    activities--we expect transportation costs and per diem rates to rise
    (as they do annually). Also, our ability to hire staff to replace
    departing staff, address key succession planning challenges and skill
    gaps, and maintain a skilled workforce will be adversely affected.
    While we must hold some critical employee benefits at last year's
    funding level, such as transit benefits and student loan repayments,
    our pool of employees eligible to retire has increased since last year.
    Also, some other agencies may be offering increased benefits that will
    be attractive to our employees and potential recruits. In addition, we
    have reduced or deferred needed targeted investments and initiatives
    geared to further increasing productivity and effectiveness, achieving
    cost savings, and addressing identified management challenges.
        Unfortunately, we expect that these actions will adversely affect
    our ability to respond to congressional requests, making it even more
    difficult to address supply and demand imbalances in areas such as
    health care, disaster assistance, homeland security, the global ``war
    on terrorism,'' energy and natural resources, and forensic auditing.
    Our diminished capacity will likely, in turn, ultimately result in
    reduced annual financial benefits, findings, and recommendations to the
    Congress and the Nation and necessitate reductions in our
      --ability to provide timely and responsive information to support
            congressional deliberations;
      --testimonies on the Congress's legislative and oversight agenda;
      --products containing recommendations for improvements in government
            operations;
      --analyses of executive branch agencies budget justifications to
            support appropriations decisions;
      --support on reauthorization activities for pending programs, such as
            the farm bill, Head Start, the Children's Health Insurance
            Program, and the No Child Left Behind Act; and
      --oversight of legislative branch programs, including the Capitol
            Visitor Center.
        In an effort to identify areas for potential improvement and help
    ensure accountability, we plan to contract with a public accounting
    firm in fiscal year 2008 to conduct a peer review of our financial
    audit practice and have an international team of auditors conduct an
    external peer review of our performance audit practices. GAO has
    received clean opinions on its previous external peer reviews.
    Consistent with generally accepted governmental auditing standards,
    external peer reviews are conducted on a 3-year cycle and serve to
    validate that the Congress and the American people can rely on our work
    and products.
        In recent years, GAO has worked cooperatively with the
    appropriation committees to submit modest budget requests. During this
    period, and for a variety of reasons, GAO has gone from the largest
    legislative branch agency to the third largest in terms of total
    budgetary resources. Adjusting for inflation, GAO's budget authority
    has declined by 3 percent in constant fiscal year 2006 dollars since
    fiscal year 2003, as shown in figure 1. These modest budget results do
    not adequately recognize the return on investment that GAO has been
    able to generate. In fact, these increases have hampered our progress
    in rebuilding from the downsizing (40 percent reduction in staffing
    levels) and mandated funding reductions that occurred in the 1990s.
    Although GAO's fiscal year 2008 budget request represents a 7 percent
    increase in constant dollar terms over our fiscal year 2007 operating
    plan, it is one of the smallest increases requested in the legislative
    branch.

       Figure 1.--Budget Authority and Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) Usage,
                             Fiscal Years 1992-2006

        Shortly after I was appointed Comptroller General in November 1998,
    I determined that the agency should undertake a major transformation
    effort. As a result, GAO has become more results-oriented, partnerial,
    and client focused. With your support, we have made strategic
    investments; realigned the organization; streamlined our business
    processes; modernized our performance classification, compensation, and
    reward systems; enhanced our ability to attract, retain and reward top
    talent; enhanced the technology and infrastructure supporting our staff
    and systems; and made other key investments. These transformational
    efforts have allowed GAO to model best practices, lead by example, and
    provide significant support to congressional hearings, while achieving
    record results and very high client satisfaction ratings without
    significant increases in funding.
        We have taken a number of steps to deal with funding shortfalls in
    the past few years; however, we cannot continue to employ the same
    approaches. Our staff has become increasingly stretched and we are
    experiencing backlogs in several areas of critical importance to the
    Congress (e.g., health care, homeland security, energy and natural
    resources). In addition, we have deferred key initiatives and
    technology upgrades (e.g., engagement and administrative process
    upgrades) for several years and it would not be prudent to continue to
    do so. These actions are having an adverse effect on employee morale,
    our ability to produce results, and the return on investment that we
    can generate.
        There is a need for fundamental and dramatic reform to address what
    the government does, how it does business, and who will do the
    government's business. Our support to the Congress will likely prove
    even more critical because of the pressures created by our Nation's
    current and projected budget deficit and growing long-term fiscal
    imbalance. Also, as we face current and projected supply and demand
    imbalance issues and a growing workload over the coming years across a
    wide spectrum of issues, GAO will be unable to respond to congressional
    demands without a significant investment in our future. We have
    exhausted the results that we can achieve based on prior investments.
    Our ability to continue to produce record results and assist the
    Congress in discharging its Constitutional responsibilities relating to
    authorization, appropriations, oversight, and other matters will be
    adversely impacted unless we take action now.
        Therefore, our fiscal year 2008 budget request is designed to
    restore GAO's funding to more reasonable operating levels.
    Specifically, we are requesting fiscal year 2008 budget authority of
    $530 million, an 8.5 percent increase over our fiscal year 2007 funding
    level. The additional funds provided in fiscal year 2007 have helped
    reduce our requested increase for fiscal year 2008 from 9.4 percent to
    8.5 percent. This funding level also represents a reduction below the
    request we submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in
    January as a result of targeted adjustments to our planned fiscal year
    2008 hiring plan. Our fiscal year 2008 budget request will allow us to
    achieve our performance goals to support the Congress as outlined in
    our strategic plan \1\ and rebuild our workforce capacity to allow us
    to better respond to supply and demand imbalances in responding to
    congressional requests. This funding will also help us address our
    caseload for bid protest filings, which have increased by more than 10
    percent from fiscal years 2002 through 2006. Our workload for the first
    quarter of fiscal year 2007 suggests a continuation of this upward
    trend in bid protest fillings.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ In the spring of 2007, we plan to issue our updated strategic
    plan covering fiscal years 2007-2012 to reflect the agenda for the
    110th Congress.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        We will be seeking your commitment and support to provide the
    funding needed to increase GAO's staffing level to 3,750 over the next
    6 years in order to address critical needs including supply and demand
    imbalances, high-risk areas, 21st century challenges questions,
    technology assessments, and other areas in need of fundamental reform.
    In addition, as we get closer to when GAO may be able to render our
    opinion on the consolidated financial statements of the U.S. government
    and the Department of Defense's financial and related systems, we will
    need to increase our workforce capacity. We will be providing the
    Congress additional information on the basis for and nature of this
    target later this year.
        Importantly, as I noted last year, we also plan to request
    legislation that will assist GAO in performing its mission work, and
    enhance our human capital policies, including addressing certain
    compensation and benefits issues of interest to our employees. We plan
    to submit our proposal to our Senate and House authorization and
    oversight committees in the near future.
        My testimony today will focus on key efforts that GAO has
    undertaken to support the Congress, our fiscal year 2006 performance
    results, our budget request for fiscal year 2008 to support the
    Congress and serve the American people, and proposed legislative
    changes.
                      key efforts to support the congress
        As is the case with each new Congress, we are beginning to have
    discussions with regard to many new requests for GAO's professional,
    objective, fact-based, nonpartisan, and non-ideological information,
    analysis, and recommendations. On November 17, 2006, I was pleased to
    offer three sets of recommendations for your consideration as part of
    the agenda of the 110th Congress. The first recommendation suggests
    targets for near-term oversight; the second proposes policies and
    programs in need of fundamental reform and re-engineering; the third
    lists governing issues. The proposals represent an effort to synthesize
    GAO's institutional knowledge and special expertise and suggest both
    the breadth and the depth of the issues facing the new Congress. We at
    GAO stand ready to assist the 110th Congress in meeting its
    constitutional responsibilities. To be effective, congressional
    hearings and other activities should offer opportunities to share best
    practices, facilitate governmentwide transformation, and promote
    accountability for delivering positive results.
        On January 9, 2007, we presented GAO's assessment of the key
    oversight issues related to Iraq for consideration in developing the
    oversight agenda of the 110th Congress and in analyzing the President's
    revised strategy for Iraq. This assessment was based on our ongoing
    work and the 67 Iraq-related reports and testimonies we have provided
    to the Congress since May 2003. Our work spans the security, political,
    economic, and reconstruction prongs of the U.S. national strategy in
    Iraq. The broad, crosscutting nature of this work helps minimize the
    possibility of overlap and duplication by any individual inspector
    general. Our work has focused on the U.S. strategy and costs of
    operating in Iraq, training and equipping the Iraqi security forces,
    governance and reconstruction issues, the readiness of U.S. military
    forces, and achieving desired acquisition outcomes. Our current work
    draws on our past work and regular site visits to Iraq and the
    surrounding region, such as Jordan and Kuwait. We plan to establish a
    presence in Iraq beginning later this fiscal year to provide additional
    oversight of issues deemed important to the Congress; subject to
    approval by the U.S. Department of State and adequate funding. We have
    requested supplemental fiscal year 2007 funds of $374,000 to support
    this effort.
        In January of this year, we also issued our high-risk series: An
    Update, which identifies federal areas and programs at risk of fraud,
    waste, abuse, and mismanagement and those in need of broad-based
    transformations. The issues affecting many of these areas and programs
    may take years to address, and the report will serve as a useful guide
    for the Congress's future programmatic deliberations and oversight
    activities. Issued to coincide with the start of each new Congress, our
    high-risk update, first issued in 1993, has helped members of the
    Congress who are responsible for oversight and executive branch
    officials who are accountable for performance. Our high-risk program
    focuses on major government programs and operations that need urgent
    attention or transformation to ensure that our government functions in
    the most economical, efficient, and effective manner possible. Overall,
    our high-risk program has served to identify and help resolve a range
    of serious weaknesses that involve substantial resources and provide
    critical services to the public. Table 1 details our 2007 high-risk
    list.

                       TABLE 1.--GAO'S 2007 HIGH-RISK LIST
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Year
                       2007 High-Risk Area                      Designated
                                                                 High Risk
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Addressing challenges in broad-based transformations:
        Strategic Human Capital Management \1\..............            2001
        Managing Federal Real Property \1\..................            2003
        Protecting the Federal Government's Information                 1997
         Systems and the Nation's Critical Infrastructures..
        Implementing and Transforming the Department of                 2003
         Homeland Security..................................
        Establishing Appropriate and Effective Information-             2005
         Sharing Mechanisms to Improve Homeland Security....
        Department of Defense (DOD) Approach to Business                2005
         Transformation \1\.................................
            DOD Business Systems Modernization..............            1995
            DOD Personnel Security Clearance Program........            2005
            DOD Support Infrastructure Management...........            1997
            DOD Financial Management........................            1995
            DOD Supply Chain Management (formerly Inventory             1990
             Management)....................................
            DOD Weapon Systems Acquisition..................            1990
        Federal Aviation Administration Air Traffic Control             1995
         Modernization......................................
        Financing the Nation's Transportation System \1\                2007
         (New)..............................................
        Ensuring the Effective Protection of Technologies               2007
         Critical to U.S. National Security Interests \1\
         (New)..............................................
        Transforming Federal Oversight of Food Safety \1\               2007
         (New)..............................................
    Managing Federal Contracting More Effectively:
        DOD Contract Management.............................            1992
        Department of Energy Contract Management............            1990
        National Aeronautics and Space Administration                   1990
         Contract Management................................
        Management of Interagency Contracting...............            2005
    Assessing the Efficiency and Effectiveness of Tax Law
     Administration:
        Enforcement of Tax Laws \1\.........................            1990
        Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Business Systems                 1995
         Modernization......................................
    Modernizing and Safeguarding Insurance and Benefit
     Programs:
        Modernizing Federal Disability Programs \1\.........            2003
        Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation Single-Employer            2003
         Insurance Program \1\..............................
        Medicare Program \1\................................            1990
        Medicaid Program \1\................................            2003
        National Flood Insurance Program....................            2006
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Legislation is likely to be necessary, as a supplement to actions by
      the executive branch, in order to effectively address this high-risk
      area.

    Source: GAO.

        In February of this year, we issued a new publication entitled
    Fiscal Stewardship: A Critical Challenge Facing Our Nation that is
    designed to provide the Congress and the American public, in a
    relatively brief and understandable form, selected budget and financial
    information regarding our Nation's current financial condition, long-
    term fiscal outlook, and possible ways forward. In the years ahead, our
    support to the Congress will likely prove even more critical because of
    the pressures created by our Nation's current and projected budget
    deficit and growing long-term fiscal imbalance. Indeed, as the Congress
    considers those fiscal pressures, it will be grappling with tough
    choices about what government does, how it does business, and who will
    do the government's business. GAO is an invaluable tool for helping the
    Congress review, reprioritize, and revise existing mandatory and
    discretionary spending programs and tax policies.
        In addition, I have participated in a series of town hall forums
    around the Nation to discuss the Federal Government's current financial
    condition and deteriorating long-term fiscal outlook, including the
    challenges posed by known long-term demographic trends and rising
    health care costs. These forums, popularly referred to as the ``Fiscal
    Wake-up Tour,'' are led by the Concord Coalition and also include the
    Heritage Foundation, the Brookings Institution, and a range of ``good
    government'' groups. The fiscal wake-up tour states the facts regarding
    the Nation's current financial condition and long-term fiscal outlook
    in order to increase public awareness and accelerate actions by
    appropriate Federal, State, and local officials.
                        performance, results, and plans
        We anticipate that the funds requested for fiscal year 2008 will
    support efforts similar to those just completed in fiscal year 2006.
    The following discussions summarize that work.
        In fiscal year 2006, major events like the Nation's recovery from
    natural disasters, ongoing military conflicts abroad, terrorist
    threats, and potential pandemics repeatedly focused the public eye on
    the Federal Government's ability to operate effectively and efficiently
    and provide services to Americans when needed. Our work during the year
    helped the Congress and the public judge how well the Federal
    Government performed its functions and consider alternative approaches
    for improving operations and laws when performance was less than
    adequate. For example, teams supporting all three of our external
    strategic goals performed work related to every facet of the Hurricane
    Katrina and Rita disasters-preparedness, response, recovery, long-term
    recovery, and mitigation. We developed a coordinated and integrated
    approach to ensure that the Congress's need for factual information
    about disaster preparedness, response, recovery, and reconstruction
    activities along the Gulf Coast was met. We examined how federal funds
    were used during and after the disaster and identified the disaster
    rescue, relief, and rebuilding processes that worked well and not so
    well throughout the effort. To do this, staff drawn from across the
    agency spent time in the hardest hit areas of Louisiana, Mississippi,
    Alabama, and Texas, collecting information from government officials at
    the Federal, State, and local levels as well as from private
    organizations assisting with this emergency management effort. We
    briefed congressional staff on our preliminary observations early in
    fiscal year 2006 and subsequently issued over 30 reports and
    testimonies on Hurricanes Katrina and Rita by fiscal year end, focusing
    on, among other issues, minimizing fraud, waste, and abuse in disaster
    assistance and rebuilding the New Orleans hospital care system.
        The following tables provide summary information on GAO's fiscal
    year 2006 performance and the results achieved in support of the
    Congress and the American people. Additional information on our
    performance results can be found in performance and accountability
    highlights fiscal year 2006 at www.gao.gov.
        Table 2 provides examples of how GAO assisted the Nation in fiscal
    year 2006.

      TABLE 2.--EXAMPLES OF HOW GAO ASSISTED THE NATION IN FISCAL YEAR 2006
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              GAO Providing Information That
     Goal             Description                      Helped To--
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
         1 Provide timely, quality         Protect Social Security numbers
            service to the Congress and     from abuse; ensure the
            the Federal Government to       effectiveness of federal
            address current and emerging    investments in science,
            challenges to the wellbeing     technology, engineering, and
            and financial security of the   mathematics education
            American people                 programs; identify actions
                                            needed to improve Federal
                                            Emergency Management Agency
                                            and Red Cross coordination for
                                            the 2006 hurricane season;
                                            highlight weaknesses in the
                                            Department of Health and Human
                                            Services' communications with
                                            beneficiaries about the new
                                            Medicare prescription drug
                                            benefit; identify funding and
                                            drug pricing disparities in
                                            the federal AIDS/HIV program;
                                            strengthen the oversight
                                            clinical laboratories;
                                            identify challenges the
                                            Department of Homeland
                                            Security faces in controlling
                                            illegal immigration into the
                                            United States; assess the
                                            thoroughness of the federal
                                            fair housing complaint and
                                            investigation processes;
                                            improve the management of
                                            federal oil and natural gas
                                            royalty revenue; develop a
                                            strategy for managing
                                            wildfires; focus on the short-
                                            and long-term challenges of
                                            financing the Nation's
                                            transportation infrastructure;
                                            and identify outdated mail
                                            delivery performance standards
                                            used by the U.S. Postal
                                            Service.
         2 Provide timely, quality         Identify current and future
            service to the Congress and     funding and cost issues
            the Federal Government to       related to DOD operations in
            respond to changing security    Iraq and Afghanistan;
            threats and the challenges of   highlight inefficiencies that
            global interdependence          could hinder DOD's efforts to
                                            reform its business
                                            operations; improve controls
                                            over the issuance of passports
                                            and vias and increase fraud
                                            prevention; improve
                                            catastrophic disaster
                                            preparedness, response, and
                                            recovery; improve the ability
                                            of federal agencies to cost
                                            effectively acquire goods and
                                            services; improve the
                                            management of payments to U.S.
                                            producers injured financially
                                            by unfairly traded imports;
                                            alert the Congress to
                                            companies that are marketing
                                            costly mutual fund products
                                            with low returns to military
                                            service members; identify
                                            steps needed to overhaul
                                            investment and management
                                            processes supporting major DOD
                                            acquisitions; improve security
                                            at nuclear power plants;
                                            improve the Department of
                                            Homeland Security's ability to
                                            detect nuclear smuggling at
                                            U.S. ports; promote government
                                            efforts to secure sensitive
                                            systems and information; and
                                            highlight the cost concerns of
                                            small public companies that
                                            must comply with internal
                                            control and auditing
                                            provisions of the Sarbanes-
                                            Oxley Act.
         3 Help transform the Federal      Improve congressional oversight
            Government's role and how it    of the process for reviewing
            does business to meet 21st      foreign direct investment;
            century challenges              strengthen DOD's information
                                            systems modernization efforts;
                                            highlight serious technical
                                            and cost challenges affecting
                                            the purchase of a critical
                                            weather satellite; highlight
                                            key practices federal agencies
                                            should adopt to prevent data
                                            breaches and better protect
                                            the personal information of
                                            U.S. citizens; monitor the
                                            development of the 2010
                                            decennial census; identify
                                            strategies to reduce the gap
                                            between the taxes citizens pay
                                            and the taxes actually owed;
                                            focus attention on the revenue
                                            consequences of tax
                                            expenditures; identify fraud,
                                            waste, and abuse in a
                                            component of the Federal
                                            Emergency Management Agency's
                                            disaster assistance program;
                                            emphasize the importance of
                                            reliable cost information for
                                            improving governmentwide cost
                                            efficiency; and expose
                                            government contractors who
                                            used for personal gain federal
                                            payroll taxes withheld from
                                            their employees.
         4 Maximize the value of GAO by    Foster among other federal
            being a model federal agency    agencies GAO's innovative
            and a world-class               human capital practices, such
            professional services           as broad pay bands;
            organization                    performance-based
                                            compensation; workforce
                                            planning and staffing
                                            strategies, policies, and
                                            processes; and share GAO's
                                            model business and management
                                            processes with counterpart
                                            organizations in the United
                                            States and abroad.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Source: GAO.

                    outcomes of our work and the road ahead
        During fiscal year 2006, we used 16 annual performance measures
    that capture the results of our work; the assistance we provided to the
    Congress; our ability to attract, retain, develop, and lead a highly
    professional workforce; and how well our internal administrative
    services help employees get their jobs done and improve their work life
    (see table 3). We generally exceeded the targets we set for all of our
    performance measures, which indicate our ability to produce results for
    the Nation and serve the Congress.

                               TABLE 3.--AGENCYWIDE SUMMARY OF ANNUAL MEASURES AND TARGETS
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         2002     2003     2004     2005     2006     2007     2008
                   Performance Measures                 Actual   Actual   Actual   Actual   Actual   Target   Target
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Results:
        Financial benefits (dollars in billions).....    $37.7    $35.4    $44.0    $39.6    $51.0    $40.0    $41.5
        Nonfinancial benefits........................     $906   $1,043   $1,197   $1,409   $1,342   $1,100   $1,150
        Past recommendations implemented (in percent)       79       82       83       85       82       80       80
        New products with recommendations (in               53       55       63       63       65       60       60
         percent)....................................
    Client:
        Testimonies..................................      216      189      217      179      240      185      220
        Timeliness (in percent)......................       96       97       97       97       92       95       95
    People:
        New hire rate (in percent)...................       96       98       98       94       94       95       95
        Acceptance rate (in percent).................       81       72       72       71       70       72       72
        Retention rate with retirements (in percent).       91       92       90       90       90       90       90
        Retention rate without retirements (in              97       96       95       94       94       94       94
         percent)....................................
        Staff development (in percent)...............       71       67       70       72       76       75       76
        Staff utilization (in percent)...............       67       71       72       75       75       78       78
        Leadership (in percent)......................       75       78       79       80       79       80       80
        Organizational climate (in percent)..........       67       71       74       76       73       76       76
    Internal operations:
        Help get job done............................      N/A     3.98     4.01     4.10      4.1      4.0      4.0
        Quality of work life.........................      N/A     3.86     3.96     3.98      4.0      4.0      4.0
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Source: GAO.

    Note: N/A indicates the information is not available.

        In fiscal year 2006, our work generated $51 billion in financial
    benefits, primarily from actions agencies and the Congress took in
    response to our recommendations. Of this amount, about $27 billion
    resulted from changes to laws or regulations, $10 billion resulted from
    agency actions based on our recommendations to improve services to the
    public, and $14 billion resulted from improvements to core business
    processes. See figure 2 for examples of our fiscal year 2006 financial
    benefits.

      FIGURE 2.--GAO'S SELECTED MAJOR FINANCIAL BENEFITS REPORTED IN FISCAL
                                    YEAR 2006
                            [In billions of dollars]
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             Description                             Amount
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Ensured continued monetary benefits from federal spectrum            6.1
     auctions....................................................
    Encouraged DOD to identify and reduce unobligated funds in           3.9
     the military services' operations and maintenance budget....
    Recommended payment methods that cut Medicare costs for              2.9
     durable medical equipment, orthotics, and prosthetics.......
    Helped to ensure that certain U.S. Postal Service retirement-        2.2
     related benefits would be funded............................
    Identified recoverable costs for the Tennessee Valley                1.8
     Authority...................................................
    Helped to increase collections of civil debt.................        1.6
    Encouraged the Department of Housing and Urban Development to        1.4
     take actions to reduce improper payments....................
    Supported the Department of Energy's efforts to reduce its           1.2
     carryover funds.............................................
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Source: GAO.

        Many of the benefits that result from our work cannot be measured
    in dollar terms. During fiscal year 2006, we recorded a total of 1,342
    nonfinancial benefits. For example, we documented 61 instances where
    information we provided to the Congress resulted in statutory or
    regulatory changes, 667 instances where federal agencies improved
    services to the public, and 614 instances where agencies improved core
    business processes or governmentwide reforms were advanced. These
    actions spanned the full spectrum of national issues, from identifying
    the adverse tax impact of combat pay and certain tax credits on low-
    income military families to improving the Department of State's process
    for developing staffing projections for new embassies. See figure 3 for
    additional examples of GAO's nonfinancial benefits in fiscal year 2006.

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

    Nonfinancial benefits that helped to change laws
        Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, Public Law No. 109-171. Our work is
    reflected in this law in different ways.
      --Strengthened Medicaid program integrity.
      --Improved oversight of the States' performance under the Temporary
            Assistance for Needy Families program.
      --Addressed domestic violence.
      --Improved oversight of schools that are lenders.
        Safe and Timely Interstate Placement of Foster Children Act of
    2006, Public Law No. 109-239.
    Nonfinancial Benefits That Helped To Improve Services to the Public
        Strengthened passport and visa issuance processes.
        Identified vulnerabilities in the process to verify personal
    information about new drivers.
        Contributed to the increased visibility of a transportation
    information sharing program for seniors.
        Identified a problem with untimely pay allowances to deployed
    soldiers.
    Nonfinancial Benefits That Helped To Promote Sound Agency and
            Governmentwide Management
        Improved the quality of federal voluntary voting system standards.
        Highlighted weaknesses in the Federal Aviation Administration's
    control over computers and other assets.
        Strengthened oversight of federal personnel actions.
        Encouraged federal agencies to seek savings on purchase cards.
        Identified improper payments in DOD's travel accounts.

        Source: GAO.
    Figure 3.--GAO's Selected Nonfinancial Benefits Reported in Fiscal Year
                                      2006

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

        During fiscal year 2006, experts from our staff testified at 240
    congressional hearings covering a wide range of complex issues (see
    table 4). For example, our senior executives testified on a variety of
    issues, including freight rail rates, AIDS assistance programs, and
    federal contracting. Over 100 of the hearings at which we testified
    were related to areas and programs we designated as high risk.
      Table 4.--GAO's Selected Testimony Issues by Strategic Goal, Fiscal
                                   Year 2006
    Goal 1--Address Challenges to the Well-Being and Financial Security of
            the American People
    Health savings accounts
    Guardianships that protect incapacitated seniors
    Lake Pontchartrain hurricane protection project
    Funds to first responders for 9/11 health problems
    Immigration enforcement at work sites
    Future air transportation system
    Nursing home care for veterans
    Passenger rail security issues
    Freight railroad rates
    AIDS drug assistance programs
    Federal Housing Administration reforms
    Improving intermodal transportation
    Hartford nuclear waste treatment plant
    Evaluations of supplemental educational services
    Factors affecting gasoline prices
    Telecommunication spectrum reform
    H-1B visa program
    Federal crop insurance program
    Goal 2--Respond to Changing Security Threats and the Challenges of
            Globalization
    A comprehensive strategy to rebuild Iraq
    Deploying radiation detection equipment in other countries
    Protecting military personnel from unscrupulous financial products
    Sensitive information at DOD and the Department of Energy
    Hurricane Katrina preparedness, response, and recovery
    Alternative mortgage products
    Global war on terrorism costs
    Transportation Security Administration's Secure Flight program
    DOD's business systems modernization
    U.S. tactical aircraft
    National Capital Region Homeland Security Strategic Plan
    Polar-orbiting operational environmental satellites
    Worldwide AIDS relief plan
    Financial stability and management of the National Flood Insurance
    Program
    Information security laws
    Procurement controls at the United Nations
    Goal 3--Help Transform the Federal Government's Role and How It Does
            Business
    Contract management challenges in rebuilding Iraq
    DOD's financial and business management transformation
    Business tax reform
    Astronaut exploration vehicle risks
    Improving federal financial management governmentwide
    Long-term fiscal challenges
    Federal contracting during disasters
    Improving tax compliance to reduce the tax gap
    Protecting the privacy of personal information
    DOD acquisition incentives
    Decennial Census costs
    Information security weaknesses at the Department of Veterans Affairs
    Improper federal payments for Hurricane Katrina relief
    Strengthening the Office of Personnel Management's ability to lead
    human capital reform
    Public/private recovery plan for the Internet
    Tax system abuses by General Services Administration contractors
    Compensation for federal executives and judges
             gao's fiscal year 2008 request to support the congress
        Our fiscal year 2008 budget request seeks the resources necessary
    to allow GAO to rebuild and enhance its workforce, knowledge capacity,
    employee programs, and infrastructure. These items are critical to
    ensure that GAO can continue to provide congressional clients with
    timely, objective, and reliable information on how well government
    programs and policies are working and, when needed, recommendations for
    improvement. In the years ahead, our support to the Congress will
    likely prove even more critical because of the pressures created by our
    Nation's current and projected budget deficit and growing long-term
    fiscal imbalance. GAO is an invaluable tool for helping the Congress
    review, reprioritize, and revise existing mandatory and discretionary
    spending programs and tax policies.
        Consistent with our strategic goal to be a model agency, we
    continuously assess our operations to ensure that GAO remains an
    effective, high-performing organization, providing timely, critical
    support to the Congress while being fiscally responsive. Our objective
    is to be an employer of choice; maintain skills/knowledge, performance-
    based, and market-oriented compensation systems; adopt best practices;
    benchmark service levels and costs against comparable entities;
    streamline our operations to achieve efficiencies; assess opportunities
    for cross-servicing, outsourcing, or business process re-engineering;
    and leverage technology to increase efficiency, productivity, and
    results. We also continue to partner within and across the legislative
    branch through the legislative branch chief administrative officers,
    financial management, and procurement councils.
        Transformational change and innovation is essential for progress.
    Our fiscal year 2008 budget request includes funds to regain the
    momentum needed to achieve these goals. Our fiscal year 2008 budget
    request will allow GAO to
      --address supply and demand imbalances in responding to congressional
            requests for studies in areas such as health care, disaster
            assistance, homeland security, the global ``war on terrorism,''
            energy and natural resources, and forensic auditing;
      --address our increasing bid protest workload;
      --be more competitive in the labor markets where GAO competes for
            talent;
      --address critical human capital components, such as knowledge
            capacity building, succession planning, and staff skills and
            competencies;
      --enhance employee recruitment, retention, and development programs;
      --restore program funding levels and regain our purchasing power;
      --undertake critical initiatives necessary to continuously re-
            engineer processes geared to increasing our productivity and
            effectiveness and addressing identified management challenges;
            and
      --pursue critical structural and infrastructure maintenance and
            improvements.
        Our fiscal year 2008 budget request represents an increase of $41.7
    million (or 8.5 percent) over our fiscal year 2007 funding level and
    includes about $523 million in direct appropriations and authority to
    use about $7.5 million in offsetting collections as illustrated in
    table 5. This request reflects a reduction of nearly $5.4 million in
    nonrecurring fiscal year 2007 costs used to offset the fiscal year 2008
    increase.

     TABLE 5.--FISCAL YEAR 2008 BUDGET REQUEST, SUMMARY OF REQUESTED CHANGES
                             [Dollars in thousands]
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Cumulative
            Budget Category              FTEs        Amount      Percentage
                                                                  of Change
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Fiscal year 2007 enacted budget        3,159     $488,627   ............
     authority.....................
    Fiscal year 2008 requested       ...........  ............  ............
     changes.......................
        Nonrecurring fiscal year     ...........       (5,374)         (1.1)
         2007 costs................
        Mandatory pay costs........  ...........       19,841           3.0
        Uncontrollable cost          ...........        5,079           4.0
         increases.................
        Rebuild our capacity.......           58       14,826           7.0
        Critical investments in      ...........        7,314           8.5
         technology improvements
         and other transformation
         areas.....................
    Net fiscal year 2008 increase..           58       41,686           8.5
    Fiscal year 2008 budget                3,217      530,313   ............
     authority.....................
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Source: GAO.

        Mandatory pay and uncontrollable cost increases.--We are requesting
    $24.9 million to cover anticipated mandatory performance-based pay and
    uncontrollable inflationary increases resulting primarily from annual
    across-the-board and performance-based increases, annualization of
    prior fiscal year costs, and an increase in the number of compensable
    days in fiscal year 2008. These costs also include uncontrollable
    inflationary increases imposed by vendors as the cost of doing
    business.
        Rebuilding our capacity.--Our fiscal year 2007 budget request
    sought funds to support an increase of 50 FTEs from 3,217 to 3,267.
    However, in order to manage within expected funding levels in fiscal
    year 2007, we will significantly curtail hiring by about 50 percent
    below the previous year, resulting in a projected FTE utilization of
    3,159--well below our planned level. In fiscal years 2007 and 2008, we
    anticipate attrition of over 600 staff that will result in a
    significant drain on GAO's knowledge capacity or institutional memory.
    Further, almost 20 percent of all GAO staff will be eligible for
    retirement by the end of fiscal year 2008, including almost 45 percent
    of our senior executive service.
        Thus, in fiscal year 2008, we are seeking funds to rebuild our
    staff and knowledge capacity. In fiscal year 2008, we plan to hire
    about 490 staff--the maximum that we could reasonably absorb--
    increasing our FTE utilization to 3,217. While we are tempering our
    immediate FTE request, increasingly higher demands are being placed on
    GAO. We are experiencing supply and demand imbalances in several areas
    of critical importance to the Congress (e.g., health care, homeland
    security, and energy and natural resources). We have also seen an
    increase in the number of bid protest filings.
        Also, to remain competitive in the labor markets, we need to
    increase employee benefits in areas such as student loan repayments and
    transit subsidies where funding constraints in fiscal year 2007 limit
    our flexibility. For example, effective in January 2007, the IRS
    increased the monthly benefit for transit subsidies for eligible
    employees who commute using public transportation. GAO, however, is
    unable to extend this increased benefit to staff.
        In addition, we need to ensure that staff have the appropriate
    tools and resources to perform effectively, including training and
    development, travel funds, and technology. And when our staff perform
    well, they should be appropriately rewarded.
        Undertake critical investments.--We are requesting funds to
    undertake critical investments that would allow us to implement
    technology improvements and streamline and re-engineer work processes
    to enhance the productivity and effectiveness of our staff, conduct
    essential investments that have been deferred as the result of funding
    constraints and cannot continue to be deferred, and implement responses
    to changing federal conditions, such as smart card technology. Also,
    during recent years, we reduced, deferred, and slowed the pace of
    critical upgrades (e.g., engagement and administrative process
    upgrades) and deferred nonessential administrative activities. In
    fiscal year 2008, we would like to have sufficient funding to take
    action to protect our current investments and continue to be a model
    agency and lead by example.
        Legislative authority.--We are requesting legislation to establish
    a board of contract appeals at GAO to adjudicate contract claims
    involving contracts awarded by legislative branch agencies. GAO has
    performed this function on an ad hoc basis over the years for appeals
    of claims from decisions of the Architect of the Capitol on contracts
    that it awards. Recently we have agreed to handle claims arising under
    Government Printing Office contracts. The legislative proposal would
    promote efficiency and predictability in the resolution of contractor
    and agency claims by consolidating such work in an established and
    experienced adjudicative component of GAO and would permit GAO to
    recover its costs of providing such adjudicative services from
    legislative branch users of such services.
        We also plan to request legislation that will assist GAO in
    performing its mission work and enhance our human capital policies,
    including addressing certain compensation and benefits issues of
    interest to our employees. While there are a number of important
    provisions, today I will only discuss several of the significant ones.
    Regarding provisions concerned with mission work, we have identified a
    number of legislative mandates that are either no longer meeting the
    purpose intended or should be performed by an entity other than GAO. We
    are working with the cognizant entities and the appropriate
    authorization and oversight committees to discuss the potential impact
    of legislative relief for these issues. Another provision would
    modernize the authority of the Comptroller General to administer oaths
    in performance of the work of the office. To keep the Congress apprized
    of difficulties we have interviewing agency personnel and obtaining
    agency views on matters related to ongoing mission work, we will
    suggest new reporting requirements. When agencies or other entities
    ignore a request by the Comptroller General to have personnel provide
    information under oath, make personnel available for interviews, or
    provide written answers to questions, the Comptroller General would
    report to the Congress as soon as practicable and also include such
    information in the annual report to the Congress.
        In regard to GAO's human capital flexibilities, among other
    provisions, we are proposing a flexibility that allows us to better
    approximate market rates for professional positions by increasing our
    maximum pay for other than the senior executive service and senior
    level from GS-15, step 10, to executive level III. Additionally, under
    our revised and contemporary merit pay system, certain portions of an
    employee's merit increase, below applicable market-based pay caps, are
    not permanent. Since this may impact an employee's high three for
    retirement purposes, another key provision of the bill would enable
    these nonpermanent payments to be included in the retirement
    calculation for all GAO employees, except senior executives and senior
    level personnel.
                               concluding remarks
        In summary, I believe that you will find our budget request
    reasonable, responsible, and well-justified given the important role
    that GAO plays and the unparalleled return on investment that GAO
    generates. We are grateful for the Congress's continued support of our
    mutual effort to improve government and for providing the resources
    that allow us to be a world-class professional services organization.
    We are proud of our record performance and the positive impact we have
    been able to effect in government over the past year and believe an
    investment in GAO will continue to yield substantial returns for the
    Congress and the American people. Our Nation will continue to face
    significant challenges in the years ahead. GAO's expertise and
    involvement in virtually every facet of government positions us to
    provide the Congress with the timely, objective, and reliable
    information it needs to discharge its constitutional responsibilities.
        Mrs. Chairwoman and members of the subcommittee, this concludes my
    prepared statement. At this time, I would be pleased to answer any
    questions that you or other members of the subcommittee may have.
        appendix i: serving the congress--gao's strategic plan framework
        This is a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to
    copyright protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and
    distributed in its entirety without further permission from GAO.
    However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or other
    material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you
    wish to reproduce this material separately.

                           GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

    STATEMENT OF WILLIAM H. TURRI, ACTING PUBLIC PRINTER
        Senator Landrieu. Mr. Turri.
        Mr. Turri. Good morning. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        It's clear that you have a busy schedule ahead of you
    today, so I'll submit my full remarks for the record and make
    only a few brief comments now.

                        GPO deg.RESULTS OF 2006

        GPO had a successful year in 2006, the second full year
    operating under our strategic vision for the future. We
    increased net income, and we're on the verge of completing
    GPO's transition to a full-service digital information
    provider. We're committed to providing a full range of digital
    and legacy information services to Congress and Federal
    agencies. And last year we made real progress toward that goal.
        With Congress' support, we awarded the key contracts for
    development of our future digital system. This system provides
    the essential technologies that tie input of analog and digital
    materials to output in print and electronic formats. We are on
    schedule for a startup later this year.
        We began production of the e-Passport for the State
    Department, and, following their schedule, we have ramped up
    production to meet the demands of travelers in North America
    and the Caribbean.
        We conducted a pilot project to demonstrate our
    capabilities in digitizing Government documents, taking the
    opportunity to begin digitizing some of the Government's
    considerable retrospective collection. We hope to make this a
    standing operation in the current fiscal year.
        We inaugurated the GPO Express card, which allows
    Government agencies to take their short run printing needs
    directly to local quick-print shops without concern that the
    publication produced will fail to be included in the Depository
    Library Program.
        I know that Senator Allard is not present today, but I am
    aware of his interest in the Government Performance and Results
    Act (GPRA), so I'm pleased to report to you that the GPO has
    begun the process of implementing Government Performance and
    Results Act-like practices into our operations.
        Building on our strategic vision, GPO is implementing a
    balanced scorecard methodology. Not only will the balanced
    scorecard dovetail with our GPRA practices, but will also link
    our strategic goals with our annual performance reviews and
    measure our organization's success with data and outcome.

                    GPO deg.APPROPRIATIONS REQUEST

        Fully two-thirds of the funds we are requesting for the
    coming fiscal year is for work we're required to provide, such
    as producing and distributing a new edition of the U.S. Code,
    handling the estimated workload of Congress, including the
    Congressional Record, bills, calendars, and committee reports
    and prints, and distributing Government publications to the
    1,200 congressionally designated libraries in the Federal
    Depository Library Program.
        The balance we're requesting is to recover the shortfall we
    are projected to experience, due to the continuing resolution
    this year, and for investment in projects to continue moving
    the strategic vision of GPO forward. Some of the shortfall
    requirement can be offset with the use of approximately $5
    million in unexpended prior-year funds for that purpose, with
    the approval of the appropriations committees. Our request for
    this authority will be sent to you soon.
        Since 2003, Congress has strongly supported our digital
    transformation, and the benefits have been dramatic: net
    income, instead of losses; increased access to digital and
    other information products, with nearly a 25-percent decrease
    in our workforce; and a strategic vision of the future that is
    not only attainable and sustainable, but which addresses
    longstanding GPO needs, corrects system deficiencies, and
    unlocks this venerable agency's potential for the future.
        I'm asking that you continue to support our forward
    advance. The goal is in sight. As our record demonstrates,
    investment in the GPO results in real and measurable gains for
    Congress, Federal agencies, and the public as a whole.
        Finally, Madam Chair, I would like to thank you for your
    support in providing an additional $1.9 million, in the
    February 15 continuing resolution, to help us with mandatory
    pay increases and retraining.
        In accordance with past practice, we will be sending an
    operating plan to the subcommittee soon.

                               PREPARED STATEMENT

        Madam Chair, this concludes my opening remarks, and I will
    be happy to respond to any questions you may have.
        Senator Landrieu. Thank you, Mr. Turri.
        [The statement follows:]
                     Prepared Statement of William H. Turri
        Madam Chair and members of the subcommittee on Legislative Branch
    Appropriations: It is an honor to be here today to present the
    appropriations request of the U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO) for
    fiscal year 2008.
                           government printing office
        As the Nation's printer and disseminator of official Federal
    documents, GPO has a long and rich history as the official producer of
    every great American state paper--and an uncounted number of other
    Government publications--since President Lincoln's time. Where once our
    products and services were confined to ink on paper, today we provide
    capabilities for the production of Federal documents in both electronic
    and conventional formats, utilizing a broad range of information
    technologies.
        By law, GPO is responsible for the production and distribution of
    information products and services for all three branches of the Federal
    Government. Many of the Nation's most important information products,
    such as the Congressional Record and other documents used by the U.S.
    Senate and House of Representatives, are produced at GPO's main plant
    in Washington, DC.
        Working under a longstanding partnership with the printing
    industry, GPO also maintains a pool of private sector vendors
    nationwide to produce the vast range of publications ordered annually
    by Federal agencies.
        GPO's primary responsibility for the dissemination of Federal
    publications traces its roots to an act of the 13th Congress, which
    provided for the distribution of congressional and other government
    documents on a regular basis to libraries and other institutions in
    each State for that Congress and ``every future Congress.'' This
    farsighted act established the antecedent for the Federal Depository
    Library Program, a program funded through GPO's appropriations, which
    today serves millions of Americans through a network of some 1,250
    public, academic, law, and other libraries located in virtually every
    congressional district across the Nation.
        Along with that program, we also provide public access to the
    wealth of official Federal information through public sales, through
    various statutory and reimbursable distribution programs, and--most
    prominently--by posting more than a quarter of a million Federal titles
    online on GPO Access (www.gpo.gov/gpoaccess), our award-winning Web
    site that is used by the public to retrieve more than 40 million
    documents free of charge every month.
                         preparing for a digital future
        Continuing advances in information technologies have transformed
    the ways that Congress, Federal agencies, and the public obtain and
    make use of government publications. As a result, printing is now
    secondary to our broader task of producing and providing access to the
    information products and services produced by the Federal Government, a
    task that today is rooted in digital rather than analog technologies.
    While printing remains an important information technology that
    continues to be required, it has become just one of a range of
    information product and service capabilities that GPO must transform
    itself to support in order to fulfill our mission requirements
    effectively in the digital era.
        This development was confirmed by a June 2004 report of the
    Government Accountability Office (GAO), Actions to Strengthen and
    Sustain GPO's Transformation. The GAO recommended that GPO develop a
    plan to focus our mission on information dissemination as our primary
    goal; demonstrate to our customers the value we can provide; improve
    and extend partnerships with agencies to help establish the GPO as an
    information disseminator; and ensure that our internal operations--
    including technology, how we conduct business, information systems, and
    training--are adequate for the efficient and effective management of
    our core business functions and services.
        To that end, in December 2004 we published our strategic vision for
    the 21st century. This document provides a framework for how our
    transformation goals--including the development of a digital content
    system to anchor all future operations, reorganization of the agency
    into new product- and service-oriented business lines along with
    investment in the necessary technologies, adoption of management best
    practices agency-wide including retraining to provide needed skills,
    and the relocation and/or reconfiguration of GPO facilities--will be
    carried out, and since then GPO's operations and programs have been
    conducted in accordance with it.
                                results of 2006
        During the past year we made significant progress in carrying out
    the elements of our strategic vision:
      --The core of our future operations will revolve around a GPO-
            developed Future Digital System--currently called FDsys--which
            is being designed to organize, manage, and output authenticated
            content of authenticated Federal documents--in text, audio, and
            even video formats--for any purpose. In 2006 we awarded
            contracts for master integrator services and equipment
            acquisition, and this project is on track to begin operations
            in summer 2007.
      --GPO's own production capabilities are focused in support of what we
            call the ``Official Journals of Government,'' including the
            Congressional Record and Federal Register, Congress's
            requirements, and security and intelligent documents. To
            improve production efficiency and broaden the range of product
            and service options for Congress and Federal agencies, we've
            invested in a variety of new technologies.
      --We continue to work closely with the library community to move the
            Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP) toward a
            predominately electronic basis as required by Congress, and
            today more than 90 percent of all new titles entering the
            program are electronic. In managing this transition we have
            taken care to ensure that documents in print formats that are
            required at this time by some libraries, particularly law
            libraries, continue to be supplied.
      --We're now working with our customers in Federal agencies more
            cooperatively, offering them more flexibility in choosing and
            working directly with vendors, especially with small value
            purchases and complex purchases involving multiple functions
            such as data preparation, personalization, and distribution. In
            2006 we augmented our expert printing procurement services by
            offering a new capability that provides Federal agencies with
            innovative, digitally linked convenience duplicating and
            printing services across the country.
      --Security and intelligent documents--including passports, Federal
            identification cards, and potentially other documents--today
            are an increasingly important business line for GPO, and could
            constitute as much as 50 percent of GPO's business in the
            future. The major product of this unit is U.S. passports, and
            in 2006 we began the successful production of the new e-
            passport for the State Department.
      --We've established a Digital Conversion Services Branch within
            Customer Services to test document scanning services for the
            FDLP and Federal agencies. In 2006, we began a pilot project to
            demonstrate our retrospective digitization capabilities and
            have recently completed that work. We look forward to sharing
            our results of this pilot project at your earliest convenience.
        In addition to these strategic directions, over the past 4 years we
    have become a more efficient operation, our organizational structure
    has been streamlined for faster decisionmaking, we have implemented
    enterprise-wide planning for our information technology systems,
    redundant facilities across the country have been consolidated or
    closed, and staffing levels have been significantly reduced utilizing
    early retirement authority authorized through Legislative Branch
    Appropriations Acts. We also initiated planning and discussions with
    our oversight and appropriations committees on the future of GPO's
    current buildings on North Capitol Street in Washington, DC.
        Perhaps most important, our finances have been restored to a
    positive basis, reversing a pattern of financial losses that reached
    $100 million in previous years. For fiscal year 2006, we generated a
    net income of $9.8 million from operations, compared with a $6.1
    million gain the year before, the third straight year of positive
    financial results. We also recorded another reduction to our long-term
    liability for the Federal workers' compensation program, freeing
    additional funds for future investment. GPO is now on a solid financial
    footing.
                    fiscal year 2008 appropriations request
        For fiscal year 2008, we are requesting a total of $181,979,000, to
    enable us to:
      --Meet projected requirements for GPO's congressional printing and
            binding and information dissemination operations during fiscal
            year 2008;
      --recover from the impact of restricted funding for fiscal year 2007
            under the current continuing resolution;
      --complete the development of our Future Digital System project and
            implement other improvements to GPO's information technology
            infrastructure;
      --perform essential maintenance and repairs to our aging buildings;
            and
      --continue retraining and restructuring GPO's workforce to meet
            changing technology demands.
        Congressional Printing and Binding Appropriation.--This account
    covers the cost of printing and other information services supporting
    the legislative process in the House of Representatives and the Senate.
    These services include production--in both print and online formats--of
    the daily and permanent Congressional Record, bills, resolutions, and
    amendments, hearings, committee prints and documents, miscellaneous
    printing and binding including stationery and document franks, and
    related products, as authorized by the public printing provisions of
    Title 44, U.S. Code.
        We are requesting $109,541,000 for this account, representing an
    increase of $21,587,000 over the level provided by the current
    continuing resolution. The increase contains two primary components:
    $9,251,000 to adjust this account to projected operating requirements
    for fiscal year 2008, and an extraordinary requirement of $12,336,000
    to fund a projected shortfall for fiscal year 2007 under the current
    continuing resolution.
        For fiscal year 2008, we project the need for $96,460,000 to meet
    anticipated congressional printing and binding requirements known to
    typically occur in a second-session year. The current level of funding,
    or $87,954,000, has remained essentially unchanged since fiscal year
    2005 in spite of increasing costs and changes in workload.
        Under the continuing resolution for fiscal year 2007, we anticipate
    incurring a significant shortfall in congressional printing and binding
    due to the unchanged level of funding since fiscal year 2005, the
    requirement to produce the 2006 edition of the U.S. Code, the need to
    fully fund contractual pay raises, and a projected increase in workload
    consistent with a first-session year, including an anticipated increase
    in days in session under the new congressional leadership. We will be
    able to meet these requirements without disrupting service to Congress
    by temporarily financing the shortfall through GPO's revolving fund. As
    GPO has done in the past (most recently in fiscal year 2001), however,
    we are seeking the restoration of the shortfall through subsequent
    appropriations.
        Under our appropriations bill language, GPO has the authority--with
    the approval of the Committees on Appropriations--to transfer forward
    the unexpended balances of prior year appropriations. This remains an
    option to transfer to GPO's revolving fund up to approximately
    $4,000,000 from the unexpended balance of the Congressional Printing
    and Binding Appropriation remaining from fiscal year 2004 and an
    estimated $1,000,000 remaining from fiscal year 2003. These funds could
    be used to offset part of the anticipated shortfall and if this option
    is exercised it would reduce our requirement for new funding for that
    purpose.

                       CONGRESSIONAL PRINTING AND BINDING
                            [In millions of dollars]
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Amount
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Fiscal Year 2007 Approved...............................            88.0
    Fiscal Year 2007 Request................................           109.5
    Change \1\..............................................           21.6
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Change includes: Mandatory requirements and continuing operations
      and investment requirements.

        Salaries and Expenses Appropriation of the Superintendent of
    Documents.--The largest single component of this appropriation is for
    the Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP). This account also
    provides for the cataloging and indexing of government publications as
    well as the distribution of government publications to international
    exchange libraries and other recipients as authorized by the documents
    provisions of Title 44, U.S. Code.
        We are requesting $45,613,000 for this account, representing an
    increase of $12,517,000 over the level provided by the current
    continuing resolution. The increase is required to cover mandatory pay
    and price level increases, recover from the impact of restricted
    funding for fiscal year 2007 under the current continuing resolution,
    and continue improving public access to government information in
    electronic formats. Of the total increase, $1,885,000 is for mandatory
    pay and price level costs.
        Our requested increase provides $3,250,000 to recover the cost
    impacts of restricted funding under the continuing resolution,
    principally the requirement to distribute the 2006 edition of the U.S.
    Code to depository libraries and cover increased overhead costs--
    primarily for information technology services--while striving to
    maintain our responsibility to distribute information products to
    libraries in the formats needed by their users.
        As GPO continues to perform information dissemination through the
    FDLP on a predominately electronic basis, as mandated in the conference
    report accompanying the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act for
    Fiscal Year 1996, we also need to make continuing investments in
    technology infrastructure and supporting systems. Our requested
    increase provides $7,382,000 to cover projects for data migration and
    processing, FDLP program outreach, Web harvesting, data storage,
    authentication, and other modernization.

                              SALARIES AND EXPENSES
                            [In millions of dollars]
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Amount
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Fiscal Year 2007 Approved...............................            33.1
    Fiscal Year 2008 Requested..............................            45.6
    Change \1\..............................................           12.5
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Change includes: Mandatory requirements and continuing operations
      and investment requirements.

        Revolving Fund.--We are requesting $26,825,000 for this account, to
    remain available until expended, to fund essential investments in
    information technology infrastructure and systems development,
    workforce retraining and restructuring, and facilities maintenance and
    repairs.
        The key projects covered by this request include $10,500,000 to
    complete the development of GPO's Future Digital System, which is
    scheduled to go live later this year; $9,375,000 to cover the
    replacement of GPO's 30-year old automated composition system, upgrade
    our Oracle enterprise business systems, and implement other
    improvements to our information technology infrastructure; $3,000,000
    to continue our program for workforce retraining and restructuring; and
    $3,950,000 for maintenance and repairs to GPO's aging buildings.

                                 REVOLVING FUND
                            [In millions of dollars]
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Amount
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Fiscal Year 2007 Approved...............................             1.0
    Fiscal Year 2007 Request................................            26.8
    Change \1\..............................................           25.8
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Change includes: Mandatory requirements and continuing operations
      and investment requirements.

        Madam Chair and members of the subcommittee, with your support we
    can continue GPO's record of achievement. We look forward to working
    with you in your review and consideration of our request.

                          CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE

    STATEMENT OF PETER R. ORSZAG, DIRECTOR
        Senator Landrieu. Peter.
        Dr. Orszag. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
        As you know, CBO provides the Congress with timely,
    nonpartisan, and objective information about budget and
    economic issues. And I just want to note that I assumed my
    position in January, and look forward to working with you and
    your colleagues throughout the rest of my 4-year term.
        CBO's proposed budget for fiscal year 2008 totals $38
    million, which is a $2.8 million, or 7.9 percent, increase over
    our fiscal year 2007 funding level. After taking into account
    increases in prices and costs, the budget restores CBO to its
    fiscal year 2006 operating level.
        As you may know, our budget is overwhelmingly for people.
    Ninety-one percent of CBO's appropriation is devoted to
    personnel costs, and the bulk of our requested increase, $2.1
    million, is devoted to staff salaries and benefits.
        On that note, I would point out that our staff is
    overwhelmingly very highly skilled. More than three-quarters of
    our professional and management staff have a Ph.D. or master's
    degree, and obviously the market for those kinds of personnel
    has become increasingly competitive, which puts pressure on
    agencies like CBO.
        The remaining 9 percent of our budget is devoted to IT
    equipment, supplies, and small purchases of other items and
    services. The funding for CBO's IT resources increases by a
    little under $500,000. The reason is the rapid increase in IT
    costs necessary to fulfill our various requirements. That IT
    funding would restore CBO's fiscal year--restore IT funding to
    CBO's fiscal year 2006 operating level.

                          CBO deg.HEALTHCARE

        I would also like to mention that various members and
    subcommittee chairmen of the House and Senate have asked CBO to
    expand our ability to assist the Congress in identifying and
    analyzing potential ways to address projected growth in
    healthcare spending. This is perhaps the central long-term
    fiscal challenge facing the Federal Government, and there is no
    other agency that is providing options on what could bend the
    curve on healthcare spending over the long term. Given the
    central importance of this issue to the budget, and given the
    potential role that CBO could play in providing such options, I
    support the initiative to expand CBO's work in this area, and
    we have put together staffing and other resources request that
    would allow us to better meet the needs of the Congress in this
    area. Totaling a little over $500,000, it includes funding for
    an additional health position, visiting fellow, consulting
    support, and the purchase of data that would allow us to
    undertake more analysis.
        Thank you very much.
        Senator Landrieu. Thank you.
        [The statement follows:]
                     Prepared Statement of Peter R. Orszag
        Madam Chair and members of the subcommittee, I am pleased to
    present the fiscal year 2008 budget request for the Congressional
    Budget Office (CBO).
        CBO's mission is to provide the Congress with timely, objective,
    nonpartisan analyses of the budget and the economy and to furnish the
    information and cost estimates required for the congressional budget
    process. That mission is its single ``program.'' Approximately 91
    percent of CBO's appropriation is devoted to personnel, and the
    remaining 9 percent to information technology (IT), equipment,
    supplies, and small purchases of other items.
        CBO's proposed budget for fiscal year 2008 totals $37,972,000, a
    $2.8 million or 7.9 percent increase over the fiscal year 2007 funding
    level. After taking into account increases in prices and costs, this
    budget request restores CBO to its fiscal year 2006 operating level.
    (The continuing resolution for fiscal year 2007 provided funding at
    less than the 2006 current services level for the agency.)
        The requested increase is largely accounted for by $2.1 million for
    increases in staff salaries and benefits, which are estimated to grow
    by 6.3 percent in 2008.
        In the request, funding for CBO's IT resources increases by almost
    40 percent, or $458,200. The reason is the rapid increase in IT costs
    necessary to fulfill CBO's IT requirements; the request does not entail
    any significant increase in those requirements. In other words, the
    increase restores IT funding to CBO's fiscal year 2006 operating level.
        The remainder of CBO's nonpersonnel budget will increase by 18
    percent, or $258,400, which restores funding to normal levels for CBO's
    share of support for the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board
    (FASAB), as well as providing for expert consultants, subscription
    services, printing, miscellaneous support by contractors, and travel
    and training requirements.
        CBO assists the Congress in exercising its responsibilities for the
    budget of the U.S. government and other legislation. Under the 1974
    Congressional Budget Act, the primary duty of CBO is to support the
    committees on the Budget of both Houses. Further, the agency supports
    the congressional budget process by providing analyses requested by the
    committees on the Budget; the committees on Appropriations; the
    committee on Ways and Means; the committee on Finance; other
    committees; and, to the extent that resources permit, individual
    members. Contributing in various forms, CBO:
      --Reports on the outlook for the budget and the economy to help the
            Congress prepare for the legislative year;
      --constructs baseline budget projections to serve as neutral
            benchmarks for gauging the effects of spending and revenue
            proposals;
      --assists the committees on the Budget in developing the
            congressional budget resolution by providing alternative
            spending and revenue paths and the estimated effects of a
            variety of policy options;
      --analyzes the likely direct effects that the President's budgetary
            proposals will have on outlays and revenues; their economic
            implications, and any budgetary feedback;
      --provides estimates of the cost of all appropriation bills at each
            stage of the legislative process, including estimates for
            numerous amendments considered during that annual process;
      --reports on all programs and activities for which authorizations for
            appropriations were not enacted or are scheduled to expire;
      --estimates the cost of many legislative proposals, including formal
            cost estimates for all bills reported by committees of the
            House and Senate and detailed explanations of the components of
            cost estimates and the estimating methodologies used;
      --estimates the cost of intergovernmental and private-sector mandates
            in reported bills and other legislative proposals;
      --conducts policy studies of governmental activities having major
            economic and budgetary impacts;
      --provides testimonies on a broad range of budget and economic issues
            addressing the agency's own budget projections as well as
            specific issues related to national security, health care
            policy, alternative means of financing infrastructure spending,
            and numerous other program areas;
      --helps the Congress make budgetary choices by providing policy
            options, but not policy recommendations, for how it might alter
            federal outlays and receipts in the near term and over the
            longer term; and
      --constructs statistical, behavioral, and computational models to
            project short- and long-term costs and revenues of government
            programs.
        In fiscal year 2008, CBO's request will allow the agency to build
    on current efforts. Specifically, the request:
      --Supports a heavy workload of formal and informal estimates of the
            costs of proposed or enacted legislation and of mandates
            included in legislation, analytical reports, other publications
            and updates, and congressional testimony;
      --supports 235 FTEs (full-time-equivalent positions), including an
            across-the-board pay adjustment of 3 percent for staff earning
            a salary of $100,000 or less, which is consistent with the pay
            adjustment requested by other legislative branch agencies;
      --funds a projected 5.2 percent increase in the cost of benefits and
            funds a combination of promotions and merit increases for
            staff;
      --funds CBO's share ($460,575) of FASAB's budget requirement;
      --provides expert consultant and subscription services necessary to
            fulfilling CBO's mission ($340,100);
      --provides management and professional training at the funding level
            in fiscal year 2006 ($125,000);
      --provides travel funding at the fiscal year 2006 funding level
            ($140,000);
      --supports the current level of maintenance and restores software
            development funding for CBO's financial management system to
            the 2006 funding level ($102,800);
      --improves disaster recovery capabilities at the Alternate Computing
            Facility ($70,000);
      --allows for acquiring commercial data necessary for CBO's analyses
            and studies ($193,000);
      --maintains essential operations for desktop software ($83,000); and
      --provides for replacing obsolete desktop computers and network
            servers ($130,000).
        CBO has been asked by various members and committee chairmen of the
    House and Senate to expand its ability to assist the Congress in
    identifying and analyzing potential ways to address projected growth in
    health care spending. Continued rapid growth in such spending poses a
    major long-term threat to the Nation's fiscal stability. Responding to
    that request, CBO has identified staffing and other resources that
    would enable the agency to better meet the needs of the Congress in
    this area. Some additional funding would be necessary to augment CBO's
    fiscal year 2008 budget request. Totaling $538,400, it includes funding
    for an additional health position, visiting fellow, consulting support,
    and the purchase of prescription drug and health insurance data, as
    well as minor funding for related IT, office space reconfiguration,
    travel, and training. CBO hopes that the subcommittee will consider
    adding funding to CBO's fiscal year 2008 budget request to cover this
    additional requirement.
        Before I close, I would like to report that CBO received its third
    consecutive clean opinion on the latest audit of its financial
    statements. The agency's fourth audit (of fiscal year 2006 financial
    statements) is ongoing.
        The agency is committed to applying the principles of the
    Government Performance Results Act, as discussed in the Senate's fiscal
    year 2006 report. This past year, the agency developed its first formal
    strategic plan and performance plan. On the basis of those documents,
    CBO will prepare its first performance accountability report, using
    fiscal year 2007 as the baseline.
        Finally, I would like to thank the committee for the funding
    provided this year, including the allowance for a cost-of-living
    adjustment that supplemented the agency's payroll under the continuing
    resolution.

                              OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE

    STATEMENT OF TAMARA E. CHRISLER, ACTING EXECUTIVE
                DIRECTOR
    ACCOMPANIED BY:
        PETER A. EVELETH, GENERAL COUNSEL
        BARBARA CAMENS, MEMBER, BOARD OF DIRECTORS

        Senator Landrieu. Ms. Chrisler.
        Ms. Chrisler. Thank you. Good morning, Madam Chair. I'm
    honored to appear before this subcommittee today as the Acting
    Executive Director of the Office of Compliance (OOC).

      OOC deg.OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE STRATEGIC PLAN GUIDES BUDGET
                                    REQUEST

        Our fiscal year 2008 budget request is guided by our newly
    developed strategic plan, which focuses on collaboration and
    communication and increasing our efforts at being a resource to
    the legislative branch.
        The first goal of our strategic plan involves our safety
    and health program, and it's through that program that our
    Office has been heavily engaged in collaborative and
    communication efforts with the Office of Architect of the
    Capitol, in negotiating a mutually acceptable resolution to the
    complaint that was filed in the utility tunnels case.
        It is anticipated that this resolution will involve a
    written settlement agreement, whereby the abatement plan for
    the hazards in the utility tunnels is outlined. We're
    requesting your assistance, and the assistance of the
    subcommittee today, to fund $280,000 approximate for our
    efforts in meeting our obligations under the settlement
    agreement; $120,000 to secure the services of a safety and
    health expert to act as a liaison between our Office and the
    Office of the AOC's liaison, to ensure that the terms of the
    agreement are met. We're also seeking an additional $152,000 to
    secure the expert services of consultants in heat issues and
    egress issues, asbestos, and mold issues. We currently have, on
    staff, contractors who are experts in some of these areas, but
    these contractors' time and attention are devoted to other
    matters, and, in order to meet our obligation under the
    settlement agreement, we're requesting your support.

    OOC deg.OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE AS RESOURCE TO LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

        In developing our strategic plan, our office thought, and
    considered, how we can be of help to the legislative branch,
    how we can be a resource in ensuring that work environments are
    safe and healthy environments from the beginning, before
    conditions become hazardous. We recognize that it's education,
    and it's knowledge, and it's preventive measures that are key.
    To this end, we would like to work with Member offices, we
    would like to work with employing offices, and review their
    safety and health plans, and evaluate their safety and health
    programs. We'd like to work with Congress to develop safety
    checklists for State offices, so staff there know how to
    recognize conditions before they become hazardous. It's
    preventive, it's proactive, and it's a cost-efficient way of
    providing services.
        Now, we know we can't act as a resource in a bubble. We
    can't sit in our Office and make determinations as to how to
    provide assistance to the covered community. We know that it
    takes collaboration with stakeholders so that we--our efforts
    are targeted to the areas where our efforts are needed. We know
    that it takes communication with safety and health officers and
    managers so that our office understands the particular needs of
    certain offices. We know that it takes financial resources. And
    that's why we're here today, to ask for your support in this
    endeavor.

         OOC deg.MONITORING ABATEMENT OF MOST SERIOUS HAZARDS

        Last year, I had the privilege of testifying before this
    subcommittee in support of the fiscal year 2007 budget request
    of the Office. In asking our general counsel about abatement of
    specific identified hazards, Senator Allard shared with us his
    experience, his prior experience, as an inspector. And the
    Senator focused on the importance of follow-up in monitoring
    abatement. And we heard the Senator, and we took those comments
    very seriously. We recognize that the fundamental success of
    any safety and health inspection program requires the ability
    to facilitate abatement of identified hazards. And a major
    factor of that facilitation is follow up. It's ensuring that
    steps were taken, and it's making sure everything that was
    supposed to be done has been done. Our Office has never had the
    funding or the staffing to monitor abatement as it should.
        With the large number of violations that were found in the
    109th Congress alone, we know that it's going to take a
    dedicated position to monitor the abatement of the identified
    hazards in the 109th Congress and the other existing hazards.
    And we're asking your support in funding an additional position
    for our Office. That would be a compliance officer, who would
    be dedicated to monitoring the abatement of identified hazards,
    who would be responsible for that follow up and ensuring that
    everything that's supposed to be done has been done.

                   ADDITIONAL FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT POSITIONS

        Our Office is requesting three additional--outside of the
    compliance officer--three additional full-time equivalent
    positions, as well, two of which were requested in fiscal year
    2007 budget request; those two being the accounts payable
    position, which would bring on staff our accounts payable
    function and allow for separation of duties, as well as a
    management analyst, who would assist in monitoring the projects
    that our Office is involved in, so that our program managers
    can focus on managing their programs.
        The fourth position that we're requesting is an
    administrative position that would be shared between the half-
    time receptionist that we currently have, bringing that
    position to full time, and the administrative support of the
    safety and health program that we anticipate--that we
    anticipate with the increased workload.
        Madam Chair, our office is energized about our new
    strategic plan, and we are very excited about further servicing
    the legislative branch as a resource. We want to be a part of
    the preventative measures, and we want to be a part of
    collaborative efforts, and we want to be a part of the
    solution.
        Joining me today is a member of our board of directors,
    Barbara Camens, and, if time permits, I would ask that she be
    allowed to make a brief statement, as well.

                              PREPARED STATEMENTS

        Senator Landrieu. Okay, that may be possible, and thank you
    for your testimony.
        Ms. Chrisler. Thank you.
        [The statements follow:]
                    Prepared Statement of Tamara E. Chrisler
        Madam Chair and members of the committee, thank you for the
    opportunity to appear before you today in support of the fiscal year
    2008 budget request of the Office of Compliance.
        Board member Barbara Camens is in attendance with me today to
    express the support of the board of directors for the Office's fiscal
    year 2008 budget request. Also with me today are General Counsel Peter
    Ames Eveleth, Deputy Executive Director Alma Candelaria, and
    Administrative and Budget Officer Beth Hughes Brown.
        As we have in the past, we present our budget request as a
    completely zero based budget, in an effort to provide transparency of
    the office's operations, and to assist the committee in understanding
    from the ground up how the office operates its mandated programs in
    employment dispute resolution, in occupational safety and health and
    ADA public access inspections and enforcement, and in education and
    outreach programs. This year, we have requested a total of $4,106,000
    for fiscal year 2008 operations. A large portion of this request,
    $280,200 (28 percent of the requested increase), is attributed to the
    required abatement monitoring of the utility tunnels case.
        The Office of Compliance (OOC or Office) approaches fiscal year
    2008 with a new strategic plan. Although our plan was implemented at
    the beginning of fiscal year 2007, 2008 will be the first fiscal year
    in which the Office has requested funding in support of this plan.
    Prior to the end of our first 3-year strategic plan in fiscal year
    2006, the Office began preparation for the drafting of our current
    plan. We incorporated input from our entire staff, outlining our major
    goal of focusing on meeting the workplace needs of the legislative
    branch, and positioning ourselves to act as a resource to the covered
    community. Shortly after the beginning of fiscal year 2007, the Office
    finalized a plan which covers fiscal years 2007-2009, with focused
    efforts on communication and collaboration with agencies and employing
    offices, and providing technical guidance as needed. As we strive to
    meet the goals and performance measures of our current strategic plan,
    we face new operational challenges of funding and staffing. We request
    your assistance in overcoming these challenges.
                         occupational safety and health
        The Congressional Accountability Act's (CAA) statutory mandate
    requires that our office conduct a workplace safety and health
    inspection program. The monitoring of remediation of hazards found
    through the Office's inspection program remains a vital part of the
    safety and health program. During fiscal year 2006, the General Counsel
    increased his efforts to remedy two serious violations which posed
    imminent danger to workers, one of which was unabated safety violations
    which existed in the Capitol Power Plant utility tunnels since before
    1999. The Office's filing of our first ever formal complaint led the
    Office of the Architect of the Capitol (AOC) to implement immediate
    interim abatement measures to protect workers in the tunnels from
    imminent harm.
        With that protection in place, the AOC and the Office engaged in
    settlement negotiations to resolve the formal complaint by devising a
    plan which requires abatement of the identified hazards, continued
    interim protection for affected AOC employees until full abatement is
    achieved, and monitoring of the abatement progress by the Office of
    Compliance. In order to ensure the safety and health of workers, this
    monitoring may require the procurement of expertise that the Office
    does not have available on staff. The current staff complement of the
    OOC has been stretched in both FTE resources and contractor funding,
    and we currently do not have available the expertise to address many of
    the specifics involved in the abatement of the tunnels hazards. Our
    fiscal year 2008 budget request includes $120,000 for funding to cover
    the costs of an OOC liaison (a safety and health expert) who will help
    us continuously interface with the AOC's liaison to facilitate
    abatement pursuant to the tunnels settlement agreement. An additional
    $152,000 is requested so that our office may obtain the expertise of
    other expert consultants who can address structural, heat, egress,
    mold, and asbestos issues.
        The monitoring of the utility tunnels as well as the monitoring of
    the nearly 13,000 findings our inspectors detected in our 109th
    Congress biennial inspection will require substantial time and
    resources. Our multi-year plan considers this time and resource
    requirement and will allow for comprehensive abatement. One portion of
    our plan to monitor abatement of the approximate 13,000 findings is the
    acceleration and increase of our follow-up inspections of the most
    critical of those findings. With the number of findings before us, we
    recognize--and the fiscal year 2006 Senate Appropriations Subcommittee
    Chairman reminded us--that it is essential that the Office incorporate
    mechanisms and personnel to better assure efficiency and timeliness in
    its monitoring program. As such, the need for a compliance officer, who
    would be dedicated to monitoring the abatement schedules of employing
    offices and ensure that employing offices have taken appropriate steps
    towards resolution of identified hazards and violations, is most
    critical. We request one FTE to serve as a compliance officer, to
    provide consistent monitoring of abatement of hazards, assure timely
    abatement of OSH hazards identified in the OSH biennial inspections and
    requestor-initiated inspections, and ensure compliance with OSH-related
    citations.
        In our fiscal year 2007 budget request, the Office explained its
    need for a management analyst to perform the administrative tasks that
    our inspectors once performed at a much higher cost. This need became
    so apparent that, while we awaited congressional consideration of our
    request, the Office engaged in a reorganization. Sacrificing the
    support of administrative staff, we reorganized positions and
    reprogrammed contractor funds to allow the duties of the management
    analyst to be performed immediately. As a result of the reorganization,
    inspector efficiency has increased; however, the Office still suffers
    from a lack of clerical/administrative support. We are requesting
    funding to add a 0.5 FTE position to ensure that the attorneys and
    inspectors are able to focus on the substantive nature of their work,
    as opposed to performing accompanying administrative tasks. The
    function of the remaining half of this position is addressed below.
        The large number of findings in our 109th biennial inspections
    contemplates the notion that there may exist deficiencies in the safety
    and health plans and programs of the legislative branch. In an effort
    to be a resource to our covered community, the Office seeks to provide
    technical assistance to member offices as well as employing offices. As
    mentioned in our strategic plan, the Office is prepared to review and
    analyze the covered community's safety plans to determine whether the
    plans meet OSHA requirements. We are requesting funds in support of
    this initiative with the hope that our early technical assistance might
    prevent the occurrence of future hazards.
        Similarly, the Office is committed to providing early assistance to
    State offices as well. The lack of funding has prevented the Office
    from conducting in-person inspections of covered facilities in State
    offices, as mandated by the CAA. However, we are developing a plan by
    which we can assist Congress in assuring worker safety in State
    offices. Through collaboration with stakeholders, we plan to develop
    and pilot self-certification check lists to provide to State offices in
    an effort to educate them on OSHA requirements, and to better equip
    them in assuring that the responsible party (e.g., GSA, private
    landlords) corrects any identified hazards.
        In addition, the anticipated opening of the Capitol Visitor Center
    during fiscal year 2008 has impacted our office as well. The Office
    stands ready to provide preliminary assistance in assessing the safety
    of the CVC prior to its occupancy. Once the CVC is occupied and it is
    added to the Office's inspection cycle, it will add approximately .7
    million square feet to the Office's area of inspection. Thus, we are
    seeking funding to sustain the increased workload.
                             education and outreach
        The Office is mandated by Congress to ``carry out a program of
    education for members of Congress and other employing authorities of
    the legislative branch of the Federal Government respecting the laws
    made applicable to them and a program to inform individuals of their
    rights under laws made applicable to the legislative branch of the
    Federal Government. . . .'' 2 U.S.C. 1381(h)(1). The Office continues
    to carry out this core mandate of the act through various educational
    and outreach activities.
        In line with the Office's initiative to act as a resource to
    legislative branch employees and employers, the Office has begun major
    efforts to disseminate a baseline survey to its constituents. We have
    devised a survey instrument to apply initially to House and Senate
    offices, with the intent of applying the same instrument to another
    large group of our constituents in the current fiscal year. The survey
    has been designed to gauge the community's general knowledge of the
    Office, their rights and responsibilities under the CAA, and their
    general satisfaction with the Office. This initiative ultimately will
    result in the first comprehensive evaluation of the Office's education
    efforts and services. The Office anticipates that this initial survey,
    followed by focus groups and additional surveys, will result in
    feedback and pointed data to allow the Office to perform a concentrated
    effort to improve and streamline and more precisely target services to
    fit the needs of the community. With your assistance, we have been able
    to fund phases I and II in the past 2 fiscal years. We are seeking
    additional funding for phase III of our survey activities to establish
    the baseline against which we will measure our success in achieving our
    educational statutory mandate.
                               dispute resolution
        The Office's employment dispute resolution program provides a
    mechanism for employing offices and employees to address issues
    involving ten different laws of the CAA, ranging from alleged
    discrimination to the alleged failure to pay required overtime. The
    successes of the dispute resolution program remain largely unnoticed
    because of the confidential nature of its administrative phases:
    counseling, mediation, and hearing processes conducted by the Office.
    Hundreds of disputes in nearly all legislative branch agencies, as well
    as in offices of members and committees of both chambers have quietly
    been addressed through our administrative dispute resolution system
    since the Office's inception in 1996. The assistance to employing
    offices and employees provided by this confidential service is
    reinforced through well-trained staff who provide exemplary services to
    employees and through the expertise of contract mediators and hearing
    officers who remain accomplished in their field.
        The need for contracted legal expertise is anticipated to continue
    in fiscal year 2008. Currently, the Office has received a large number
    of complaints which have proceeded to hearing and may proceed to the
    administrative appellate stage before the Office's board of directors.
    During the first quarter of fiscal year 2007, there were pending before
    the board five cases for appellate review. The preparation of these
    decisions, to include legal research, legal writing, and legal
    analysis, requires expert assistance in order to render sound board
    decisions in a timely fashion. The Office currently has staff dedicated
    to this program requirement; however, because complaints continue to be
    filed at a steady pace, and because the Office does not foresee a
    decrease in the number of appeals of hearing officers' decisions,
    assistance from a contract attorney will aid the office in providing
    timely board decisions.
                               management support
        As mentioned above, the Office of Compliance makes extensive use of
    service vendors and personal services contractors to provide many of
    our vital functions, including employment dispute resolution and OSH
    inspections. In general, this practice provides significant cost
    savings and allows this small agency to maintain capacities on an ``as-
    needed'' basis. However, some core internal control functions are
    currently also under-served or contracted out due to our limited FTE
    authorization, which at 17 is two less than the agency was authorized
    in fiscal year 1998.
        The Office has just two FTE's dedicated to all IT, HR, general
    administrative support and fiscal management functions. This situation
    has resulted in inefficiencies, work load overages, and the necessity
    to contract out core functions, such as accounts payable. Accounting
    staff is necessary to ensure that a separation of functions can be
    maintained in our fiscal management. HR/project management staff is
    necessary to further the Office's commitment to best practices,
    allowing program managers to concentrate on their areas of expertise.
    General administrative staff is necessary to address workload issues of
    staff who have to perform administrative duties instead of duties in
    their own subject matter areas. As mentioned in our fiscal year 2007
    budget request, we are requesting one analyst FTE to address our HR and
    project management deficit, and an accounting technician FTE to bring
    our basic accounting and other fiscal responsibilities on staff. The
    cost of these FTE's will be partially offset by a reduction in
    contractor expenses. In addition, we are requesting a half-time FTE to
    complete the part-time receptionist position, so that our remaining
    staff can concentrate on performing the duties of their respective
    substantive areas.
                                   conclusion
        There are a number of other requests in our budget submission which
    we commend for your consideration. The ones referenced herein are
    presented to highlight a portion of the endeavors which our office
    hopes to undertake with your assistance. On behalf of the board of
    directors, the appointees and the entire staff of the Office of
    Compliance, I thank you for the committee's support of the efforts of
    this agency. I assure you that the Office is committed to the most
    efficient and prudent use of taxpayer money. I respectfully request
    that the committee respond favorably to the Office's fiscal year 2008
    budget request. We will be happy to respond to any questions which you
    may have.
                                     ______

                      Prepared Statement of Barbara Camens
        Madam Chair and members of the subcommittee, good morning. I am
    Barbara Camens, and I represent the Board of Directors of the Office of
    Compliance. I am honored to be here today to join Acting Executive
    Director Tamara Chrisler in testifying on behalf of the Office's fiscal
    year 2008 budget request.
        Madam Chair, the Board would first like to commend the work of Ms.
    Chrisler, Peter Eveleth, and the entire staff in achieving so many
    goals in the past few years. We now have a new strategic plan for
    fiscal year 2007-2009, with a line of sight to individual work plans.
    We have established and continue to develop protocols to enable us
    better to partner with the agencies for which we have employment law
    and safety and health jurisdiction. We are negotiating a settlement
    agreement of our first safety and health complaint, involving the
    utility tunnels which, if approved, will prevent the matter from
    reaching federal court, will conserve substantial resources, and will
    ensure the immediate and ongoing abatement of the underlying safety
    hazards.
        This record of improvement is the result of the hard work and
    dedication of the four statutory officers who are appointed by the
    Board, and the dedicated staff they have assembled. While the Board
    wholeheartedly supports the entire budget request, we wish to
    underscore the need which the agency has to increase its FTE complement
    to 21. Right now the FTE complement of 17 is two less than the 19 the
    Office was afforded in fiscal year 1998. Over the past several years,
    the agency has concentrated its available resources on enhancing its
    service delivery, particularly in the OSH area. Consequently, there is
    a compelling need for basic operational support staff. I can assure you
    that the Office of Compliance will continue to make the most efficient
    use of every dollar which is appropriated by this committee.
        I would like to call your attention to two statutory changes that
    are of significant interest to Susan Robfogel, the Chair of the Board
    of Directors, as well as the entire Board. The first has to do with
    internal promotion within the Office of Compliance. The Congressional
    Accountability Act requires the Office's statutory appointees to be
    individuals who have not worked within the legislative branch during
    the previous 4 years. This provision makes it impossible to promote
    from within; for example, from Deputy Executive Director to Executive
    Director. Since the Board could be actively contemplating such a
    promotion, we have an immediate interest in changing the prohibitive
    section of the CAA. We have contacted, and plan to work with the
    appropriate oversight committees of both Chambers to expedite this
    change, and would greatly appreciate the support of this subcommittee
    in this effort.
        In addition, the Office has recently contracted with a human
    resources consulting firm that has begun assessing our human capital
    needs. The contractor's report makes recommendations for how various
    office functions could be more efficiently and effectively performed.
    One of the contractor's preliminary recommendations is for ``the Board
    of Directors (to) consider the feasibility of seeking legislative
    change to allow the establishment of senior executive positions in the
    Office of Compliance where these responsibilities warrant.'' We are
    requesting your assistance in enacting this change for the positions of
    Executive Director and General Counsel of the Office of Compliance, and
    if you consider it appropriate for each of the five members of the
    Board of Directors. Please provide us any guidance you deem advisable
    to effect this change in compensation levels.
        I am available to address any questions.

        Senator Landrieu. Let me just begin with questions, if I
    could, to Mr. Walker. Let me say that, although my experience
    on this subcommittee is rather brief, my experience in
    Government is not, and I've been in public office for, now,
    almost 30 years, having started in my own legislature, and then
    working up as State treasurer, and then, of course, being 10
    years in the Senate. I realize, while there are a lot of people
    who spend a lot of time bashing Government, I believe
    Government can do a lot of good, does a lot of good every day.
    I am proud of the fact that this is the finest Government,
    democracy, in the world. It's what many of the issues that
    we're dealing with here and abroad are all about. And, while
    some of your agencies don't get the time and attention they
    need, because they're sort of the mechanical part of making it
    work, it does not go without my notice of the importance of
    what you do every day to just keep the trains running on time
    and to keep this Government operating efficiently,
    transparently, and professionally, which is so rare in the
    world today.
        So, I would think, particularly for the Comptroller's
    office and the Congressional Budget Office, Peter, that you all
    really are the muscle that makes possible a trim and fit
    Government, and we want to run a trim and fit Government to
    meet all the goals and objectives, from the Constitution to
    every law that's written, to fulfill the dreams and hopes of
    the country. So, I hope that people in the room understand that
    this is not just a mechanical accounting exercise for me. I
    really look forward to learning more about your offices. My
    background is not in auditing or investigation. But I would say
    that I really am a true believer in Government working well.
    And--as much as I can help you do your jobs well--I think our
    subcommittee will be making a significant contribution.

    GAO deg.JUSTIFICATION FOR INCREASED FUNDING IN THE GOVERNMENT
                             ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE

        Mr. Walker, Some in Congress are going to be quite suspect
    and hesitant--as you know, about fighting for extra money. It
    is not going to be easy----
        Mr. Walker. No, I realize that.
        Senator Landrieu [continuing]. Currently, we've got a
    tremendous amount of extremely important calls on funding, both
    domestically and internationally. So, would you spend another
    minute or two, giving your three or four best arguments to the
    skeptics that say, ``What you do is not that important, and we
    don't need to increase your budget.'' Seeing this graph that
    you submitted sort of tells the story. But if you'd add
    something to that.
        Mr. Walker. I'll be happy to provide something for the
    record. And thank you for the opportunity, Madam Chair.
        [The information follows:]

                           Need for Increased Funding

        In recent years, GAO has worked cooperatively with the
    Appropriations Committees to submit modest budget requests.
    Adjusting for inflation, GAO's budget authority has declined by
    3 percent in constant fiscal year 2006 dollars since fiscal
    year 2003. These modest budget results do not adequately
    recognize the return on investment that GAO has been able to
    generate. In fact, these modest increases have hampered our
    progress in rebuilding from the downsizing (40 percent
    reduction in staffing levels) and mandated funding reductions
    that occurred in the 1990s.
        With your support, GAO has become more results-oriented,
    partnerial, and client focused. We have made strategic
    investments; realigned the organization; streamlined our
    business processes; modernized our performance classification,
    compensation, and reward systems; enhanced our ability to
    attract, retain and reward top talent; enhanced the technology
    and infrastructure supporting our staff and systems; and made
    other key investments. These transformational efforts have
    allowed GAO to model best practices, lead by example, and
    provide significant support to Congressional hearings, while
    achieving record results and very high client satisfaction
    ratings without significant increases in funding.
        We have taken a number of steps to deal with funding
    shortfalls in the past few years; however, we cannot continue
    to employ the same approaches. Our staff has become
    increasingly stretched and we are experiencing backlogs in
    several areas of critical importance to the Congress (e.g.,
    health care, homeland security, energy and natural resources).
    In addition, we have deferred key initiatives and technology
    upgrades (e.g., engagement and administrative process upgrades)
    for several years and it would not be prudent to continue to do
    so. These actions are having an adverse effect on employee
    morale, our ability to produce results, and the return on
    investment that we can generate.
        There is a need for fundamental and dramatic reform to
    address what the government does, how it does business, and who
    will do the government's business. Our support to the Congress
    will likely prove even more critical because of the pressures
    created by our nation's current and projected budget deficit
    and growing long-term fiscal imbalance. Also, as we face
    current and projected supply and demand imbalance issues and a
    growing workload over the coming years across a wide spectrum
    of issues, GAO will be unable to respond to congressional
    demands without a significant investment in our future. We have
    exhausted the results that we can achieve based on prior
    investments. Our ability to continue to produce record results
    and assist the Congress in discharging its Constitutional
    responsibilities relating to authorization, appropriations,
    oversight, and other matters will be adversely impacted unless
    we take action now.

                 GAO deg.LINKING RESOURCES TO RESULTS

        Mr. Walker. We're in the business of improving the
    performance of the Federal Government and ensuring its
    accountability for the benefit of the American people. We
    provide oversight, insight, and foresight work. We help the
    Congress discharge its constitutional responsibilities with
    regard to appropriations, authorization, reauthorization,
    oversight, et cetera.
        The best case I would give you, Madam Chair, is, I think
    the U.S. Government does not do a very good job of linking
    resources to results. We are a shining exception to that
    general rule. We generated, last year, a $105 return in
    financial benefits for every dollar invested in our agency.
    Number two in the world is around 24 to 1. The Congress needs
    to do a better job, in my view, of recognizing that the
    baselines of all budgets are not equal. I'm talking in general,
    not about the legislative branch, but throughout Government.
    The Government needs to start doing a better job of analyzing
    what makes sense and what doesn't make sense for tomorrow, and
    are we targeting our resources to where we're getting results.
        If the Congress does that, our case is clear and
    compelling, and I have no concerns. But if the Congress doesn't
    do that, and if the Congress takes a baseline approach to say,
    ``Well, this is where we were last year, and this is how much
    money we have this year,'' and, if it doesn't delve in, get the
    facts, and differentiate, then I'm very concerned, because what
    happens is, agencies like ours, who try to ask for very modest
    budget requests, and to lead by example----
        Senator Landrieu. Get penalized.
        Mr. Walker [continuing]. Get penalized. There are very
    perverse incentives in that. I know you believe, as I do, that
    we need to transform what Government does and how Government
    does business. We are an ally to this Congress in getting that
    done. But we need to have a reasonable level of resources in
    order to be able to do our job.
        Senator Landrieu. Thank you.

              GAO deg.HIRING IN A COMPETITIVE JOB MARKET

        Let me just ask you to comment about the tensions that
    you're finding, or the difficulties, in hiring based on the
    competitiveness of the private market. I'm going to ask you the
    same, Mr. Turri, and also Peter. Because the region that we're
    in here is very competitive. Are you seeing it scale up pretty
    substantially, or has it been this way for several years?
        Mr. Walker. It varies, Madam Chair. Basically, for GAO,
    we're deemed to be an employer of choice. We're deemed to be
    one of the best places to work in the Federal Government. We're
    deemed to be a preferred professional services organization.
    So, in general, we have a lot more people who want to work for
    GAO than we have positions. There are, however, exceptions. We
    experience real supply and demand imbalances in hiring Ph.D.
    economists, healthcare professionals, and information
    technology professionals. Even in areas such as financial
    management and auditing, because of Sarbanes-Oxley and a
    variety of other issues, there are selected areas in which we
    are increasingly competing for talent and having difficulties
    in being able to attract the number of people with the type of
    education and experience that we want. But, in general, we're
    okay. Those areas where we have challenges, but we need to meet
    those challenges, because some of these areas are the ones that
    represent the greatest challenges for Government--healthcare,
    for example.
        Senator Landrieu. And do you think you have the
    flexibility, based on the current authorization laws, to allow
    you to make those differentials in pay that are required to
    attract and retain that kind of talent?
        Mr. Walker. We have more flexibility than most agencies in
    Government, thanks to the actions of the Congress. On three
    different occasions--1980, 2001, and 2003--the Congress has
    given us initial authorities, which we have aggressively used.
    I can assure you that I will not hesitate to let you know if we
    think we need more authorities. I would like to note for the
    record, as is included in my statement, we are planning to
    submit a legislative proposal to our oversight and authorizing
    committees, this year, that does deal with certain human
    capital issues.

         GAO deg.MARKET-BASED COMPENSATION AT THE GOVERNMENT
                             ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE

        Senator Landrieu. As I understand, there was a hearing in
    the House on this, last week, that had a couple of questions
    about complaints that they had received about people feeling
    that they might not have been treated fairly. And, of course, I
    wasn't able to read all the testimony of that hearing. Would
    you like to comment, for the record----
        Mr. Walker. Sure.
        Senator Landrieu [continuing]. About some of those----
        Mr. Walker. Yes.
        Senator Landrieu [continuing]. Issues?
        Mr. Walker. Thank you Madam Chair for the opportunity. Let
    me try to provide some contextual sophistication for this,
    because you just get pieces of things that are reported.
        In July 2003, I testified before the Congress, and I asked
    for additional legislative authorities in order to make GAO a
    more market-based, skills-, knowledge-, and performance-
    oriented organization with regard to classification and
    compensation systems. Congress granted us that authority in
    July 2004.
        Later in 2004, we received the results of our first-ever
    competitive compensation study for GAO personnel. It was good
    news and bad news. The good news was, the vast majority of our
    people were either compensated fairly, or for a material
    percentage of individuals--Ph.D. economists, attorneys,
    information technology specialists, and a few others--the study
    found that we should raise their pay potential, raise their pay
    ranges; and, in fact, we did do that. There were many more
    positives than negatives. There was, however, one area that it
    was not good news for some of our employees. That study said
    that we had roughly 300 employees that were overpaid, as
    compared to the market. As a result, one had to decide, ``What
    would you do with those individuals?''
        I made the determination that, while I had the authority to
    freeze their pay under the law, I didn't want to do that; I
    wanted to give them some performance incentives. And, in fact,
    we did, and we are still giving them performance incentives,
    even greater performance incentives. But I made the decision
    not to provide them an automatic across-the-board pay increase,
    because, in my view, doing so would be inconsistent with the
    concept of equal pay for work of equal value, and inconsistent
    with the concept of providing competitive compensation levels
    for our people. Candidly, I never promised to give across-the-
    board increases to people paid above market, nor have I ever
    been asked to promise to give across-the-board increases to
    people paid above market. To put this in context, in 2007 we're
    talking about roughly 150 people out of 3,200, down from over
    300 in 2006.
        Senator Landrieu. Thank you, Mr. Walker. I think that was
    very well stated. I guess I should say, for the record, that
    I've done the exact same thing in my office. And I have the
    flexibility to do that. And I believe in that kind of approach
    for the 45 people that work for me. So, I don't know all the
    details of this, and I'm not going to prejudge, but I most
    certainly find no fault with the thought and the
    professionalism in which you have addressed this. That is
    exactly what I try to do within the tight budgets that we have,
    to retain the very best staff that I can retain, with the
    skills necessary to do the job I need to do as a Senator.

    GAO deg.IMPLEMENTING A TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT AT THE GOVERNMENT
                             ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE

        Mr. Walker, what are the critical factors in implementing a
    technology assessment function at GAO? Do you see merit in
    creating permanent capability within GAO to study technology
    assessments?
        Mr. Walker. Thank you for that question, Madam Chair.
        The Congress, as you know, for several years, has been
    debating whether, and to what extent, to reestablish a
    technology assessment capability. We have conducted some
    technology assessments, at the request of the Congress, in part
    to serve as a beta to determine whether or not we might be an
    appropriate agency to do that work. In my opinion, the Congress
    does need some additional capability with regard to technology
    assessments. Second, I think we have proven that we've got the
    ability to do that work. Third, I would question whether or not
    it makes sense to create a new legislative branch entity with
    all the different overhead and infrastructure that would have
    to come with that.
        Should the Congress decide to create this capability, and
    to place it at GAO, we would need a few more FTEs, and we would
    need some additional funding, because we're already stretched.
    But I can assure you, it would be a lot more cost beneficial to
    do it at GAO than it would be to start something from scratch,
    a whole new entity, with its own support structure and all the
    other things that would have to come with it.

                GAO deg.RELEVANCE OF EXISTING MANDATES

        Senator Landrieu. And one more question. You've approached
    the subcommittee regarding a number of mandates involving your
    work that you believe should be repealed. Could you reiterate
    those, for the record, and why you think they should be
    repealed?
        Mr. Walker. I'll be happy to provide a list for the record.
        [The information follows:]
      GAO deg.Proposed Repeal and Modification of GAO Reporting
                                  Requirements
        GAO has proposed language that would repeal or modify a number of
    mandates for GAO audits and reports. Most of the mandates impose
    recurring requirements on GAO. While the circumstances of each vary,
    the common theme is that continued audits and reports would provide
    little or no value and consume resources that could be applied to GAO
    work of higher priority to the Congress. Eliminating these mandates
    would conserve resources while preserving the option for congressional
    committees to request GAO work in areas covered by the specific
    mandates.
        (a) Annual Report by GAO on Consistency of IMF Practices With
    Statutory Policies.--Section 504(e) of title V of the Consolidated
    Appropriations Act, 2000 (Public Law 106-113--Appendix E) is repealed.
        (b) Review of Proposed Changes to Export Thresholds for
    Computers.--Section 314 of title III of the Consolidated Appropriations
    Act, 2001 (Public Law 106-554--App. B) is repealed.
        (c) Annual Reports on Waiting Times for Appointments for Specialty
    Care.--Section 604(c) of the Veterans Health Programs Improvement Act
    of 2004 (Public Law 108-422) is amended by striking ``the Comptroller
    General of the United States'' and inserting ``the Inspector General of
    the Department of Veterans Affairs''.
        (d) Audit by GAO.--Paragraph (4)(A) of subsection (f) of section
    4404 of Public Law 107-171 (2 U.S.C. Sec.  1161(f)(4)(A) is amended--
                (1) by striking ``shall'' and inserting ``may''; and
                (2) by striking ``annual''.
        (e) Section 902(k) of the Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act
    of 1998 (Public Law 105-277; 8 U.S.C. 1255 note) is repealed.
        (f) Local Educational Agency Spending Audits.--Section 1904 of the
    Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6574) is
    repealed.
        (g) Audit of Financial Transactions.--Section 11 of the National
    Moment of Remembrance Act (Public Law 106-579; 36 U.S.C. 116 note) is
    repealed.
        (h) Loss Ratios and Refund of Premiums.--Section 1882(r)(5) of the
    Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395ss(r)(5)) is amended--
                (1) in subparagraph (A)--
                        (A) by striking ``(A) The Comptroller General shall
                    periodically, not less than once every 3 years,'' and
                    inserting ``The Secretary may''; and
                        (B) by striking ``and to the Secretary''; and
                (2) by striking subparagraph (B).
        (i) GAO Reports.--Section 14 of the Radiation Exposure Compensation
    Act (Public Law 101-426; 42 U.S.C. 2210 note) is repealed.
              proposed transfer of comptroller general authorities
        The proposed language would transfer certain functions currently
    performed by GAO to the Department of Labor. GAO performs purely
    ministerial functions under the Davis-Bacon Act and the Contract Work
    Hours and Safety Standards Act. These functions include payment to
    employees and others pursuant to determinations of the Department of
    Labor, and certain ministerial reporting functions. These functions are
    more appropriately performed by the Department of Labor.
        (a) Authority of Comptroller General to Pay Wages and List
    Contractors Violating Contracts.--Section 3144 of title 40, United
    States Code, is amended--
                (1) in the title, by striking ``of Comptroller General'';
                (2) in subsection (a)(1), by striking ``The Comptroller
            General'' and inserting ``The Secretary of Labor''; and
                (3) in subsection (b)(1), by striking, in both places,
            ``Comptroller General'' and inserting ``Secretary of Labor''.
        (b) Reports of Violations and Withholding of Amounts for Unpaid
    Wages and Liquidated Damages.--Section 3703 of title 40, United States
    Code, is amended in subsection (b)(3), by
                (1) striking ``The Comptroller General'' in the first
            sentence and inserting ``The Secretary of Labor'' and
                (2) striking ``the Comptroller General'' in the second
            sentence and inserting ``The Secretary of Labor''.
        (c) Health and Safety Standards in Building Trades and Construction
    Industry.--Section 3704 of title 40, United States Code, is amended--
                (1) in subsection (c)(1), by
                        (A) striking ``Transmittal of names of repeat
                    violators to Comptroller General'' and inserting
                    ``Findings of repeat violations'', and
                        (B) striking all words after ``effect''.
                (2) in subsection (c)(2), by
                        (A) striking the first sentence and inserting ``Not
                    sooner than 30 days after giving notice of the
                    Secretary of Labor's finding under paragraph (1) to all
                    interested persons, the Secretary shall distribute each
                    name to all agencies of the Federal Government.'';
                        (B) striking ``from the date the name is
                    transmitted to the Comptroller General'' in the second
                    sentence;
                        (C) striking ``whose name was submitted to the
                    Comptroller General'' in the third sentence; and
                        (D) striking the fourth sentence and inserting
                    ``The Secretary shall inform all Government agencies of
                    the Secretary's action''.

        Mr. Walker. But here is the key concept. And it's something
    that we talked about earlier. Government tends to be an
    accumulation and amalgamation of various policies, programs,
    functions, and activities over the years; and, in this
    particular case, of mandates that have come up over the years.
    Some of them make sense, some of them don't make sense; some of
    them are outdated, and some of them don't pass a cost-benefit
    test. So, what we've endeavored to do is, we've gone back, and
    we've looked at all the mandates that currently apply to us,
    and we've tried to work with the Congress in understanding
    which ones are still relevant, which ones have merit, and which
    ones are cost beneficial.
        And so, I'll be happy to provide some more for the record,
    but I--it's kind of a spring cleaning, and spring is coming
    soon, and--I think a lot of people, frankly, need to have a
    spring cleaning.
        Senator Landrieu. My husband would most certainly agree
    with you. He threatens to start one any day. I tell the
    children, ``Move out of the way. You, too, will be thrown out
    of this house.''
        Mr. Turri, we will move now to you. The 49-percent increase
    in your budget is quite substantial. Now, I understand the
    whole argument about starting from a baseline that's too low to
    do the mission, and so a 5 percent or 6 percent isn't going to
    make any difference. But, still, that's fairly significant. So,
    would you mind trying to explain a little bit more in detail
    about that?

              GPO deg.GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE FINANCES

        Mr. Turri. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Just for clarification, GPO is unique in the way it is
    funded. Of all the revenue that we have in our operation, about
    80 percent of it actually is nonappropriated. It's based on a
    revolving fund that receives most of its revenue from procured
    printing, Federal Register printing, the printing of passports,
    and other products. That area actually funds 80 percent of what
    the agency is all about.
        Senator Landrieu. And how much does that generate annually?
        Mr. Turri. We expect, this year, our total revenue to be
    around $880 million. So, the balance of the 20 percent or so is
    appropriated funds. Of that particular amount, congressional
    printing and binding is a significant part of that operation.
    And this year, what we're asking for is about $21 million plus
    to bring that budget up to where it belongs. In 2005, we were
    appropriated about $88 million for congressional printing and
    binding. That particular year, we were very close to that
    appropriation. It kind of bumped right up to it. In 2006, we
    actually exceeded the appropriated number by $3 million. We
    actually had to use transfers to fund that shortfall.
        This year, with a continuing resolution, we project we are
    going to be in excess of $12 million over the appropriation--
    the flat funding that we've had for the last couple of years.
    About $5 million of that is for the U.S. Code. The rest of it
    is for the fact that this year Congress will have increased
    days in session, the fact that we have wage increases that are
    mandatory, and materials costs have increased. Those particular
    items all add up to, as I say, an increased amount. And the
    volume of work that Congress is doing each year has increased,
    and those same arguments will apply to the budget of 2008, once
    again looking at probably about a $9 million increase. Just to
    bring us up to where we belong and the amount of money that we
    are mandated to spend by the work that we do every day, will
    bring our congressional printing and binding budget up by $21
    million. That is something we really have no control over. We
    are just obliged, obviously, every day to print that work.
        Senator Landrieu. Can I ask you this? You have been with
    this office for a short period of time?
        Mr. Turri. I actually have been with the GPO approximately
    4 years as the deputy to Mr. James. In January, I took over as
    Acting Public Printer, as the search for a new Public Printer
    continues.
        Senator Landrieu. Has the agency ever gone through a
    comprehensive review--since you're generating about 80 percent
    of your funding--which is very substantial? I know some of that
    are fees set by Congress for what a passport costs, et cetera--
    but have you ever had a review--since you are in sort of a
    business that can actually produce revenue? Is there any
    thought that you could actually produce more than you need and
    get your 80 percent up to 100 or 110 or 120?
        Mr. Turri. Are you talking about----
        Senator Landrieu. Like an outside review of what you do to
    suggest additional revenues without driving up the cost of
    these documents for the users to a point where it would be
    counterproductive?
        Mr. Turri. In my tenure, we haven't undertaken anything
    like that, but it's certainly something, Madam Chair, that----
        Senator Landrieu. We might want to----
        Mr. Turri [continuing]. We could possibly consider.

                       GPO deg.SPECIAL DOCUMENTS

        Senator Landrieu [continuing]. Are all of the new documents
    that are being printed, designed, thought of, for homeland
    security weighing on your office at all?
        Mr. Turri. It's really separate and complete. It's----
        Senator Landrieu [continuing]. Just for homeland security?
        Mr. Turri. No. I would say homeland security, on its own,
    is not necessarily having any significant impact on our
    business.
        Senator Landrieu. You're required to update the U.S. Code
    every 6 years, so that's part of this request?
        Mr. Turri. It's part of this, Madam Chair. We were notified
    that it looks like it might be pushing more into 2008. We
    thought we were going to be required to print it this year, but
    currently, we're still printing supplements for the last U.S.
    Code this year. But, as I say, printing it in 2008 won't
    decrease our overall budgetary needs. It just will push the
    funding requirement into 2008.

                           GPO deg.PASSPORTS

        Senator Landrieu. Okay. And can you give us the status of
    the electronic passport?
        Mr. Turri. Yes, Madam Chair, I'd be delighted to do that.
        The new passport had just begun to be designed when I
    arrived there, about 4 years ago. The last few years have been
    spent in the process of designing and building a system that
    would produce a biometric passport. In February, or just about
    1 year ago, we began to get the realization from the State
    Department that this particular quantity of passports that we
    had been producing, which were about 9 million a year, was
    beginning to jump at a fairly rapid rate, to the point of where
    now it looks they're expecting, this year, to get about 17
    million requests for new passports. That number, as you can
    imagine, is a significant increase over what was expected.
        Madam Chair, in the particular area of passports, we went
    from 30 to 80 employees in the passport division just in the
    last 12 months, which obviously, as you can imagine, requires a
    significant amount of ingest and training into that particular
    operation. We have added eight brand new pieces of equipment,
    which are not pieces of equipment that come off assembly lines,
    they're all predesigned specifically to produce the biometric
    passport. I'm happy to say, though, this particular month that
    we're in, as things ramp up and continue, we will be producing
    approximately 1 million e-Passports along with still producing
    the legacy passports of around 500,000. This will give us about
    1\1/2\ million passports this month, which would take care of
    the 17 million passport requests that----
        Senator Landrieu. Requirement.
        Mr. Turri [continuing]. Might be coming this year. And I'm
    very proud of what we have accomplished, because even in a
    ramp-up mode, we are producing four times as many e-Passports
    as any country in the world. And we expect this to continue.

                      GPO deg.PRODUCTION FACILITY

        Senator Landrieu. Now, where is this work being done? What
    physical facility?
        Mr. Turri. Currently it is being done in a building
    separate from our regular GPO offices. It's actually across the
    street from our regular buildings.
        Senator Landrieu. And since I don't know where your regular
    building is, help me.
        Mr. Turri. I'm sorry. It's----
        Senator Landrieu [continuing]. Your regular building?
        Mr. Turri [continuing]. It's actually down the street,
    Madam Chair, at 732 North Capitol, not----
        Senator Landrieu. I know where that is.
        Mr. Turri [continuing]. Far from here. We'd love to have
    you come down and visit our operation sometime.
        Senator Landrieu. I want to come see the main building, on
    North Capitol.
        Mr. Turri. Right.
        Senator Landrieu. I'm reminded now of where that is. And
    this other location is right----
        Mr. Turri. Right across the----
        Senator Landrieu [continuing]. Across the street.
        Mr. Turri. It's in a separate building.
        Senator Landrieu. And do you find your facilities adequate?
    Aren't you trying to do some repairs or restoration?
        Mr. Turri. Well, that particular building is the newest of
    our buildings. The essential repairs and restoration that we're
    requesting money for are really needed across the street in our
    regular buildings. What we're looking for, for passports, is a
    remote site facility for security and increased production
    reasons. The idea of having passports produced in one place is
    not----
        Senator Landrieu. Ideal.
        Mr. Turri [continuing]. Correct. We have been searching.
    And we are getting very close, we hope, to identifying
    someplace that may be very close to your home State.
        Senator Landrieu. That would be good.
        It's close to my home State.
        Mr. Turri. Well, close enough that they can come across the
    line.
        Senator Landrieu. But let me say, I know, from the other
    committees that I serve on, there is great deal of interest,
    from many different angles, about these new passports and how
    people are going to get them.
        Mr. Turri. Yes.
        Senator Landrieu. Who gets them, and--et cetera.
        Mr. Turri. Yes.
        Senator Landrieu. I think I would like to plan a field trip
    to the office and----
        Mr. Turri. Well----
        Senator Landrieu [continuing]. I'll take a couple of
    other--try to bring a few Senators with me that are actually
    either on this committee or the Homeland Security Committee,
    because there's a lot of concern about all of this new
    paperwork and documentation that we're going through to try to
    make our borders more secure without hampering travel, et
    cetera. So, I think this is going to be an issue some of the
    Senators are going to be interested in.
        And----
        Mr. Turri. That would----
        Senator Landrieu [continuing]. Finally----
        Mr. Turri. That would be great, Madam Chair. We'd love to
    have you down there.

              GPO deg.FEDERAL DEPOSITORY LIBRARY PROGRAM

        Senator Landrieu. And the Federal Depository Library
    Program, can you tell me where you see this going, because of
    electronic information?
        Mr. Turri. Yes. Part of our request this year is for the
    Federal Depository Library Program. We are requesting an
    increase of approximately $12 million over last year's funding
    for this program. Two million dollars of that is for mandatory
    pay and price increases. A little over $3 million of it is for
    the U.S. Code, printing and distribution, and IT support.
        The balance of the $7 million, Madam Chair, is for projects
    for data migration, data processing, data storage,
    authentication, cataloging, and indexing, along with web
    harvesting. We also have started a program, which we are
    continuing, of what's called outreach, which basically is a
    review for libraries, to go out and see that they're
    maintaining the level of operation that they need to do for
    user satisfaction.
        But every one of these things that I have mentioned, as far
    as the data migration, data storage, et cetera, are all
    necessary for ingest into the future digital system that we're
    requesting budgets for. Without that particular input into the
    future digital system, it would be like having a home without
    any sinks or furniture. So, the two go hand in hand, quite
    frankly.
        Senator Landrieu. Okay. Thank you very much.
        Mr. Turri. You're welcome. Thank you, Madam Chair.

                       CBO deg.HEALTHCARE COSTS

        Senator Landrieu. Dr. Orszag, I understand that Senator
    Conrad has a lot of confidence in your ability, and we'll be
    looking forward to working closely with you. And I know that
    you've worked with Senator Gregg as part of the Budget
    Committee, as well. Your efforts in honing down on some of
    these healthcare costs is commendable, because it's a serious
    problem in our own general budget and a real issue with
    businesses, large and small. And it's, in my view, something we
    just can't sustain, and we have to change course. And finding
    that course has been elusive, to date. But are you going to,
    and how are you going to, coordinate with your sister agencies?
    Or is there any coordination at all? Are you all just striking
    off on your own with this effort?
        Dr. Orszag. Senator, there's a lot of coordination.
    Clearly, GAO does some work in health. MedPAC offers advice and
    options specifically on Medicare. And what we're going to try
    to do is play a role in broader healthcare issues, because I
    believe, and most analysts believe, that it is not possible,
    over the long term, to slow the growth in Medicare and Medicaid
    unless there is overall slower cost growth in the health
    sector, as a whole. And embedded in that, though, is the
    opportunity--because a variety of evidence suggests that we
    could take costs out of the system without actually harming
    American's health. And I think trying to capture that
    opportunity is the central fiscal challenge facing the Federal
    Government, and we will be working with any agency that is
    motivated and interested in the same thing, to be putting
    forward options for you to consider.
        Senator Landrieu. And I know that your focus is right here
    in the capital, as it should be, with the Federal Government,
    but I know that you're aware that there are counterparts of
    yours in all 50 States, and some exceedingly professional
    people in those States that do for the States what you do for
    the Federal Government. Is there any formal or informal
    exchange of information, at any level, that you all go through
    with State fiscal officers or budget folks at the State levels?
        Dr. Orszag. I'm aware of a variety of informal
    interactions. For example, on the Medicaid and SCHIP programs,
    our analysts are in touch with people at the State level,
    because that's what you need to do in order to fully understand
    those programs. And, also, there are, whenever folks come to
    Washington, opportunities for interactions. We have much less
    time, resources, and ability to go out to the States, but there
    is also a little bit of that.

     GAO deg.COORDINATION OF FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

        Senator Landrieu. Well, I'm going to think through this a
    little bit. But, you know, as I said, I was a member of the
    Appropriations Committee in the House, where I served for 8
    years, and it occurred to me there, people in Washington don't
    realize that. It reminds me of a slogan that I read once that
    said, ``You don't stop dancing with a gorilla until the gorilla
    stops dancing.'' And the Federal Government is a gorilla out
    there. And where we are 50 percent of State budgets now, 60
    percent of State budgets, it's hard for them to get a handle on
    their budget when they don't control 50 to 60 percent of it. At
    least that was the case in Louisiana when I left to come here.
        And I think that sometimes we don't realize--maybe it's
    because we all get this Beltway mentality sometimes, to a
    certain degree or another. And it might be very interesting for
    you to think through that. And I'm going to talk with some of
    the Senators about this and see. It can be done informally. It
    doesn't have to be done formally. But you might be very
    surprised at the ideas that you might find out there.
        And, Mr. Walker, I don't know if you have anything----
        Mr. Walker. Yes, if I might add--it might be helpful to you
    and to Peter. Obviously, they're a lot smaller operation than
    we are. Obviously, they're based solely in Washington, DC,
    whereas we're in 12 cities. But a couple of thoughts.
        One, I totally agree with Peter that the largest fiscal
    challenge for the Federal Government, State governments, and
    the private sector--is healthcare. He and I get along very
    well. We've already started to coordinate efforts. It's going
    to be critical that we coordinate in this healthcare area. As
    you know, I appoint all the MedPAC members, and we do quite a
    bit of healthcare work, too. But I'm confident we'll work
    together on that.
        With regard to Federal, State, and local, you raise an
    excellent point. I chair something called the Intergovernmental
    Audit Forum, which are all the inspector generals, all the
    State auditors, and all the county and city auditors. We also
    have something on an international basis, the International
    Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions. I didn't pick the
    name.
        Senator Landrieu. Quite fancy.
        Mr. Walker. There's a lot to be learned here, through
    coordinating efforts, and we've, in fact, enhanced that
    significantly during my tenure. So, I think you're onto
    something.
        Senator Landrieu. Well--I appreciate that, because I just
    think that that's a whole area that we--you know, our Governors
    should get together with Senators and the House Members, and,
    of course, we have other exchanges. But I think the more staff
    level exchanges, the better.
        Dr. Orszag. If I could add just one other thing, we also
    have responsibility for identifying mandates that are contained
    in legislation that are imposed on State and local governments.
    So, we have people who are actively scouring legislation for
    Federal changes that impose mandates on State and local
    governments.

           CBO deg.OPERATING UNDER THE CONTINUING RESOLUTION

        Senator Landrieu. Okay. Could you just comment on how your
    agency is coping with the continuing resolution, which was
    funded below the 2006 level?
        Dr. Orszag. We're making do, as we--you know, as you need
    to in such situations. But I would identify two things. One is
    information technology. We have delayed investments in
    computers and the normal cycle of replacing equipment, to a
    degree that's not sustainable over time. And the second thing
    is something that you had asked about earlier--again, with
    regard to recruiting, retaining, and motivating our people--the
    current situation, we can get by with for 1 year or maybe, you
    know, a short period of time, but there is this underlying
    pressure, which is that, out of our roughly 235 people, 218 are
    professional or management, and 39 percent of them are Ph.D.'s,
    and 38 percent have a master's degree. The market for those
    people in academia, at the Federal Reserve, and let alone the
    private sector, has taken off over the past several decades.
    And we're obviously operating under a different structure. So,
    that puts pressure on us. And the more that we have very tight
    funding, the more pressure we're under. And we, therefore, have
    to live off of--you know, we're lucky that we have a really
    great reputation and a lot of people want to come work for us,
    and that--despite my kids calling it the ``Congressional Boring
    Office''--most people in Washington think--seem to think it's a
    very exciting place to work. So, we will continue to try to
    uphold that.
        Senator Landrieu. I wish I could share with you what my
    kids say about my job.
        We won't even go there.
        Senator Landrieu. Ms. Chrisler, I don't have any particular
    questions. Actually, I do, but do you want to add anything
    before I get to them? And your testimony was excellent, but is
    there anything you can think you would like to add?

            OOC deg.WORKLOAD DUE TO CAPITOL VISITOR CENTER

        Ms. Chrisler. Thank you for the opportunity. One thing that
    I did not mention that I appreciate being given the opportunity
    to mention at this point is the Capitol Visitor Center. And our
    Office has been involved in the construction of the Capitol
    Visitor Center, and we're appreciative of the opportunity to
    provide technical assistance and technical advice, at this
    point in the construction, prior to occupancy. Once occupancy
    does take place, the Capitol Visitor Center is going to add 0.7
    million square feet of inspection jurisdiction to our Office,
    and there is a portion in our budget request to respond to that
    increased workload.
        So, I thank you for allowing me to present that.

       OOC deg.FIRE ALARM TESTING IN THE CAPITOL VISITOR CENTER

        Senator Landrieu. Do you believe that the amount of testing
    deemed necessary by the Architect of the Capitol and the fire
    marshal for the CVC is adequate? Have you been looking at that,
    the testing for the fire threat?
        Ms. Chrisler. Thank you for the question. We--our Office
    has been involved in discussions regarding the fire testing and
    the fire issues with respect to the Capitol Visitor Center. Our
    General Counsel, Peter Eveleth, is with me today, and he has
    been directly involved in those conversations. And, if I may
    ask your indulgence, I would ask that he be allowed to
    specifically respond to your question.
        Senator Landrieu. Okay, that would be terrific. And then,
    if your board member wants to come forward and just speak for a
    couple of minutes that would be terrific. You all could just
    pull up two additional chairs, if you'd like, or however. Y'all
    have the smallest budget and most people.
        So, David, if you all will just bear with them just for a
    minute. Give them a minute. Just because they're little doesn't
    mean they're not important.
        Mr. Eveleth. Good morning, Madam Chair. My name is Pete
    Eveleth. I'm the General Counsel of the Office of Compliance.
        With respect to the testing of fire alarms and the other
    systems in the CVC, we've been working closely with the fire
    marshal, and we have been reviewing various regulations that
    impact that. And we support the efforts of the fire marshal in
    that regard, that there should be complete 100-percent
    testing--acceptance testing of those alarm systems, given,
    particularly, the location of the facility, because it is
    underground, and a failure of any kind of systems would--could
    result in a catastrophe, given the number of people----
        Senator Landrieu. And we think that's going to take about 6
    months of complete testing? Is that what I've heard?
        Mr. Eveleth. I couldn't tell you exactly how much that's
    going to be. It may be--it may depend on how much pretesting is
    done in advance of the acceptance testing.
        Senator Landrieu. Okay.
        Ms. Camens. Madam Chair, good morning. I'm Barbara Camens,
    and I appreciate the opportunity to speak on behalf of the
    board of directors of the Office.
        I have two brief comments, both of which have to do with
    statutory changes which are sought by the board of directors.
        The first has to do with the issue of internal promotion
    within the Office. Our statute, the Congressional
    Accountability Act, requires that the four statutory positions
    that are appointed by the board be held by individuals who have
    not previously worked within the legislative branch during the
    previous 4 years. This provision essentially makes it
    impossible for any internal promotion within our Office. Our
    Acting Executive Director, Ms. Chrisler, was originally
    appointed by the board to the Deputy Executive Director
    position, and, given that fact, and given the current statutory
    language, the board is precluded from considering her for
    permanent appointment, notwithstanding the confidence that we
    have in her performance. And the issue is broader. Obviously,
    it has an impact on our entire Office staff. The board of
    directors is seeking a statutory change to give us the ability
    to fully access and utilize and reward, through internal
    promotion, the talent and accumulated experience which has been
    developed within our Office. And we do seek your support.
        Second, we are seeking some additional flexibility, in
    terms of compensation within our Office. Specifically, we're
    seeking an amendment to our statute to permit the establishment
    of two senior Executive Service positions, with regard to the
    Executive Director and the General Counsel. Our Office has
    recently undergone a comprehensive human capital needs study,
    and the conclusion of the outside consultant was that these two
    top manager positions share many attributes of SES positions in
    other agencies, and yet, we have a statute which imposes a
    salary cap. We are seeking a legislative change to allow the
    establishment of these SES positions. And we think it's
    crucial, both to the recruitment and the retention of the
    individuals of the high caliber that we need, the sense of
    leadership, the sense of vision that is necessary for leading
    our Office into the future.
        Thank you.
        Senator Landrieu. Thank you very much.

                         ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

        My questions have all been answered.
        Do you all have anything else that you want to add for the
    record? And, of course, the record is open, and you can submit
    anything in writing.
        [The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
    were submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the
    hearing:]
                     Questions Submitted to David M. Walker
                Questions Submitted by Senator Mary L. Landrieu
                                    staffing
        Question. I understand you would like to increase GAO staffing to
    3,750 over the next 5 or 6 years. Please explain how you arrived at
    this staffing level as the optimal level for GAO, what specific areas
    additional staff would be deployed to, and the results you would
    anticipate.
        Answer. Our initial estimate of this FTE level has been informed by
    (1) the recent update of our Strategic Plan for serving the Congress
    for fiscal years 2007-2012, (2) what we believe would be sufficient to
    minimize the existing and anticipated backlog in areas where we are
    experiencing supply and demand imbalances, and (3) address other
    critical needs. Our Strategic Plan for serving the Congress is updated
    through continuous consultations with the Congress.
        Our request for FTE's is then based on a systematic assessment of
    the workforce that we will need to achieve the strategic goals and
    objectives outlined in our Strategic Plan in support of the Congress
    and the American people. Annually, we develop a workforce plan that
    results from a detailed analysis of staffing considerations. Our
    workforce needs assessment is an essential element in our strategic
    approach to managing GAO--an approach that links human capital and
    performance management with strategic planning, budgeting, and
    performance accountability.
        Specifically, our FTE request is based on a thorough assessment of
    a number of factors including: Congressional requests and interests,
    statutory mandates, strategic priorities, emerging issues, current
    staffing data (FTE usage, attrition, consultant and contract usage,
    staff distribution by level and type), identified skill shortages,
    succession and knowledge retention issues, results achieved with staff
    resources, and budgetary considerations. As part of our workforce
    planning process, GAO managers identify the types of skills and
    experience and the level and numbers of employees needed to accomplish
    our anticipated workload. Relative to current and projected staffing
    data, our managers assess whether GAO has too few or too many staff
    working in each strategic area. Having received this input from our
    managers, the GAO leadership team makes fact-based decisions about our
    FTE needs and the optimal deployment of our staff resources to most
    efficiently accomplish our work.
        The 3,750 represents a preliminary estimate and a not to exceed
    number based on existing and expected workloads. It also assumes an
    increasing role for GAO in a range of areas addressed in our strategic
    plan and our 21st Century Challenges report of February 2005. For
    example, an increase in GAO's staffing level over the next 6 years is
    needed to allow us to address critical needs including supply and
    demand imbalances in areas such as health care, homeland security, the
    global ``war on terrorism,'' energy and natural resources, and forensic
    auditing, technology assessments, and other areas in need of
    fundamental reform. Also, additional staff are needed to support GAO
    efforts to be able to render our opinion on the consolidated financial
    statements of the U.S. government and the Department of Defense's
    financial management and related systems.
                              human capital issues
        Question. Over the past few Congresses, you have received
    additional human capital flexibilities through two pieces of targeted
    legislation. How have these pieces of legislation helped GAO to become
    a model federal agency? Given some of the challenges you have faced
    within your agency over the past few years, what else do you believe
    needs to be done in order to improve upon your human capital situation?
        Answer. The GAO Personnel Flexibilities Act of 2000 (Public Law
    106-303), and the GAO Human Capital Reform Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-
    271), are the two recent pieces of legislation that were enacted by
    Congress on behalf of GAO. GAO sought this legislation in order to help
    to reshape its workforce and recruit and retain staff with needed
    technical skills. The Comptroller General was granted permanent
    authority to offer voluntary early retirement and separation incentive
    payments to realign the workforce to meet budgetary constraints while
    reducing high-grade, managerial or supervisory positions and correcting
    skill imbalances. In fiscal years 2001 through 2006, GAO has granted
    voluntary early retirement to a total of 177 employees. These early
    retirements helped GAO reshape its workforce by providing retirement to
    mostly high-graded staff and allowed GAO to address succession planning
    and skill imbalance issues in addition to increasing the numbers of
    entry-level staff who can be hired. GAO was also able to establish
    senior level scientific, technical and professional positions with the
    same pay and benefits applicable to the Senior Executive Service. This
    authority has been used to employ GAO's Chief Actuary, Chief
    Statistician and Chief Economist. Another authority in the law allowed
    GAO to provide certain key employees with less than 3 years' service to
    earn 160 hours of annual leave each year rather than 104 hours. This
    has given GAO the ability to recruit individuals with significant work
    experience who might not have otherwise considered joining the federal
    workforce. GAO has just recently recruited 2 individuals under the
    Executive Exchange Program provided for in section 7 of Public Law 108-
    371. This partnership will assist us in drawing on the expertise of
    individuals from accounting firms, information technology firms,
    consulting groups and other organizations to develop solutions to
    current and emerging issues. These innovative human capital management
    flexibilities have been instrumental in enabling GAO to become a world-
    class professional services organization.
        We have other human capital challenges for which we may seek
    additional assistance from Congress to address:
      --Ensure that the bonus portion of our annual performance based
            compensation counts for retirement as long as employee's total
            basic pay plus performance based compensation is below the
            maximum for his or her position. GAO has implemented a
            performance-based compensation system that is designed to
            enhance performance and accountability while helping the agency
            maintain a competitive advantage in attracting, motivating,
            retaining, and rewarding a high performing and quality
            workforce. As part of this modern system, an employee's
            performance-based compensation is distributed between a base
            pay increase and a bonus. This latter payment is currently not
            considered in calculating an employee's basic pay for purposes
            of his/her annuity.
      --Eliminate GS-15, step 10, cap to allow the Comptroller General to
            pay employees up to the rate for Executive Level III based on
            the results of our periodic market pay studies. GAO has a
            highly diversified and skilled workforce that performs work of
            the highest level and importance. Presently, employees other
            than those in the Senior Level or Senior Executive Service are
            limited by statute to a pay rate that cannot exceed GS-15, step
            10. According to recent market surveys commissioned by GAO,
            some of GAO's professionals, such as economists and attorneys,
            cannot be compensated commensurate with market rates because of
            this statutory limitation. This is problematic, since GAO must
            compete for its staff with the private sector and other public
            agencies that can pay more. For example, the Departments of
            Defense and Homeland Security, and the Federal Deposit
            Insurance Corporation and other agencies concerned with
            financial matters are not subject to the GS-15 limit.
      --Eliminate the prohibitive cost associated with buyouts by amending
            Public Law 106-303 to remove the requirement, consistent with
            the rest of the federal government, that GAO make additional
            contributions to retirement funds in the case of voluntary
            separation incentive payments (VSIP) to GAO employees. This
            payment renders this flexibility virtually unusable, especially
            in these times of budget constraint.
        Question. In 2005 and 2006, GAO conducted a restructuring of Band
    II staff and placed employees in one of two pay levels. What was the
    impetus for this effort? What are you doing to address the concerns
    that have been raised?
        Answer. As part of our overall human capital transformation
    efforts, GAO has developed and implemented a validated competency-based
    appraisal system and modern market-based and skills, knowledge, and
    performance-oriented compensation system. When developing the Analysts'
    competency-based performance system, some Band II staff responded that
    certain activities associated with staff leadership were critical to
    their jobs and others did not. This bimodal response indicated that
    different roles and responsibilities were being performed by staff
    within the band. As a next step in its human capital transformation,
    GAO proceeded to develop a compensation system that would:
      --Enable GAO to attract and retain top talent;
      --Result in equal pay for work of equal value over time;
      --Reflect the roles and responsibilities that staff are expected to
            perform;
      --Be reasonable, competitive, performance-oriented; and based on
            skills, knowledge and roles;
      --Be affordable and sustainable based on current and expected
            resource levels; and
      --Conform to applicable statutory limits.
        The purpose of restructuring the Band II position was to clearly
    distinguish between the roles and responsibilities of those analysts
    who are generally individual contributors and/or sometimes provide
    overall leadership on selected engagements and those who are expected
    to consistently take on a leadership role for a broad range of
    engagements over time. When comparing Band II roles, responsibilities
    and pay to the market, a Watson Wyatt market based compensation study
    supported the CG decision that these two roles should have different
    pay ranges. By better linking roles and responsibilities to the
    appropriate market-based pay ranges, senior analysts will be more
    equitably compensated.
        Since the initial restructuring and placement of staff into the
    Band IIA and IIB pay levels, GAO has conducted 2 competitive placement
    opportunities resulting in the placement of additional staff into Band
    IIB. To address concerns regarding compensation for Band IIA employees,
    we decided for 2007 pay decisions to provide 100 percent of the
    performance based compensation amount to those Band IIA staff whose
    salaries were above the Band IIA maximum rate (i.e., ``transition
    staff''). In 2006, Band IIA transition staff received only 50 percent
    of their performance based compensation.
        Question. It is our understanding that you relied upon the results
    of a market based pay study to establish pay ranges for GAO staff and
    to limit the compensation of those employees who were paid in excess of
    these ranges. CRS has stated that these limitations have had the impact
    of significantly reducing the salary and future pension benefits of
    affected GAO staff. Can you share with the committee the data that GAO
    relied upon to conclude that GAO's Analyst Band II staff were overpaid
    and that such actions were therefore justified?
        Answer. GAO has established market based compensation ranges for
    major occupational groups. These ranges are based on salary surveys
    conducted by Watson Wyatt Worldwide, a leading human capital consulting
    firm. Watson Wyatt's process for developing the ranges entailed meeting
    with GAO occupational experts to develop an understanding of GAO's
    positions, linking these positions to comparable jobs in comparator
    organizations, and collecting salary data from various sources for such
    positions. Among the sources of salary data used by Watson Wyatt were
    the following surveys: Abbot Langer Consulting and Legal, Altman Weil
    Legal, Cordom Not-for-Profit, Mercer IT and Watson Wyatt Data for
    Professional positions and others. We would be happy to brief the
    Committee on the extensive data, if requested, and provide further
    details.
        Question. Federal employees in the Washington, DC area received
    across-the-board and locality adjustments resulting in base pay
    increases of 2.64 percent in January 2007. What increase was provided
    to GAO staff? What was the basis for GAO's increase and why does it
    differ from other federal employees?
        Answer. In 2007, the Comptroller General authorized a 3 percent
    increase in the salary ranges applicable for GAO employees within the
    ranges. A 2.4 percent increase in the annual salary for all employees
    performing at a satisfactory level who were within competitive
    compensation limits was provided. This percentage was based on the
    annual update of competitive compensation trends conducted by Watson
    Wyatt. In addition, GAO employees were also eligible for performance-
    based compensation (PBC) adjustments. PBC is based on individual
    performance and is calculated as a percentage of the ``competitive'' or
    market rate for the employee's band and location. An employee with an
    average appraisal would receive a PBC amount equal to 2.15 percent of
    the competitive rate for his or her position as base pay and/or as
    bonus. Except for Band IIB staff subject to the speed bump who received
    their entire PBC amount in the form of a bonus, 100 percent of the 2007
    PBC amount was provided to all other staff as an increase to base pay
    not to exceed the maximum rate applicable to the employee's position.
        The Comptroller General's determination regarding the amount of the
    annual adjustment was based on a consideration of the criteria set
    forth in 31 U.S.C. 732(c)(3). Among the data considered by the
    Comptroller General was salary survey information indicating that
    consulting, professional, scientific and technical services
    organizations actually adjusted ranges by an average of 2.7 percent in
    2006 and projected an adjustment of 3 percent in 2007. Prior to the
    passage of Public Law 108-371, GAO employees' salaries were given the
    same base and locality increase as the General Schedule. As provided in
    31 U.S.C. 732(c)(3), GAO employees' increases were decoupled from the
    General Schedule and the authority to determine the amount of the
    increase was granted to the Comptroller General.
        The average across-the-board increase provided to executive branch
    employees was 2.2 percent nation-wide. In addition, most executive
    branch employees receive within grade increases on a regular basis and
    the annual value of such an increase is approximately 1.6 percent. GAO
    employees received a 2.4 percent across-the-board increase and were
    eligible for additional performance based pay. An employee with an
    average appraisal would receive a performance based pay amount equal to
    2.15 percent of the competitive rate for his or her position.
        Question. Each year, federal employees' pay adjustments are
    effective the first pay period beginning on or after January 1. Our
    understanding is that GAO employees did not receive their pay
    adjustments in January. When did GAO provide its across the board
    increase? Why is the date different than and later than other
    legislative agencies, given that the entire government was subject to
    the same budget uncertainties?
        Answer. The effective date of GAO employees' pay adjustment was
    February 18, 2007. Under 31 U.S.C. 732(c)(3), the Comptroller General
    is authorized to set the date of GAO employees' pay adjustments as well
    as the amount. GAO delayed the annual pay adjustment because we did not
    receive the funding requested, to ensure that we would not negatively
    impact our ability to operate effectively, and to avoid unpaid
    furloughs of our employees.
                           gao technology assessment
        Question. Mr. Walker, there is interest once again in re-funding
    the old Office of Technology Assessment. In response to such interest
    back in 2002, our Committee established a pilot program for GAO to
    conduct technology assessment. How successful was that effort, and do
    you believe GAO can continue to effectively conduct non-partisan
    forward-looking technology assessment work? GAO has completed 4
    technology assessment jobs in the past couple of years, which were
    requested in a bi-cameral, bi-partisan fashion. Were those work-
    products well-received and are the findings being utilized? Can you
    describe GAO's in-house capacity for technology assessment?
        Answer. In response to the committee's direction to establish a
    technology assessment pilot program at GAO, we have completed four
    technology assessment reports.\1\ Our products have been relevant,
    timely, and well-received. For example, we testified before three
    different congressional committees on our findings in our biometrics
    report. As a result of one of these hearings, and using information
    from our biometrics report, a bill was introduced in the House in July
    2004, directing the Transportation Security Administration to establish
    system requirements and performance standards for using biometrics, and
    to establish processes (1) to prevent individuals from using assumed
    identities to enroll in a biometric system and (2) to resolve errors.
    These provisions were later included in an overall aviation security
    bill and were eventually included in the Intelligence Reform and
    Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, enacted in December 2004. The
    biometrics report is still relevant, even after 4 years, in examining
    the numerous biometrics programs being developed in the federal
    government.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Technology Assessment: Using Biometrics for Border Security,
    GAO-03-174 (November 15, 2002); Technology Assessment: Cybersecurity
    for Critical Infrastructure Protection, GAO-04-321 (May 28, 2004);
    Technology Assessment: Protecting Structures and Improving
    Communications during Wildland Fires, GAO-05-380 (April 26, 2005); and
    Technology Assessment: Securing the Transport of Cargo Containers, GAO-
    06-68SU (January 25, 2006).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        GAO has designated cybersecurity as a high-risk area since 1997 and
    the technologies discussed in our technology assessment report on
    cybersecurity play a key role in addressing this area.\2\ In 2005, we
    testified on the findings of our report on technologies that can be
    used to protect structures and improve communications during wildland
    fires. Senator Bingaman sent a letter to the Comptroller General
    thanking us for this report, stating that such studies are important
    tools for understanding the technology implications of policies
    considered by Congress. In March 2006, Senator Bingaman sent another
    letter to the Comptroller General thanking us for our timely, thorough,
    and well-received report on cargo security technologies, which he
    stated will help the Congress perform its oversight functions with
    regard to port and container security.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ High-Risk Series: An Update, GAO-07-310 (January 2007).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        A technology assessment function in the legislative branch can be
    beneficial. For congressional decision-makers, an independent
    technology assessment study can make complex scientific and technical
    issues more accessible by analyzing the values and tradeoffs of various
    technologies and presenting them in a public policy context that can be
    applied directly into the legislative process. Should the Congress
    determine the need for this type of analysis and that it would be more
    prudent to place the function in an existing organization rather than
    create a new one, we believe that GAO is qualified to take on this
    function. A GAO line of work on technology assessments would not be a
    departure from its normal mission, but a process of differentiating,
    defining, and implementing new work methods. GAO's focus on producing
    quality reports that are professional, objective, fact-based, fair,
    balanced, nonideological, and nonpartisan is consistent with the needs
    of an independent legislative branch technology assessment function.
        Further, GAO's work already covers virtually every area in which
    the federal government is or may become involved. To accomplish this
    work, GAO maintains a workforce of highly trained professionals with
    degrees in many academic disciplines, including accounting, law,
    engineering, public and business administration, economics, and the
    social and physical sciences. More specifically, GAO's Center for
    Technology and Engineering, which led our pilot program in technology
    assessment, is staffed by engineers and scientists with experience in
    systems engineering, software engineering, real-time systems, computer
    security, cost estimation, and biological technologies. To leverage our
    multidiscipline workforce, we have staffed our technology assessments
    with both staff from the Center for Technology and Engineering and
    analysts in our mission teams, such as Homeland Security and Justice,
    Information Technology, and Natural Resources and Environment.
        While GAO is capable of conducting the work, we believe there are
    critical factors that need to be considered to conduct technology
    assessments on a permanent basis at GAO. First, we would need to define
    an operational concept for this line of work, adapted from current
    tested processes and protocols. At a minimum, this capability would
    require: (1) developing and maintaining relationships with relevant
    congressional committees to facilitate the selection of technology
    assessment topics; (2) keeping congressional committees abreast of the
    results of technology assessments, meeting with members and staff, and
    preparing testimony statements for relevant hearings; (3) developing
    and maintaining relationships with key external experts and
    organizations to remain informed about emerging technologies and
    potential related public policy issues; (4) developing, documenting,
    and refining processes for conducting technology assessments; (5)
    consulting with independent experts and conducting peer review of
    reports; (6) developing standards and procedures for issuing technology
    assessment reports as distinct from our audit products; and (7)
    developing metrics to measure the value of the technology assessment
    capability.
        A second critical factor is the estimation of resources for
    conducting technology assessments. To establish a basic capability to
    conduct one assessment annually, GAO would require four additional
    full-time staff, at an estimated cost of about $723,000 ($573,000 for
    four FTEs and $150,000 to obtain contract assistance or provide
    expertise not readily available within GAO). For higher demands,
    additional technology assessment requests would require--depending on
    economies of scale, timing, and scope of work--incremental additional
    resources.
                 gao operations under the continuing resolution
        Question. Mr. Walker, according to your statement, GAO has had to
    operate in a constrained manner this year because of resource
    shortfalls under the continuing resolution. Are there significant
    numbers of Congressional requests GAO is turning down, or is it taking
    longer to get work done? What is your current backlog of Congressional
    requests? How does this compare to previous years?
        Answer. We are only a few months into the new Congress and we see
    several trends which lead us to believe that Congress will be
    requesting much more of GAO. For instance, our current backlog as of
    March 2007 has grown above 2005 and 2006 levels. Also, during our
    outreach for our upcoming strategic plan update, we have been told that
    demand will likely increase. We are seeing this in the recent surge in
    requests for GAO testimonies during the Congress's first few months. We
    have been quite fortunate that much of this early testimony has been
    based on previous work. Constraints on FTEs due to the current funding
    situation for the remainder of fiscal year 2007 will likely prevent us
    from being as responsive in the future as Congress begins to request
    new work for the second session.
        More specifically, we are currently experiencing supply and demand
    imbalances in responding to congressional requests in areas such as
    health care, homeland security, the global ``war on terrorism,'' energy
    and natural resources, and forensic auditing. In fiscal year 2007, we
    will experience a reduction of 35 FTEs--from 3,194 to 3,159--from our
    fiscal year 2006 FTE level, which will exacerbate the problem. In
    fiscal year 2008, we are seeking an FTE increase in teams conducting
    work related to homeland security, defense, natural resources and
    energy, and health care to help address these supply and demand
    imbalances. We will also be seeking your commitment and support to
    provide the funding needed to increase GAO's staffing to a to-be-
    determined level not to exceed 3,750 over the next 6 years in order to
    address critical needs, including supply and demand imbalances, high-
    risk areas, 21st Century Challenges questions and other areas of the
    federal government in need of fundamental reform, and technology
    assessments. In addition, as we get closer to when GAO may be able to
    render our opinion on the consolidated financial statements of the U.S.
    government and the Department of Defense's financial management and
    related systems, we will need to increase our workforce capacity.
        GAO has made significant progress in reducing the very large
    backlog of Congressional requests over the past several years so that
    we can better support the Congress, but this has been very difficult to
    achieve. We are doubtful that it will continue based on our outreach
    efforts with the new Congress and the constrained resource level we
    will be operating at through fiscal year 2007. As of March 31, 2007, we
    had a workload imbalance of 419 requests--a growing increase over the
    last two years. The general result of GAO's initiative to be more
    responsive to the Congress is seen in the following table showing the
    pending requests at the end of each year.

                PENDING REQUESTS AS OF DECEMBER 31ST OF EACH YEAR
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Requests
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    2002.......................................................          463
    2003.......................................................          390
    2004.......................................................          492
    2005.......................................................          358
    2006.......................................................          329
    2007 \1\...................................................          419
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ As of March 31, 2007

        Last year (fiscal year 2006), we accepted about 85-88 percent of
    the requests received. Of these, roughly one-fourth (22 percent) were
    delayed. Of those not accepted, some were declined, withdrawn, sent to
    an Executive agency, or were pending a decision by GAO on whether we
    are able to accept the request. We also have done and are doing work,
    on such topics as Iraq and Katrina, under the Comptroller General's
    authority because there is such broad congressional interest in them.
    We believe this has also served to limit the number of requests we
    would have received on these issues. Due to the increasing supply and
    demand imbalances, GAO typically has been unable to accept requests
    from individual members in recent years and has worked to merge
    requests so that we can do related work for several requesters.
        Our requested work has also been taking somewhat longer to start--
    almost doubling in some areas--resulting in longer timeframes to
    respond to the requester. The table below shows the average number of
    months that it has taken us to start mandates (priority 1), requests
    from Committee chairs and ranking members (priority 2), and requests
    from members (priority 3).

                    AVERAGE DURATION TO INITIATE ENGAGEMENTS
                                   [In months]
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           2004         2005         2006
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Priority:
        1 \1\........................         1.82         2.49         2.74
        2............................         2.93         2.49         3.91
        3............................         2.74         4.41         6.37
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Prior to the update of GAO's Congressional Protocols in July 2004,
      priority 1 designation included requests from committee chairs and
      ranking minority members.

                                gao supplemental
        Question. GAO is requesting $374,000 for oversight work in Iraq.
    Why can't GAO absorb this relatively small amount of funding within its
    $500 million budget?
        Answer. Because about 80 percent of our budget provides funds to
    support our staff--our most important asset--and the balance of our
    budget contains many mandatory operating expenses--such as rent,
    utilities, and contracts for ongoing operations--we have very limited
    flexibility to make adjustments. In fiscal year 2007, we received
    significantly less funding than we had requested. In order to operate
    within the constraints of the fiscal year 2007 joint resolution, our
    Operating Plan holds most of our budget accounts at or below fiscal
    year 2006 funding levels, resulting in reduced operating levels,
    deferred hiring to address succession planning challenges and skill
    gaps, and delayed investments geared to further increasing productivity
    and effectiveness. While we have allocated funds to address needed
    oversight work in Iraq, additional funds are needed to allow us to
    maintain a continuing presence in Baghdad.
        Question. GAO has an extensive array of performance targets and
    measures. Your testimony indicates that you met most of your
    performance targets. How often do you reevaluate those measures to see
    whether they are responsive to GAO and the Congress? Do you have them
    evaluated by an independent party, such as during a peer review?
        Answer. GAO's performance measures include those measures
    traditionally used by auditing and professional services firms.
    Annually, GAO reviews its performance targets and continuously
    reevaluates its performance measures. In fact, it is rare for a year to
    pass without some refinements in our performance indicators to help us
    better manage our agency to support the Congress for the benefit of the
    American people. For example, in the past few years, we have added
    measures to better assess how our support units are doing their jobs;
    changed our measure for determining how timely our products are by
    obtaining feedback directly from our congressional clients; and
    eliminated measures, such as the number of recommendations made, that
    we thought were no longer useful. Further, as we continue to gain more
    experience, we anticipate making additional changes so that we can
    better support the Congress.
        In addition to the continuous evaluations by our Office of Quality
    and Continuous Improvement, we routinely receive suggestions from such
    organizations as (1) GAO's Inspector General, who annually reviews some
    of the measures before they are included in the annual Performance and
    Accountability report, (2) an independent Audit Advisory Committee as
    part of their annual review of GAO's financial statements and
    performance data included in our annual Performance and Accountability
    Report, and (3) independent reviewers for the Association of Government
    Accountants (AGA) as part of their annual process to evaluate
    Performance and Accountability Reports submitted by participating
    executive branch agencies and GAO.
        Specifically, staff in our Inspector General's (IG) office test our
    compliance with procedures related to our performance data on a
    rotating basis over a 3-year period. During fiscal year 2006, the IG
    reviewed accomplishment reports totaling 96 percent of the total dollar
    value reported for financial benefits, including most accomplishment
    reports of $100 million or more, and found that GAO had a reasonable
    basis for claiming these benefits. Their suggestions have also resulted
    in policy clarifications or changes in the performance measures
    reported. For example, the IG's review of fiscal year 2005 qualitative
    measures led to GAO discontinuing public reporting of these measures
    and retaining them for internal use. The 3-member Audit Advisory
    Committee is composed of individuals who are independent of GAO and
    have outstanding reputations in public service or business with
    financial or legal expertise. Two members are former IRS Commissioners
    and the other member is a former Controller of the Office of Federal
    Financial Management in OMB. The comments we receive from the committee
    members have, among other things, helped to ensure transparency in our
    Performance and Accountability Report when we describe our performance
    measurement processes and results. Comments that we receive as part of
    the AGA's Certificate of Excellence in Accountability Reporting program
    also help improve the transparency and clarity of our performance
    reporting.
        GAO also recognizes that our performance measures can be
    supplemented by other information. We do this by taking such actions as
    outreaching for feedback on our performance to our congressional
    clients on an annual basis, participating in periodic oversight
    hearings of GAO's performance and operations, using our audits to
    identify best practices and then applying them to GAO's operations,
    listening closely to Congressional clients who provide unsolicited
    comments throughout the year, and seeking continuous feedback from our
    clients as part of our web-based survey to measure satisfaction with
    our most significant written products and testimonies.

                              SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS

        Senator Landrieu. The subcommittee stands in recess. Thank
    you.
        [Whereupon, at 11:10 a.m., Friday, March 16, the
    subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of
    the Chair.]

             LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008

                                  ----------

                             FRIDAY, MARCH 30, 2007

                                           U.S. Senate,
               Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The subcommittee met at 10:10 a.m., in room SD-138, Dirksen
    Senate Office Building, Hon. Mary L. Landrieu (chairman)
    presiding.
        Present: Senators Landrieu and Allard.

                                  U.S. SENATE

                        Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper

    STATEMENT OF HON. TERRANCE W. GAINER, SENATE SERGEANT
                AT ARMS; CHAIRMAN, U.S. CAPITOL POLICE
                BOARD
    ACCOMPANIED BY:
            DREW WILLISON, DEPUTY SERGEANT AT ARMS
            CARL HOECKER, INSPECTOR GENERAL

                     STATEMENT OF SENATOR MARY L. LANDRIEU

        Senator Landrieu. Good morning. Our subcommittee will come
    to order. We have a routine but important subcommittee meeting
    this morning to review the budgets for the Senate Sergeant at
    Arms, the U.S. Capitol Police Board and the Capitol Police. We
    welcome our witnesses to the subcommittee and I thank Senator
    Allard for joining us. I look forward to working with Senator
    Allard on this subcommittee, as he chaired it for several
    years, and is very interested in the subjects that we will be
    discussing this morning. So let me welcome you all.
        We meet this morning to take testimony on the fiscal year
    2008 budget request, as I said, for the Sergeant at Arms and
    Doorkeeper of the Senate, which is his official name and the
    United States Capitol Police.
        I would like to welcome Terry Gainer who joins us today to
    testify on behalf of the budget. I'd also like to acknowledge
    and welcome his Deputy Sergeant at Arms, Drew Willison. I had
    the pleasure of working with Drew previously when he was the
    clerk of the Energy and Water Subcommittee and I always found
    him to be direct and efficient and I appreciate his work here.
        Our second witness is Phillip Morse, Chief of the U.S.
    Capitol Police. I welcome you Chief. Thank you for coming to my
    office and visiting with me earlier this week. This is a fairly
    new position for you and I believe you were sworn in 5 months
    ago today. So you're getting your head and hands around the
    challenges before us. I look forward to hearing your vision and
    your priorities for the Department.
        The 2008 budget request for the Sergeant at Arms totals
    $227 million, which is $28 million or 14 percent above the
    current year. This request includes funding for 19 additional
    full-time employees, which appears to be needed largely to fill
    technology-related positions. The increase in your expense
    budget of nearly 17 percent also seems to be technologically
    driven. Several of my questions will address this particular
    increase.
        The Capitol Police budget request for 2008 totals $299
    million, which is $43.5 million or 17 percent above the current
    year. This request includes funding for 20 additional civilian
    employees and supports the current force of 1,671 sworn
    officers, which is quite a large force.
        I hope you will update the subcommittee on the need for
    these extra civilian positions, Chief. While your salary budget
    shows an increase of 9 percent, your expense request has
    increased by over 60 percent. This is a pretty substantial
    increase and I look forward to discussing this with you and the
    priorities you have outlined in this area.
        As I've said in previous hearings and it bears repeating
    that I doubt the subcommittee will have the resources available
    to provide double digit increases for all of our entities.
    Therefore, at some point in the near future we're going to have
    to have some serious discussions with you and your staff about
    what are the most urgent priorities as we try to continue our
    push for safety, additional safety in the Capitol, but
    recognizing there are some budget constraints here.
        In closing, I'd like to acknowledge all the good work by
    the employees of your staffs. I know they are working hard to
    get some of our things in order and I'm sure you're both very
    proud of what they are doing to help you. So I'd like to now
    turn to my friend and ranking member Senator Allard for his
    opening remarks.

                       STATEMENT OF SENATOR WAYNE ALLARD

        Senator Allard. Thank you, Madam Chairman and I look
    forward to working with you on this budget. I thank you for
    convening this hearing. I appreciate that. I am pleased to see
    Sergeant at Arms Terry Gainer and Chief Phil Morse this morning
    and congratulations to both of you on your new positions. I
    look forward to working with both of you. I appreciate the work
    you and the men and women who work for you--the work that they
    do--the officers who protect the Capitol complex, the Sergeant
    at Arms employees who ensure our mail is safe, the folks who
    develop emergency plans, the doorkeepers, the phone operators,
    technology specialists and many others who I haven't mentioned
    who ensure everything runs smoothly in the Senate. I'm one
    Member of the Senate who really appreciates all your efforts.
        This morning I will have a number of questions including
    one about the Sergeant at Arms request for additional staffing.
    Madam Chairman, I've talked about this in the Sergeant at Arms
    hearings in the past 2 years. If this year's request is
    approved, the Sergeant at Arms will have grown by 25 percent
    since 2001.
        With respect to the Capitol Police, I am pleased that we
    now have a permanent Chief on board as well as an inspector
    general. There are many challenges ahead for the Chief
    including the need to get the administrative side of the House
    in order, as well as control overtime spending and ensure that
    officers are deployed effectively and according to a rigorous
    threat assessment.
        Several studies and reviews of Capitol Police officer
    staffing have been undertaken or are underway to ensure
    appropriate protocols for staffing. Unfortunately, there does
    not seem to be a lot of coordination amongst these various
    staffing analyses. Unfortunately, we need to see a firm plan
    for appropriate risk-based staffing of posts and the most
    effective use of additional duty hours. I would like to see
    this brought to closure over the next couple of months.
        Let me also say that we were shocked last September when a
    deranged intruder managed to breach several checkpoints and
    gain access to the Capitol. This was a wake-up call. I look to
    Capitol Police leadership and we want to be confident that such
    an occurrence could never happen again.
        I would note that the Capitol Police are requesting a very
    large increase in civilian staffing, 30 additional employees.
    This would result in more than a 100-percent increase in
    civilian staffing since 2001. With that in mind, there should
    be no reason that very serious management problems identified
    by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) could not be
    resolved.
        I have been working with a lot of the other agencies on the
    executive branch side about bringing accountability to their
    budget process. As you may be aware of, there is a process we
    apply to the executive branch that we do not apply to
    legislative branch agencies. I'm one that feels that what we
    require of the rest of Government, we ought to require of the
    legislative branch.
        So this GAO report that has come out has me concerned. I
    think there are some very serious statements in this GAO report
    about financial management operations and what I see, Madam
    Chairman, is that we need to emphasize particularly to the
    Chief of Police and those that are under him, the importance of
    putting together an accountable budget, one that identifies
    goals and objectives that are measurable and then tie the
    budget into those.
        I noticed in the last several years, I've been authorizing
    a lot of reprogramming of dollars. What that tells me is, we're
    not doing a very good job of programming the money. Chief
    Morse, this is a problem you've inherited. I hope you can begin
    to really focus on what it is going to take and if you have to
    work with GAO or Mr. Gainer with his past experience in the
    Department, to improve accountability and financial management.
        You can expect me to be diligent in asking for
    accountability on some of these issues. I want you to
    understand that it is because I feel we have to do a little
    better job in the legislative branch of holding our own
    agencies accountable. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
        Senator Landrieu. Thank you and let me say to my ranking
    member that I share those goals and objectives and I don't
    think the legislative branch should be held out in any other
    standard than we hold the other agencies that we have
    jurisdiction over. So I look forward to working with you in a
    cooperative way to get to the goals and objectives that we can
    have the best police force and best security for the Capitol,
    not just for those of us that work here and call this our
    workplace, but most importantly, for the millions of people
    that visit here and call this place the People's House. It is
    very important that we keep that in mind. So with that, Mr.
    Gainer would you like to begin your testimony?

                        STATEMENT OF TERRANCE W. GAINER

        Mr. Gainer. Thank you, Madam Chair and members of the
    subcommittee, thank you for allowing me to testify here today,
    and I ask to submit for the record my written testimony. I
    would also like to make a few brief comments about the efforts
    of the men and women of the Sergeant at Arms Office and our
    budget and then quickly segue into my role as Chairman of the
    Police Board.
        This marks the 12th time I have presented a budget for an
    organization for which I have been responsible--seven times as
    the director of the Illinois State Police, four times as the
    Chief of the Capitol Police and now as the new Senate Sergeant
    at Arms.
        Each time increases were requested, each time I struggled
    with my own team to request only what was needed to be
    successful at our core business. While need might be in the eye
    of the beholder I have not employed the tactic where one sets a
    high mark, figuring that the give and take of the budget
    process yields a mutually agreeable number which leaves all
    participants satisfied.
        At the same time, I have never received all that I
    requested, nor have I ever been able to submit a request for a
    flat budget. In all cases, however, in all those organizations,
    the operations of the organization continue to be professional.
        On several occasions, I have begun a budget year knowing
    the organization could not be as cutting edge as possible, for
    projects might take longer, service might not be as perfect as
    professionals expect, yet the organizations always survive.
        This Sergeant at Arms budget regretfully is no different
    than those I have presented for other organizations. We are
    requesting more, as you've indicated, practically 14 percent
    more, to nearly $227 million. The personnel increases, by most
    measures, are modest. We respectfully request 19 additional
    FTEs. In total, a 13.9-percent increase is sizable. I am fully
    aware of this as I sit here today with a Chief who is also
    requesting a considerable increase, and we are not the only
    ones asking you for more. I wish it weren't so.
        Madam Chair and members of this subcommittee, the men and
    women of the Senate Sergeant at Arms Office and the wonderful
    team at the United States Capitol Police are here for one
    single purpose. We keep the doors of this powerful institution
    open for business, facilitating the ability of the people you
    serve to come and go freely.
        If we are not successful, it would be difficult for the
    Senate to be successful. Including telephones, computers,
    pages, doorkeepers, the media galleries, parking, the photo
    studio, technology development, the post office, police
    operations, emergency preparedness, recording studio, EAP,
    environmental services, hair care, nationwide support of your
    State offices, the cabinet shop, information technology,
    education and the training of your staff, services to your
    families, printing and graphics and direct mail, the help desk
    and the wonderful professionals at the appointment desk, I
    think we do it all. The team does it right 24 hours a day, 7
    days a week, and we like our work.
        Our strategic plan, completed by Bill Pickle, my
    predecessor, just months ago is straightforward in its vision:
    exceptional public service. Our mission is straightforward:
    operational, security and protocol support services to the
    United States Senate.
        In concluding this portion of my remarks, let me say thank
    you again for the support of the subcommittee. Working with
    your staff is helpful and productive. Our partnership with the
    Secretary of the Senate and the Architect of the Capitol (AOC)
    are essential to achieving excellence.
        Now if I can just move quickly to the second half of my
    brief remarks, putting on the hat as Chairman of the Police
    Board. Let me share just a few thoughts. The Board works
    closely with Chief Morse and his Department in assessing
    security risks and determining appropriate approaches for
    avoidance or mitigation. The addition of an inspector general
    presents a unique opportunity for the Department and the Board
    to identify the best business and security practices while
    auditing the results. But make no mistake: this Capitol
    continues to be a prime target of terrorists. We need to be
    steps ahead of the offender. One step ahead is not good enough.
    Your United States Capitol Police is a professional
    organization fully capable of balancing freedom of access and
    security, but this is no small task and the challenges are
    many.
        The cost of technology and of its maintenance is high. The
    stress of constant diligence is real. The mission requirements
    are evolving. The United States Capitol Police have prepared a
    budget request that reflects the needs of the Department in
    meeting critical security requirements as they are currently
    understood and I would emphasize as they are currently
    understood. They have been judicious in the initiatives
    included in the budget. Chief Morse and his team have the full
    support of the Capitol Police Board and their efforts,
    especially in determining the number of personnel needed,
    evaluating threats, and maximizing the use of technology.
        Please keep in mind that as the threat environment changes
    or additional mission requirements are added the Department
    will in all probability need additional personnel along with a
    concomitant associated cost. For instance, the opening of the
    Capitol Visitor Center (CVC) is an additional responsibility.
        From the police perspective, this means more doors to cover
    and people to protect. Longer hours of operation for that
    facility, more visitors, or the opening of doors, which are
    currently closed and locked, have the potential to be unfunded
    mandates. We need to weigh carefully the requests as they
    unfold for the year. The mutual efforts of our organizations,
    with the guidance and oversight of the Senate committees, will
    provide the work environment the Senate needs to make the
    important, tough decisions for America. Thank you and I look
    forward to trying to answer your questions.
        Senator Landrieu. Thank you very much.
        [The statements follow:]
             Prepared Statement of the Honorable Terrance W. Gainer
                                  introduction
        Madam Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for
    inviting me to testify before you today. I am pleased to report on the
    progress the Office of the Sergeant at Arms (SAA) has made over the
    past year and our plans to enhance our contributions to the Senate in
    the coming year.
        For fiscal year 2008, the Sergeant at Arms respectfully requests a
    total budget of $226,893,000, an increase of $27,642,000 (or 13.9
    percent) over the fiscal year 2007 budget. This request will allow us
    to enhance service to the Senate community by supporting and improving
    the Senate's technology infrastructure and to ensure a safe and secure
    environment. Appendix A, accompanying this testimony, elaborates on the
    specific components of our fiscal year 2008 budget request.
        In developing this budget and our operating plans, we are guided by
    three priorities: (1) ensuring the United States Senate is as secure
    and prepared for an emergency as possible; (2) providing the Senate
    outstanding service and support, including the enhanced use of
    technology; and (3) delivering exceptional customer service to the
    Senate.
        This year I am pleased to highlight some of this Office's
    activities including the publication of the ``United States Senate
    Sergeant at Arms Strategic Plan''. Our accomplishments in the areas of
    security and preparedness, information technology, and operations are
    also impressive. We are preparing for next year by planning for the
    major events we know will come and by ensuring that the Office of the
    Sergeant at Arms is an agile organization that can adjust to the
    unexpected.
        An outstanding senior management team leads the efforts of the
    dedicated Sergeant at Arms staff. Drew Willison serves as my Deputy,
    and he and I are joined by Administrative Assistant Rick Edwards,
    Republican Liaison Lynne Halbrooks, General Counsel Dan Strodel,
    Assistant Sergeant at Arms for Security and Emergency Preparedness
    Chuck Kaylor, Assistant Sergeant at Arms for Police Operations Bret
    Swanson, Assistant Sergeant at Arms and Chief Information Officer Greg
    Hanson, and Assistant Sergeant at Arms for Operations Esther Gordon.
    The many accomplishments set forth in this testimony would not have
    been possible without this team's leadership and commitment.
        The Office of the Sergeant at Arms also works with other
    organizations that support the Senate. I would like to take this
    opportunity to mention how important their contributions have been in
    helping us achieve our objectives. In particular, we work regularly
    with the Secretary of the Senate, the Architect of the Capitol, the
    Office of the Attending Physician, and the United States Capitol Police
    (USCP). When appropriate, we coordinate our efforts with the U.S. House
    of Representatives and the agencies of the Executive Branch. I am
    impressed by the people with whom we work, and pleased with the quality
    of the relationships we have built together.
        This is my first year testifying before this Committee as Sergeant
    at Arms and I would be remiss if I did not mention how proud I am of
    the men and women with whom I work. The employees of the Office of the
    Sergeant at Arms are among the most committed and creative in
    government. We hope to build on the success this organization has
    experienced in recent years.
        None of our efforts would be accomplished, though, without the
    guidance of this Committee and the Committee on Rules and
    Administration. Thank you for the support you consistently demonstrate
    as we work to serve the Senate.
    Challenges of the Past Year
                Funeral of Former President Ford
        On Saturday, December 30, 2006, the remains of former President
    Gerald R. Ford arrived on the East Front of the Capitol in a formal
    military procession. The United States Capitol was the site of the
    second State Funeral since 1973 and the second in the past two and a
    half years.
        My office coordinated preparations for this national event with
    many internal and external organizations. This event could not have
    been accomplished without the extraordinary efforts of many Sergeant at
    Arms employees who were tireless in their dedication to meeting the
    Senate community's needs. Many of our employees canceled their holiday
    and year-end leave plans to support this historic event.
        Capitol Facilities staff cleaned and set up the holding rooms, the
    Photo and Recording Studios captured the event for viewing and
    historical purposes, and other staff provided behind-the-scenes
    support. Our media galleries worked tirelessly to support the media
    needs.
        We also focused on protocol and security throughout the week. My
    Executive Office staff coordinated attendance at the service in the
    Capitol Rotunda with Senate offices, and they assisted the Senators and
    officials who participated in the program. In addition, we were
    responsible for coordinating the official Senate delegation's
    attendance at the National Funeral Service, held at the Washington
    National Cathedral on January 2, 2007. My security team collaborated
    with the United States Capitol Police, the Secret Service, and other
    Federal agencies to ensure a secure environment, and we were a
    continuous presence in the Capitol Police Command Center. As a result
    of everyone's work, approximately 50,000 mourners were able to pay
    their respects to the former President in the Rotunda of the Capitol.
                Transition
        My Office facilitated the change to the new Congress by equipping,
    staffing, and running the Transition Office for newly elected Senators,
    coordinating the moves and setup of temporary office suites, and
    coordinating the moves and setup for permanent office space both for
    new Senators and Senators who chose to relocate. We installed equipment
    in the transition office space, and provided administrative and mail
    services, as well as Web sites, documents, and placement services to
    assist the newly elected Senators.
     security and preparedness: protecting the senate and planning for the
                                    unknown
        In our security and preparedness programs, we work collaboratively
    with organizations across Capitol Hill to secure the Senate. We also
    rely upon Senate Leadership, this Committee, and the Committee on Rules
    and Administration for guidance and support.
        While nearly six years have passed since 9/11 and the anthrax
    attacks, and although no major attack has occurred against us at home,
    the threat of attack remains. Not all hazards are man made, and our
    contingency plans can be implemented to respond to natural disasters as
    well. Over the past two years, Senate offices in Washington, D.C. and
    in the States have been impacted by local disruptions and natural
    disasters. The security and emergency programs that have been developed
    over the past six years have enabled the Senate and our supporting
    agencies to respond appropriately in each instance, ensuring the safety
    of staff and visitors and recovering operations as rapidly as possible.
    The ongoing improvement and appropriate expansion of our security and
    emergency plans and programs will continue to be a priority for the
    Sergeant at Arms.
        On September 6, 2000, the Bipartisan Leadership for the 106th
    Congress directed the Capitol Police Board to develop and manage a
    program which would enable the Congress to fulfill its constitutional
    obligations in the event of a disaster-related incident. The Capitol
    Police Board was further directed to coordinate with Officers of the
    Senate and House to develop a comprehensive Legislative Branch
    emergency preparedness program. As a member of the Capitol Police Board
    and Chairman for 2007, the Senate Sergeant at Arms will continue to
    build on the accomplishments of previous Boards.
        Our efforts to ensure that we can respond to emergencies and keep
    the Senate functioning under any circumstance have grown over the past
    years. To continue improvements in this area and better manage our
    security and preparedness programs, we have established seven strategic
    priorities to focus our efforts:
      --Emergency Notifications and Communications.--Provide effective
            communications systems, devices, and capabilities to support
            the Senate during any emergency.
      --Accountability.--Ensure accurate and timely accounting of Members,
            Senate staff, and visitors during an emergency.
      --State Office Security and Preparedness.--Develop and implement a
            comprehensive, all hazards state office security and
            preparedness program.
      --Emergency Plans, Operations and Facilities.--Continue emergency
            planning, emphasizing life-safety, continuity of operations,
            and programs to address the needs of individuals after a
            disaster.
      --Training and Education.--Continue a strong emergency preparedness
            training program.
      --Exercises.--Conduct a comprehensive exercise program to validate,
            rehearse and improve Senate readiness to act in the event of an
            emergency.
      --Office Support.--Provide responsive security services and customer
            support to Senate offices, committees, and support
            organizations.
    Emergency Notification and Communications
        Our emergency notification and communications initiatives ensure
    that we have effective communications systems, devices, and
    capabilities in place to support the Senate during an emergency. We
    have continued to improve our notification and communications processes
    over the past year. We expanded the coverage of text alerts to include
    any PDA on any cellular or data service provider. We are currently
    integrating all notification systems into a single Web-based interface,
    allowing the Capitol Police to initiate voice and text messages to
    several thousand individuals in a matter of seconds. We have also
    installed a video-based alert system that will allow the Capitol Police
    to display emergency messages on the Senate cable TV network. Over
    1,300 wireless annunciators are in place across the Senate, and the
    Capitol Police have completed the installation of a public address
    system that can broadcast into public areas throughout the Capitol,
    Senate Office Buildings, and outdoor assembly areas. Further, if the
    Senate is forced to relocate, we have the capability to video
    teleconference and broadcast between an emergency relocation site and
    other Legislative Branch and Executive Branch sites.
        Looking forward, we intend to expand our telephonic and text-based
    notification capabilities to support office and staff requirements
    during emergencies. Additionally, our video teleconferencing
    capabilities will soon provide the ability to create ``Anytime
    Anywhere'' video conferences.
    Accountability
        Accountability of Members and staff remains an area of emphasis in
    all our emergency plans and evacuation drills. One of our major
    initiatives this year was to improve procedures for offices to report
    accountability information to the Capitol Police and the Sergeant at
    Arms quickly and accurately. Significant progress was made during 2006
    to better achieve these goals.
        In 2006, a BlackBerry-based accountability application was
    deployed, allowing Office Emergency Coordinators to account for staff
    remotely using their BlackBerry. This builds on the automated check-in
    system that was developed and fielded to Senate offices and committees
    in 2005. Both accountability methods are now operational and used
    during quarterly drills. The backbone for this capability, termed the
    Accountability and Emergency Roster System, or ALERTS, allows each
    office to manage staff rosters as well as to indicate who in the office
    is to receive email and telephonic alerts from the Senate's emergency
    notification system. A comprehensive instruction manual has been
    produced for use by Capitol Police and Office Emergency Coordinators. A
    total of 176 Senate staff members were trained on how to use ALERTS and
    Remote Check-in during in-office or classroom sessions. Our staff has
    also trained personnel in the Capitol Police Senate Division on the use
    of this system.
        Personnel accountability is stressed in the Emergency Action Plan
    template that we have developed for use by all Senate offices. This
    template, offered to all offices, encourages the development of
    internal communications procedures during emergencies through a phone
    tree or emergency contact list. Offices are encouraged to establish and
    periodically practice these internal procedures for accounting for
    staff members, post emergency. To aid in this effort, we conduct
    Emergency Action Plan training classes with a special emphasis on staff
    accountability and stress the initiative during all Office Emergency
    Coordinator training. Once a quarter, our office conducts a remote
    accountability exercise with Senate Office Emergency Coordinators.
    During our most recent exercise, over 125 individuals logged in to
    provide office accountability, and we worked with twenty offices on
    training and configuration issues.
    State Office Security and Preparedness
        The Senate's State Office Preparedness Program consists of several
    elements. First is the Physical Security Enhancement Program. This
    program provides a security assessment of each state office, followed
    by physical security enhancements if the office desires to participate
    in the program. We have completed an initial physical security survey
    of all established state offices and the results of these on-site
    reviews were provided to each Member. In addition to the physical
    security enhancements, we have developed and are piloting a program
    that provides additional emergency preparedness and continuity of
    operations support to state offices.
        Since the program's inception in 2002, we have conducted 538 state
    office security surveys and will conduct another 76 surveys of new and
    relocating offices for the 110th Congress over the coming months. We
    have completed security enhancements in 183 state offices of which 75
    were completed in 2006. This past year we finalized an agreement with
    the Federal Protective Service and General Services Administration to
    streamline installation of security enhancements for Senate state
    offices located in federal buildings. We are currently working with 60
    state offices in some stage of planning or approval. To date, members
    of our Office of Security and Emergency Preparedness have visited
    approximately 24 state offices where security enhancements have been
    installed or implemented. Staff from each of these offices has
    expressed tremendous gratitude for the security enhancements and the
    personalized visit. In short, this is a successful program and we will
    continue our emphasis in this area.
        Our State Office Preparedness Program combines our existing
    physical security enhancement program with additional emergency
    preparedness and continuity of operations planning (COOP) support. This
    level of support includes equipment and training and will mirror those
    programs that are currently offered to Member's Washington, D.C.
    offices. We have identified specific requirements to tailor the program
    to the individual state offices based on a needs analysis and risk
    assessment, and are piloting this program with 10 Member state offices
    across the United States starting in the spring of this year. If
    successful, we plan to offer this program to all Member state offices
    in 2008.
    Emergency Plans, Operations and Facilities
        Our emergency plans ensure that we attend to the safety of Senate
    Members and staff, as well as to the continuity of the Senate. It is
    the responsibility of each Member office and committee to have the
    requisite plans in place to guide their actions during any emergency
    event. I can report that every Member office completed and filed an
    Emergency Action Plan with our Office of Security and Emergency
    Preparedness during the 109th Congress. These are being updated by
    Member Offices now, and new Members have initiated plans. Every office
    within the SAA and Secretary of the Senate has a completed Continuity
    of Operations (COOP) plan, almost every Member office has a COOP Plan,
    and the SAA is working with every committee to ensure their respective
    continuity of operations plans are developed. Our staff provides
    training, guides, templates, assistance, and in-office consulting
    sessions to any office that requests it. Those offices that have
    updated plans are encouraged to maintain and exercise them.
        We established working groups to identify and address all Senate
    emergency programs, plans, and requirements. Last year, we identified
    the need for post-event care and family assistance. Over the past year,
    we have continued to develop plans that provide critical services to
    affected families following a wide-spread event. In cooperation with
    the Senate's Employee Assistance Program, we have conducted training
    with a core group of employees to establish peer support teams. That
    training will expand this year.
        Recognizing the Sergeant at Arms' responsibility to coordinate the
    actions of internal organizations, inform and support Senate offices,
    and effectively manage the resources within our purview during an
    emergency, the SAA has established an Emergency Operations Center (EOC)
    capability that pulls key functional area representatives together into
    a single operational area during an emergency. The SAA exercised this
    capability twice during 2006, upgraded to a web-based EOC management
    and information tracking application, WebEOC, and conducts quarterly
    training for internal functional representatives.
    Training and Education
        Training helps Senate staff know what to expect in an emergency,
    how to use the equipment we provide, and what protective actions they
    may take. We help office staff create continuity and emergency plans.
    We conduct training on all of our equipment including emergency
    equipment, emergency communication devices, and our accountability
    system. Our training program is coordinated through the Joint Office of
    Education and Training.
        Training activities over the past year included 351 escape hood
    training sessions that were delivered to 5,132 staff members; nine
    chemical, biological, radiological, and explosives briefings for 125
    staff; 20 office emergency coordinator basic and advanced training
    sessions reaching 130 staff. CPR and Automated External Defibrillator
    (AED) training is also taught by the Office of the Attending Physician.
    This training for 24 personnel monthly is typically oversubscribed.
        Not everyone is able to attend training classes. To augment our
    training efforts, the SAA creates and distributes topic-specific
    brochures and guidance documents to further enhance Senate
    preparedness. These are distributed throughout the community and
    describe procedures, emergency equipment, and other useful instruction
    for emergencies. A number of the brochures were updated in 2006, and
    Protective Actions for Interns was added to this portfolio. This year
    the SAA developed and provided computer-based training options on our
    emergency equipment and emergency procedures to every office and any
    staff member with access to Webster. Our computer based training
    support to offices will continue to expand as new courses are developed
    and made available on-line.
    Exercises
        Exercises ensure the Senate's plans are practiced and validated on
    a regular basis. Our comprehensive exercise program is structured to do
    just that. The Senate Sergeant at Arms' 2006 Exercise Program was
    diverse and productive. During the period, we conducted a series of
    eleven major exercise events in partnership with other Senate and
    Capitol Hill stakeholders to include the Capitol Police, Architect of
    the Capitol, Office of the Attending Physician, and the U.S. House of
    Representatives. Emergency Operations Center capabilities were
    exercised on five occasions, to include first-ever set up of our
    alternate locations. We established procedures for Leadership and
    Members, and conducted relevant training and exercises. Recently, we
    conducted an exercise related to the Senate Chamber that included the
    USCP, all Secretary and Sergeant at Arms Chamber staff, and the Party
    Secretaries' staffs. In February of 2007 we conducted a review of the
    Disaster Family Assistance plans to further identify and develop policy
    issues and operational requirements and procedures for this area. The
    highlight for the year was a two-day concurrent capabilities exercise
    where the setup of four key contingency facilities was accomplished
    nearly simultaneously. In past years, these facilities were exercised
    independently, and this year's exercise tested our Leadership and
    Member locations, an alternate Chamber, and the Sergeant at Arms and
    Secretary's Emergency Operations Center in one event. An interagency
    Joint Legislative Branch communications test for off-campus locations
    and an emergency transportation command and control exercise further
    rounded-out the exercises that were conducted. Our 2007 exercise
    program is equally aggressive and continues to ensure the Senate can
    conduct operations under any circumstance.
    Office Support
        The Senate's emergency equipment ensemble for Senate offices
    continues to mature. Each office has received Emergency Supply Kits,
    uniquely tailored for the Senate community. Over 448 have been
    distributed and are being maintained by Senate offices. These kits are
    designed to be used during ``shelter-in-place'' events, but have the
    functionality to be used on a daily basis if needed. Additionally, 72
    kits tailored for the Sergeant at Arms transportation fleet were
    developed and deployed in 2006.
        Over 1,300 wireless emergency annunciators are deployed throughout
    Senate offices. These systems provide the Capitol Police with the
    ability to audibly notify offices and provide instructions during an
    emergency. Our Emergency Preparedness Office provides day-to-day
    troubleshooting support to offices. This has resulted in the
    installation of 90 additional wireless emergency annunciator units in
    various offices throughout the Senate. Our Office of Security and
    Emergency Preparedness responded to 197 annunciator trouble calls in
    2006. In addition to daily troubleshooting support, we installed
    wireless emergency annunciators in the Russell Senate Office Building
    attic to ensure that all staff are alerted of evacuations and emergency
    situations.
        In 2006, the Senate Sergeant at Arms completed lifecycle
    replacement of the Quick 2000 Escape Hoods with the new SCape CBRN30
    Escape Hoods. Our program also added the Baby SCape Escape Hood for
    children under the age of three. We replaced over 20,000 escape hoods
    in Senate offices and in the public caches throughout the Senate. To
    address special locations and our mobility impaired evacuation
    procedures, almost 800 Victim Rescue Units that provide respiratory
    protection in a smoke filled environment have been issued to mobility
    impaired individuals and their buddy teams.
        We will conduct an annual inventory and serviceability inspection
    of all emergency equipment items issued to Senate offices later this
    year.
        We provide other office outreach and support through widely
    distributed publications and monthly informational notices to Office
    Emergency Coordinators. We also make extensive use of the Senate's
    intranet resources to support offices.
    Mail Safety
        The anthrax and ricin attacks of past years necessitated new
    security measures, and our Office responded. We have worked
    collaboratively with this Committee, the Committee on Rules and
    Administration, our science advisors, the Capitol Police, United States
    Postal Service, the White House Office of Science and Technology
    Policy, and the Department of Homeland Security in developing safe and
    secure mail protocols.
        All mail and packages addressed to the Senate are tested and
    delivered by Senate Post Office employees whether they come through the
    U.S. Postal Service or from other delivery services. We have
    outstanding processing protocols in place here at the Senate. The
    organizations that know the most about securing mail cite the Senate
    mail facility as among the best. We have been asked to demonstrate our
    procedures and facilities for some of our allies and for other
    government agencies, including the Departments of Defense and Homeland
    Security. When they look for ways to improve their mail security, they
    visit our facility.
        We have been good stewards of taxpayer dollars in the process. We
    processed volumes of mail similar to that of the House of
    Representatives and we accomplished it for approximately 40 percent of
    their cost. Last year, the Senate processed, tested, and delivered over
    13,700,000 safe items to Senate offices, including over 9,600,000
    pieces of U.S. Postal Service mail; over 3,900,000 pieces of internal
    mail that are routed within the Senate or to or from other government
    agencies; almost 70,000 packages; and over 136,000 courier items.
        We continue to seek improvements in mail processing and have worked
    with this Committee in identifying avenues to reduce our costs. In
    April 2007, we will move our Alexandria letter mail processing
    activities into a newly constructed facility that will enhance the
    processing of Senate letters as well as perform the package testing
    that is currently being performed by a vendor. Bringing the processing
    of packages in-house will increase the security of the packages and
    will save the Senate over $200,000 annually. This state-of-the-art
    facility will provide a safer and more secure work environment for our
    employees and is designed to serve the Senate's mail processing needs
    for decades.
        We also worked with this Committee and the Committee on Rules and
    Administration to build one of the best facilities within the
    government to process time sensitive documents that are delivered to
    the Senate. This past August, we opened the Courier Acceptance Site to
    ensure all same day documents are x-rayed, opened, tested, and safe for
    delivery to Senate offices. The number of time sensitive documents
    addressed to Senate offices is significant. We processed over 136,000
    courier items during 2006.
        Since the anthrax attacks of 2001, our office has worked with the
    Department of Homeland Security, the United States Postal Service
    (USPS), and our science advisors in seeking avenues to improve the
    safety of the mail routed to Senate state offices and to Members' home
    addresses. USPS has installed detection units at mail processing plants
    throughout the United States. Virtually every letter is run through
    this equipment which is designed to detect certain contaminants,
    thereby providing a safety screen that did not exist in the past.
        This year our Senate Post Office and our Office of Security and
    Emergency Preparedness worked collaboratively with our science advisors
    to develop and introduce the first device designed to provide Senate
    staff who work in state offices a level of protection when handling
    mail. To date, four Member state offices are participating in this
    program, and the feedback received from Senate staff has been
    favorable. Our plan is to expand this program to all state offices
    within the next six months.
    Office of Police Operations and Liaison
                Security and Vulnerability Assessments
        The Senate Sergeant at Arms works closely and on a continuous basis
    with the Capitol Police, the Capitol Police Board, and security and law
    enforcement agencies that support us here on Capitol Hill.
    Collectively, we constantly scrutinize our security posture, searching
    for any vulnerabilities, and determining the most efficient ways to
    remediate any we find. During 2006, the Capitol Police Board requested
    and subsequently received a security assessment of the Capitol Complex
    performed by the United States Secret Service. We are reviewing this
    assessment and will take its recommendation into consideration as we
    fund and execute security enhancements for the Senate.
                Identification Badge Improvements
        In March of 2006, the Capitol Police Board established a task force
    to examine identification badge policies and procedures across the
    Congressional campus. The goal was to increase security, reduce fraud
    and system abuse, and achieve uniformity of identification processes
    and practices by adopting a standard identification system for use
    throughout the campus. As a result of the work performed by the task
    force, several security enhancements were added to the ID badges issued
    for the 110th Congress, including: designations on limitations on hours
    of access; larger photographs; a simpler text field to ease confusion
    experienced by police officers who must examine the cards; and
    standardization of badges issued to personnel of external agencies. The
    Task Force's work also set the foundation for future communication
    across the Congressional campus when implementing new identification
    policies and procedures.
                Foreign CODEL Support Program
        The Foreign CODEL support program was created to ensure that the
    unique needs and security requirements of Senators are met while they
    perform official travel outside the contiguous United States. Through a
    coordinated liaison effort between the SAA, USCP, and the Department of
    State, threat assessments and security reviews are conducted for
    official foreign travel performed by Senators. USCP officers are
    assigned as security liaison agents for CODEL trips that warrant
    security.
      information technology--a strategy for security and customer service
        We continue to place special emphasis on leveraging technology to
    enhance security, emergency preparedness, service, and support for the
    United States Senate. Last year we issued the Senate's updated
    Information Technology Strategic Plan, ``An IT Vision for Security,
    Customer Service and Teamwork at the United States Senate 2006-2008'',
    and this year we are half-way through executing that plan. We have
    already accomplished some impressive results.
      --Replication of all mission-critical systems at the Alternate
            Computing Facility (ACF) and successful execution of two
            complete failover tests for continuity of operations and
            continuity of government (COOP/COG).
      --Raising the CIO's overall customer satisfaction rating to 87
            percent.
      --Completion and full operational capability of the Senate's first
            redundant security operations centers (SOC).
      --Successful completion of requirements phase and procurement
            activity for the Senate Telecommunications Modernization
            Program (TMP).
      --Completion of the Active Directory and Messaging Architecture
            (ADMA) project--the largest and most successful infrastructure
            project ever undertaken in the Senate to provide a state-of-
            the-art messaging infrastructure custom tailored to meet the
            security and privacy needs of individual offices.
      --Completion of an award-winning wireless infrastructure to support
            cellular telephone, BlackBerry emergency communication devices,
            and wireless local area networks (LANs) across the Senate
            campus.
      --Development of a new emergency communications system based on
            device-to-device communications and not reliant on any
            commercial cellular carrier. This system provides robust
            emergency communications while allowing Member offices to
            purchase cellular service from the carrier of their choice.
        Our CIO is currently preparing the annual update of the Senate IT
    Strategic Plan which lays out our technology direction for the next two
    years. This new version updates the five strategic goals to enhance our
    customers' service experience and the Senate's security posture
    through:
      --Supporting Senate continuity of operations plans (COOP) and
            continuity of government (COG) by deploying an information
            infrastructure that is flexible and agile enough to respond to
            adverse events.
      --Continuing to reduce paper-based manual processes and moving
            business on-line.
      --Continuously improving our customer care processes using feedback
            from our customers through performance metrics, customer
            satisfaction surveys, and service level achievement
            measurements.
      --Access to mission-critical information anywhere, anytime, under any
            circumstances through continued development of alternate
            computing facilities, remote access technologies, and
            eliminating bottlenecks and potential failure points in the
            Senate's information infrastructure.
      --Replacing the Senate's telephone switch with a new state-of-the-art
            switch and ancillary services based on Voice over Internet
            Protocol (VoIP) and convergence technologies.
        Five strategic information technology goals, and their supporting
    objectives, drive our information technology programmatic and budgetary
    decisions. There are currently approximately 50 major projects under
    active project management directly tied to the following five strategic
    goals:
      --Secure.--A secure Senate information infrastructure
      --Customer Service Focused.--A ``Customer Service Culture'' top-to-
            bottom
      --Effective.--Information technology solutions driven by business
            requirements
      --Accessible, Flexible & Reliable.--Access to mission-critical
            information anywhere, anytime, under any circumstances
      --Modern.--A state-of-the-art information infrastructure built on
            modern, proven technologies
        Another key aspect of the plan--the CIO organization's Core Values
    and Guiding Principles--defines the organization's culture and ensures
    it is aligned strictly with the Senate's business priorities. These
    values and principles emphasize people, teamwork, leadership, and a
    relentless pursuit of organizational excellence. The goal is to have
    the right sized workforce with the correct talent mix to deliver
    information technology services and solutions quickly and effectively
    to satisfy the Senate's requirements.
    Technology for Security, Accessible, Flexible & Reliable Systems, and a
            Modern Senate Information Security Infrastructure
        We are improving the security of the technology infrastructure that
    protects data, respects privacy, enables continuous Senate operations,
    and supports our emergency and continuity plans. Our efforts over the
    past year have enabled us to support alternate sites and the
    replication of information, as well as emergency and contingency
    communications. We are delivering increased support for remote access
    and are completing the in-building wireless infrastructure. A
    significant commitment to information technology security will
    increasingly protect the Senate from external threats, and the multi-
    year telecommunications modernization project will improve the
    reliability of the infrastructure. This work all focuses on improving
    the ability of the Senate to accomplish its mission.
                Alternate Sites and Information Replication
        We continue to develop our ability to relocate information systems
    capability at the alternate computing facility (ACF). All critical
    Senate enterprise information systems are now replicated there, using
    sophisticated storage area network technology. In October, the CIO
    conducted the second comprehensive test of the facility: Senate primary
    computing facilities (including network access) were completely shut
    down and reconstituted at the ACF. Full capability and functionality
    were provided from the ACF for a period of four hours and then systems
    were ``failed-back'' to the primary computing facility on Capitol Hill.
    Like the first comprehensive test, conducted in December 2005, this
    exercise, which encompassed more applications, was a complete success.
    Funds requested in fiscal year 2008 will help us continue to upgrade
    the storage area network to meet expanding data requirements and ensure
    we can continue to replicate Senate enterprise systems successfully at
    the ACF.
        This past year the CIO organization continued helping Member and
    committee offices replicate their data to state offices and to the ACF
    through the remote data replication (RDR) program. As of February 2007,
    there are 41 Member offices and 17 committees taking advantage of this
    program, with 45 percent installed at the ACF and 55 percent installed
    in Members' state offices. RDR will provide the Senate an unprecedented
    ability to access institutional data in the event of an emergency.
    Another system which is integral to emergency planning, particularly in
    the event of a mass telecommuting scenario such as a pandemic, is the
    Senate's video teleconferencing system. This highly-successful project
    now has over 525 units installed supporting offices across the nation
    with usage rates in excess of 30,000 minutes per day when the Senate is
    in session.
        The CIO completed the active directory messaging architecture
    (ADMA) project this past year, offering Member offices three
    architectural options for their messaging infrastructure. Both the
    enterprise and hybrid architectures provide complete replication of the
    Member's electronic mail at the ACF. Eighty-five percent of the offices
    are now taking advantage of the COOP capability inherent in the
    enterprise and hybrid options.
        We recently introduced the Virtual File Server (VFS) system which
    allows offices to store data securely on our large, centrally-hosted,
    enterprise-class storage area network. The VFS system, as designed,
    provides redundancy for disaster recovery and COOP and minimizes the
    environmental and staff burden of in-office data storage. Offices that
    opt for VFS also enjoy enterprise-level data backup and off-site
    storage of backup tapes while retaining control of data recovery. The
    active components are located at the ACF. In the event of a disaster
    that renders the PCF system unavailable, the ACF system will be brought
    on line and will provide users consistent access to their data. The VFS
    system has been available since December, 2006, and already fourteen
    Senate offices have taken advantage of this exciting new technology.
                Emergency and Contingency Communications
        The CIO is providing a comprehensive array of communications
    systems and options with the objective of being able to communicate
    under any circumstance. A new capability, currently being deployed
    Senate-wide, is the Senate Message Alert Client (SMAC). SMAC eliminates
    our dependence on any single commercial carrier for BlackBerry
    emergency communications and provides the flexibility of device-to-
    device communications. Through SMAC, emergency notification lists can
    be created, inter- or intra-office, to push emergency messages directly
    to devices on the list in real time. SMAC and the global email alert
    system are two of the primary methods for the USCP and the SAA to issue
    mass emergency communications messages.
        This year we continued upgrading and testing our two Senate
    emergency response communications vehicles according to a monthly
    exercise plan. These assets are available for deployment with LAN, WAN,
    telephone, and satellite connectivity and provide the ability to
    relocate significant information infrastructure virtually anywhere. We
    also continue to train and expand our deployment teams, and work to
    revise and refine our operations procedures for deployment of these
    vehicles in support of the Senate.
        This past year we completed the in-building wireless infrastructure
    in all of the Senate office buildings, including the Capitol, and are
    currently outfitting the Capitol Visitor Center (CVC) in preparation
    for its opening in 2008. This innovative system, which won a Government
    Computing News Best Practices Award, improved signal strengths for the
    major cellular telephone carriers as well as BlackBerry service. This
    infrastructure provides coverage in areas where it was previously poor
    or non-existent and allows Senate staff to connect back to their
    offices via wireless remote computing. The wireless infrastructure also
    supports every carrier, allowing Members to use the carrier of their
    choice with the device of their choice across the Senate campus.
        This year Senate COOP and reconstitution sites have been equipped
    with information technology infrastructure including
    telecommunications, data networks, and video teleconferencing.
    Additionally, mobile and remote computing technologies allow Senate
    staff to access and modify their information and communicate from
    virtually anywhere, anytime. We will continue to enhance and expand
    these capabilities in order to support a potentially dispersed
    workforce with the ability to telecommute. These capabilities are
    crucial to our ability to support the Senate in an emergency situation
    where the workforce must be dispersed and also support the Senate's
    ability to provide employees with flexible work options on a daily
    basis.
        We are dedicated to providing an integrated and highly-reliable
    emergency communications infrastructure through a variety of projects
    including expanding our emergency communications infrastructure,
    integrating and streamlining emergency communications capability,
    liaison with the USCP command center, developing specifications for
    outfitting emergency operations centers (EOC) and leadership
    coordination centers, and conducting monthly comprehensive testing of
    emergency alert notification systems. This past year we successfully
    conducted comprehensive Senate-wide tests of all of our emergency
    communications systems, upgraded the SAA EOC with a web-based
    management system, and began work on a major upgrade of the Senate's
    mass communications system.
                Securing our Information Infrastructure
        As a result of information security activities we described in last
    year's testimony, we have gained a much better understanding of the
    dynamic nature of global cyber threats. This knowledge, combined with
    the flexible technologies used in the security operations center (SOC),
    allows us to understand the overall IT operational risk present in the
    Senate environment. Adjusting our own SAA controls, and making
    recommendations to offices and committees, allows us to help ensure
    continuity of government by increasing availability of the IT
    infrastructure, even under duress.
        In the IT security threat environment, the list of potential
    threats to our information infrastructure is growing in number and
    sophistication. Over the next year, we will meet the challenge of
    managing a volatile security environment by: (1) expanding the role of
    the recently established SOCs; (2) optimizing our current configuration
    of security controls; (3) improving our collaboration with other
    federal agencies in the areas of incident response and situational
    awareness; (4) evaluating, testing, and deploying new security control
    mechanisms; and (5) enhancing communication with IT staff in Member and
    committee offices to give them timely and usable information in order
    to improve the security posture of their local IT systems.
        During a recent four-month period, our most visible IT system, the
    Senate`s website, www.senate.gov, was the target of over 17 million
    discrete unsuccessful security events from almost 200,000 different
    Internet addresses. A recent external security review of the site
    helped us make some adjustments that will secure the site even more,
    but the site itself is a prime target for attacks. We will soon engage
    an outside party to perform another assessment of www.senate.gov, as we
    have made a number of infrastructure improvements over the last year.
        Similar to security in the physical world, security in the
    information technology world requires constant vigilance and the
    ability to deter attacks. The threats to our information infrastructure
    are increasing in frequency and sophistication, and they come from
    spyware, adware, malware, Trojans, keyloggers, spybots, adbots, and
    trackware, all of which continuously search for vulnerabilities in our
    systems. Countering the evolving threat environment means increasing
    our awareness of the situation, improving our processes, and
    continually researching, testing, and deploying new security
    technologies. Because we have very little advance notice of new types
    of attacks, we must and do have flexible security control structures
    and processes that are continually revised and adjusted. Our efforts to
    cultivate external relationships to improve our overall awareness of
    internet-based threats have been effective. As the global threat
    environment has shifted, we have modified our techniques and our
    technologies to improve our awareness and response to better protect
    the Senate's IT infrastructure.
        This last year, we experienced growth in the area of office and
    committee computer security assistance. We are increasingly called upon
    to help offices and committee system administrators properly configure
    desktop and server security controls. We also assist them in evaluating
    our weekly reports on anti-virus controls. Additionally, we are now
    monitoring Internet email ``blacklists'' for potential delivery issues.
    As the Senate continues to employ cutting edge technologies, the IT
    security group's activities will adjust in order to ensure optimal
    product performance and service delivery. We continue to use cutting
    edge technology, not only within our IT security services, but also in
    our IT security infrastructure. For example, we recently upgraded our
    antivirus infrastructure which will allow us greater flexibility,
    better utilization of our computing resources, and will enhance our
    availability and disaster recovery capabilities. This infrastructure is
    very scalable, and we can continue to expand capabilities while
    conserving on costs.
        Protecting the Senate's information is one of our most important
    responsibilities. This year we have taken tremendous strides in this
    area with the development and operation of the Senate`s redundant SOCs,
    one located at Capitol Hill and the other at the ACF. The mission of
    the SOCs is to identify and understand threats, assess vulnerabilities,
    identify failure points and bottlenecks, determine potential impacts,
    and remedy problems before they adversely affect Senate operations. In
    the coming months, an outside party will perform an operations review
    of our current SOC implementation and we will use the results of this
    assessment to procure, as needed, additional cyber security products
    and services which will provide enhanced value to our customers. We
    augment this capability with close liaisons to other federal agencies
    to ensure we have the most up-to-date information and techniques for
    combating cyber threats. Running within the SOCs, a state-of-the-art
    security information management system aggregates and reports on data
    from a variety of sources worldwide to help us track potential
    attackers before they can harm us. The combination of the security
    operations center, our defense-in-depth capability at all levels of our
    network infrastructure, and our enterprise anti-virus/anti-spyware
    programs has proven highly effective.
        The threat environment, as measured by detected security incidents,
    remains very high. For example, every day we detect approximately
    1,121,000 potential security threats targeting the Senate, over 40
    percent of which are characterized as medium to high risk. Other anti-
    virus/worms controls detected and countered 2,181 viral events in 310
    computers located in 91 Senate offices in just the three-month period
    between November 1, 2006, and February 1, 2007. To date, 136 Senate
    offices use our managed anti-virus system. This system protects over
    11,000 Senate computers. This is one of the main reasons that recent
    worm outbreaks affected only a relatively small number of Senate
    computers while just three years ago, outbreaks infected several
    thousand machines and caused notable disruption in IT operations. Our
    antivirus products are comprehensive and state-of-the-art.
        IT security is, and will continue to be, a growth area as we work
    to stay ahead of threats and put safeguards in place. We plan to
    increase both our analytical and defensive capabilities. Accordingly,
    this year we are requesting three new full-time employees in our IT
    Security Branch.
                The Senate Telecommunications Modernization Program
        We are currently in the process of modernizing the Senate's entire
    telecommunications infrastructure to provide improved reliability and
    redundancy to support daily operations and continuity of operations and
    government, as well as to take advantage of technological advances to
    provide a more flexible and robust communications infrastructure. We
    are now in the final engineering and design stage of this multi-year
    project to modernize Senate telecommunications systems in the Capitol,
    Hart, Dirksen, Russell, and Postal Square buildings.
        The telecommunications modernization program is being engineered to
    provide redundancy for increased reliability and availability resulting
    in a state-of-the-art system of converged voice, data, and video
    communications technologies built upon Internet telephony protocols or
    voice over IP (VoIP). This approach will allow economies of scale in
    construction and management and, from the user side, the ability to
    synchronize audio and video conferences, share documents, and
    collaborate at their workstations. The telecommunications modernization
    program will replace our twenty-year old telephone technology,
    eliminate single failure points, provide new capability and value to
    the Senate, and benefit from the security of running behind our
    infrastructure's firewalls.
    Modern Technology to Enhance Customer Service
                Customer Service, Satisfaction, and Communications
        Our Strategic Plan stresses customer service as a top priority, and
    we actively solicit feedback from all levels and for all types of
    services. The CIO's Fourth Annual Customer Satisfaction Survey revealed
    another improvement with an overall customer satisfaction rating of 87
    percent, up two percent from last year. This comprehensive survey
    measures satisfaction with systems, solutions, service and the quality
    of personnel in our organization. Based on the survey results, our
    customer satisfaction action plan continues to stress developing strong
    communications and customer relationships, introducing modern
    technology faster, and providing offices with options and choices that
    tie the Senate's technology directly to the offices' business
    requirements.
        In addition to the comprehensive Annual CIO Customer Satisfaction
    Survey, we solicit customer feedback for every help desk ticket opened.
    We have very stringent service level agreements (SLAs) in place that
    directly drive the level of compensation our contractors receive. Since
    January 2006, we have exceeded the 95 percent SLA performance metric
    every month in system installation service levels, help desk resolution
    times, and customer satisfaction. In order to ensure we are
    communicating as much as possible and as effectively as possible with
    our customers, the CIO organization continues its comprehensive
    outreach and communication program through the CIO's Blog, information
    technology newsletters, quarterly project status reviews, participation
    in information technology working groups, weekly technology and
    business process review meetings with customers, joint monthly project
    and policy meetings with the Committee on Rules and Administration, the
    Senate Systems Administrators Association, and the Administrative
    Managers' Steering Group.
                Keeping Senators and their Staffs Informed
        The Senate Information Services program continues to deliver
    premium, vital online information services to Senators and Senate
    staff. These services range from the Senate's own ``real-time'' news
    tool, Senate NewsWatch, to enterprise-wide subscriptions to heavily-
    used external research services that provide online access to:
    extensive current and archived news and general information including
    ten historical newspapers, federal and state statutes and case law,
    regulatory and judicial developments, congressional news and current
    policy issues analysis, information technology policy developments, and
    daily updated directories of government, business, and professional
    associations. In addition, Senate users accessed nearly 2.7 million
    real-time news stories and almost 1.5 million pages of Congressional
    news and current policy analyses during 2006. The most recent addition
    to the program differs from other online news services because of its
    unique digitally imaged, full-format graphical presentation of more
    than 300 U.S. and international newspapers available each morning on
    the day of publication. These newspapers appear on the screen as they
    would on the reader's desk, complete with photos and other graphics.
    Senate users viewed nearly 24,000 newspapers using this service in
    2006.
                A New Information Technology Support Contract
        The final option year of our current IT support contract ends in
    September 2007. Due to the large size, importance with respect to
    customer service and complexity, we began to develop contract
    requirements in 2005 and issued a request for proposals in 2006. We are
    currently in the process of reviewing proposals with the expectation of
    signing a new contract this summer. The new contract will incorporate
    lessons learned during the current contract and stress a high level of
    customer service and customer satisfaction through stringent SLAs that
    tie compensation to performance.
                A Robust, Reliable, Modern Messaging Architecture
        This past year we completed deployment of a comprehensive active
    directory and messaging architecture (ADMA) providing a spectrum of
    options for data management. A great IT success story, this project
    began in 2003 with the three primary goals: providing a computing
    platform that allows offices to replace servers running the now
    unsupported Windows NT 4 operating system, improving the messaging
    system, and providing offices with choices to meet their varying
    business needs. The design options were presented to Senate offices
    along with the expected impact on each office of migrating all
    computers, user accounts, and email. We committed to and met specific
    time frames for completing each office migration. Today, all Senate
    offices are enjoying the benefits of ADMA which includes a modern,
    robust, reliable, and scalable infrastructure, built-in options for
    continuity of operations, design choices, and a platform for leveraging
    modern technologies including collaboration, mobility, and
    communications.
                Web-Based and Customer-Focused Business Applications
        This year, we completed the first phase of a new Senate services
    portal. Based on the requirements of Senate offices and the Committee
    on Rules and Administration, the portal, called TranSAAct, is
    eliminating paper-based, manual processes and moving them to the web.
    Using TranSAAct, Member offices manage and track invoices for SAA
    services through a modern web interface and also have single sign-on
    access to a host of web-based applications including the ALERTS
    emergency notification database, package tracking, the metro fare
    subsidy system, and garage parking database. Built on an extensible
    modern database framework, TranSAAct allows indefinite expansion as new
    applications are added. We are now actively pursuing Phase II which
    will include many more applications, all available through the
    TranSAAct single sign-on interface.
        This year, we continued support to the Secretary of the Senate
    through improvements and enhancements of the Financial Management
    Information System and Legislative Information System. Reliance on
    special forms and dedicated hardware was eliminated as a new document
    printing application achieved full production usage. We also provided
    essential support on an electronic invoicing initiative with a major
    vendor. Finally, major architectural improvements were realized with
    the release of a new database and the addition of a new, modern
    operating environment on the Senate's mainframe computer.
        To provide more functionality and choices for Senate offices to
    manage correspondence, this past year we awarded new Constituent
    Correspondence Management Systems (CCMS) contracts. Under these
    contracts, we are able to offer offices new capabilities and more
    functionality such as document management, workflow, and improved email
    management. The new contracts also contain strict service level
    standards to provide for improved services and support from the
    vendors.
                Showcasing and Promoting Modern Information Technology in
                        the Senate
        This past year we continued to highlight new technologies in the
    Information Technology Demonstration Center through a series of well-
    attended CIO Demo Days. After products are tested and validated in the
    Technology Assessment Laboratory, they are then available for offices
    to try in the demo center. The Demo Days feature live demonstrations of
    new and emerging technologies. This year, we introduced: SMAC, virtual
    file services, and a variety of new communications devices.
        Also, this past year, we hosted two more highly-successful Senate
    Emerging Technology Conferences and Exhibitions to expose Senate staff
    to new technologies and concepts. These conferences are designed around
    technology themes of immediate interest Senate-wide. The two
    conferences held this past year featured new web technologies and the
    future of desktop computing. Speakers included industry leaders, Senate
    office staff, and CIO staff. The next Senate Emerging Technology
    Conference and Exposition, scheduled for April, will feature mobile
    computing technologies.
        In order to perform technology assessments, feasibility analysis,
    and proof of concept studies, to ensure we are considering technologies
    that will directly support the Senate's mission, we have expanded the
    technology assessment laboratory. Technologies and solutions are vetted
    and tested here prior to being announced for pilot, prototype, or mass
    deployment to the Senate. To ensure that relevant technologies and
    solutions are under consideration, the CIO-led technology assessment
    group, consisting of members of the CIO organization and our customers,
    performs high-level requirements analysis and prioritizes new
    technologies and solutions for consideration for deployment in the
    Senate. Some of the technologies explored in the lab during 2006
    include: advanced video teleconferencing to support distributed
    operations in the event of a pandemic; virtual file systems, as a
    remote data application option; new emergency communication products
    such as new BlackBerry devices; new multi-function machines to
    consolidate printing/scanning/faxing; and the latest office automation
    software. We publish the results of our studies on the emerging
    technology page of the CIO's intranet site on Webster.
       operations and support: consistently delivering excellent service
        The commitment to exceptional customer service is a hallmark of the
    Sergeant at Arms organization and the cornerstone of our support
    functions. The groups that make up our support team continue to provide
    exceptional customer service to the Senate community.
    Capitol Facilities
        Our staff works around the clock to ensure that the furniture and
    furnishings are of the highest quality, cabinetry and framing are
    outstanding, and the environment within the Capitol is clean and
    professional.
        Service to the Capitol community was greatly enhanced with the
    implementation of the first phase of the integrated work management
    system that was acquired in April, 2006. This system includes an on-
    line furniture catalog, ordering functions, and work order tracking
    capabilities. When fully implemented, the work management system will
    prove invaluable to our efforts to improve customer service and
    response times as we serve our customers in the Capitol.
    Printing Graphics and Direct Mail
        We provide photocopying and print design and production services to
    the Senate. The Printing Graphics and Direct Mail (PGDM) department
    continues to provide high level service and customer support to the
    Senate community. In fiscal year 2006, we responded to an increasing
    demand for color publications by using both digital color reproduction
    and traditional full color offset printing. PGDM produced more than 8.1
    million full-color pages utilizing offset presses. Our copy centers
    made over 46 million copies last year. The convenient web-based
    printing ordering service expanded, increasing web-based printing
    requests to more than 3.3 million documents. PGDM staff scanned more
    than 2.4 million Senate office documents for archiving and expanded the
    newest service, CMS Imaging, to scan nearly 350,000 documents, a 207
    percent increase over fiscal year 2005. We saved the Senate
    approximately $800,000, enabled quick turnaround times, and provided
    convenient customer service by producing over 9,000 large format charts
    in-house. In the area of constituent mail, Senate offices saved $1.3
    million in postage expenses as a result of PGDM sorting over 7.2
    million pieces of mail during the first three quarters of fiscal year
    2006. Working with other Senate entities, we also processed 45,000 flag
    requests.
        After years of planning, the new Senate Support Facility in
    Landover, Maryland is fully functional. We manage a storage area for
    other Senate offices including: furniture for Capitol Facilities;
    legislative documents for the Secretary of the Senate; general and
    emergency equipment for SAA IT Support Services; and a book storage
    area that holds publications for distribution to the entire Senate
    community. Substantial increases in efficiency and functionality have
    been realized in this multi-purpose facility, including a cooperative
    arrangement with the United States Capitol Police Off-Site to ensure
    the proper screening of all stored material. This facility has an
    enhanced inventory system for accurate inventory control and
    accountability. A state-of-the-art security system provides controlled
    access to sensitive documents and objects. Other features include
    environmental and climate controls.
    Parking Office
        We completed the Senate Transportation Plan for COOP and emergency
    operations and developed a plan to increase the volume of E85/Flex-fuel
    vehicles in the SAA fleet. As part of an ongoing project, we replaced
    gate kiosks on Lots 16 and 19 in cooperation with the AOC. We executed
    the leases for two new 15-passenger shuttle buses that are ADA
    compliant and completed the COOP Driver Emergency Procedures manual and
    all training sessions.
    Photo Studio
        The Photo Studio completed the migration of the Photo Browser to
    the latest version of the Asset Manager software. We implemented
    procedures to store Senators' photo images on DVDs for archiving and
    creating index booklets. Additionally, we introduced composite photo
    prints and expanded image retouching and restoration services.
    Recording Studio
        We televise the activity on the Senate Floor, as well as Senate
    committee hearings, and we provide a production studio and equipment
    for Senators' use. Last year, we televised all 978 hours of Senate
    Floor proceedings, 907 committee hearings, and broadcast 1,559 radio
    and television productions.
                Committee Hearing Room Upgrade Project
        Demand for additional committee broadcasts has been ever
    increasing. In 2003, we began working with this Committee and the
    Committee on Rules and Administration to upgrade and install multimedia
    equipment in Senate committee hearing rooms. The project includes
    digital signal processing, audio systems, and broadcast-quality robotic
    camera systems.
        To date, we have completed thirteen hearing rooms and have four
    more in the design phase. Room enhancements include improved speech
    intelligibility and software-based systems that we can configure based
    on individual committee needs. The system is networked, allowing
    committee staff to easily and automatically route audio from one
    hearing room to another when there are overflow crowds. Additionally,
    the system's backup will take over quickly if the primary electronics
    fail.
        As part of the upgrades included in our move to the Capitol Visitor
    Center (CVC), we are installing technologies to enhance our ability to
    provide broadcast coverage of more hearings simultaneously without
    adding staff. For example, the Committee Hearing Room Upgrade Project
    will allow us to cover a hearing with one staff member. Before the
    upgrade, three staff members were required to adequately cover a
    hearing. These technology enhancements, coupled with the expansion of
    the number of control rooms for committee broadcasts to twelve, will
    enable us to increase our simultaneous broadcast coverage of committee
    hearings from five to as many as twelve.
                Migration to the Capitol Visitor Center
        The most significant work we anticipate for the Senate Recording
    Studio, over the next year and a half, is its move from the basement of
    the Capitol to the Capitol Visitor Center. This move will enable the
    Recording Studio to complete its upgrade to a full High Definition
    facility, and to implement a number of improvements that have been
    planned to coincide with the opening of the Center. The Studio
    anticipates moving all aspects of its operation, including the
    engineering shops, the Senate Television operation, Studio production
    and post-production facilities, committee broadcast services, and all
    administrative and management offices to the CVC by September 1, 2008.
                                   conclusion
        We take our responsibilities to the American people and to their
    elected representatives seriously. The Office of the Sergeant at Arms
    is like dozens of small businesses, each with its own primary mission,
    each with its own measures of success, and each with its own culture.
    It has a fleet of vehicles that serves Senate Leadership, delivers
    goods, and provides emergency transportation. Our Photography Studio
    records historic events, takes official Senate portraits, provides a
    whole range of photography services, and delivers thousands of pictures
    each year. The SAA's printing shop provides layout and design, graphics
    development, and production of everything from newsletters to floor
    charts. The Office of the Sergeant at Arms also operates a page
    dormitory, a hair salon, and parking lots. It provides many other
    services to support the Senate community, including framing, flag
    packaging and mailing, and intranet services. Each of these businesses
    requires personnel with different skills and different abilities. One
    thing that they all have in common, though, is their commitment to
    making the Senate run smoothly.
        Over the past year, the staff of the SAA has kept the Senate safe,
    secure, and operating efficiently. This Committee and the Committee on
    Rules and Administration have provided active, ongoing support to help
    us achieve our goals. We thank you for your support and for the
    opportunity to present this testimony and respond to any questions you
    may have.
                  appendix a.--fiscal year 2008 budget request
        attachment i--financial plan for fiscal year 2008 office of the
                     sergeant at arms--united states senate

                                                    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
                                              [Dollar amounts in thousands]
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                              Fiscal year 2008 vs.
                                                                               Fiscal year      fiscal year 2007
                                                                  Fiscal year      2008    -------------------------
                                                                  2007 budget    request                   Percent
                                                                                               Amount     Incr/Decr
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    General Operations & Maintenance:
        Salaries................................................      $60,051      $64,443       $4,392          7.3
        Expenses................................................      $67,219      $81,934      $14,715         21.9
                                                                 ---------------------------------------------------
          Total General Operations & Maintenance................     $127,270     $146,377      $19,107         15.0
                                                                 ===================================================
    Mandated Allowances & Allotments............................      $55,630      $58,072       $2,442          4.4
    Capital Investment..........................................      $11,711      $17,165       $5,454         46.6
    Nondiscretionary Items......................................       $4,640       $5,279         $639         13.8
                                                                 ---------------------------------------------------
          TOTAL.................................................     $199,251     $226,893      $27,642         13.9
                                                                 ===================================================
    Staffing                                                              927          946           19          2.0
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

        To ensure that we provide the highest levels and quality of
    security, support services and equipment, we submit a fiscal year 2008
    budget request of $226,893,000, an increase of $27,642,000 or 13.9
    percent compared to fiscal year 2007. The salary budget request is
    $64,443,000, an increase of $4,392,000 or 7.3 percent, and the expense
    budget request is $162,450,000, an increase of $23,250,000 or 16.7
    percent. The staffing request is 946, an increase of 19.
        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
    $64,443,000, an increase of $4,392,000 or 7.3 percent compared to
    fiscal year 2007. The salary budget increase is due to the addition of
    19 FTEs, a COLA, and merit funding. The additional staff will support
    increased demand for services, as well as advancing technologies.
        The general operations and maintenance expenses budget request for
    existing and new services is $81,934,000, an increase of $14,715,000 or
    21.9 percent compared to fiscal year 2007. Major factors contributing
    to the expense budget increase are additional services and locations
    under the IT support contract, $4,054,000; AssetCenter upgrade,
    $1,086,000; maintenance, equipment and supplies for the Alternate
    Computing Facility, $1,057,000; increased bandwidth for Senate internet
    access, $932,000; and maintenance costs related to Enterprise Storage,
    $710,000.
        The mandated allowances and allotments budget request is
    $58,072,000, an increase of $2,442,000 or 4.4 percent compared to
    fiscal year 2007. This variance is primarily due to increases in
    maintenance and procurement of Member and Committee mail systems,
    $1,500,000; and office equipment for Washington D.C. and state offices,
    $683,000.
        The capital investment budget request is $17,165,000, an increase
    of $5,454,000 or 46.6 percent compared to fiscal year 2007. The fiscal
    year 2008 budget request includes funds for hearing room audio/video
    upgrades, $5,000,000; data network engineering and upgrade costs,
    $3,800,000; upgrade of SAN, $2,700,000; modular furniture replacement
    project, $2,000,000; and other smaller projects.
        The nondiscretionary items budget request is $5,279,000, an
    increase of $639,000 or 13.8 percent compared to fiscal year 2007. The
    request funds three projects that support the Secretary of the Senate:
    contract maintenance for the Financial Management Information System,
    $3,958,000; maintenance and necessary enhancements to the Legislative
    Information System, $910,000; and maintenance and enhancements to the
    Senate Payroll System, $411,000.
          attachment ii--fiscal year 2008 budget request by department
        The following is a summary of the SAA fiscal year 2008 budget
    request on an organizational basis.

                                              [Dollar amounts in thousands]
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                              Fiscal year 2008 vs.
                                                                              Fiscal year       fiscal year 2007
                                                                 Fiscal year      2008    --------------------------
                                                                 2007 budget    request                    Percent
                                                                                              Amount      Incr/Decr
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Capitol Division...........................................      $26,350      $36,780      $10,430          39.6
    Operations.................................................      $39,213      $44,372       $5,159          13.2
    Technology Development.....................................      $38,679      $52,075      $13,396          34.6
    IT Support Services........................................      $79,542      $77,570      ($1,972)         -2.5
    Staff Offices..............................................      $15,467      $16,096         $629           4.1
                                                                ----------------------------------------------------
          TOTAL................................................     $199,251     $226,893      $27,642          13.9
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Each department's budget is presented and discussed in detail on
    the next pages.

                                                    CAPITOL DIVISION
                                              [Dollar amounts in thousands]
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                              Fiscal year 2008 vs.
                                                                              Fiscal year       fiscal year 2007
                                                                 Fiscal year      2008    --------------------------
                                                                 2007 budget    request                    Percent
                                                                                              Amount      Incr/Decr
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    General Operations & Maintenance:
        Salaries...............................................      $15,449      $16,457       $1,008           6.5
        Expenses...............................................       $7,101      $10,923       $3,822          53.8
                                                                ----------------------------------------------------
          Total General Operations & Maintenance...............      $22,550      $27,380       $4,830          21.4
                                                                ====================================================
    Mandated Allowances & Allotments...........................       $3,800       $3,500        ($300)         -7.9
    Capital Investment.........................................  ...........       $5,900       $5,900           N/A
    Nondiscretionary Items.....................................  ...........  ...........  ............  ...........
                                                                ----------------------------------------------------
          TOTAL................................................      $26,350      $36,780      $10,430          39.6
                                                                ====================================================
    Staffing...................................................          281          283            2           0.7
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Capitol Division consists of the Executive Office, the Office of Security and Emergency Preparedness, the
      U.S. Capitol Police Operations Liaison, Post Office, Recording Studio and Media Galleries.

        The general operations and maintenance salaries budget request is
    $16,457,000, an increase of $1,008,000 or 6.5 percent. The salary
    budget increase is due to the addition of two FTEs, a COLA and merit
    increases, and other adjustments. The Recording Studio will add a
    Broadcast Technician to coordinate robotic coverage of the new
    committee hearing control rooms, and a Broadcast Engineer is needed to
    maintain and troubleshoot audio systems in multiple hearing rooms.
        The general operations and maintenance expenses budget request is
    $10,923,000, an increase of $3,822,000 or 53.8 percent. This increase
    will primarily fund consulting and equipment purchases in the Office of
    Security and Emergency Preparedness.
        The mandated allowances and allotments budget request for state
    office security initiatives is $3,500,000.
        The capital investments budget request of $5,900,000 will fund
    hearing room audio/video upgrades, $5,000,000; Recording Studio server
    expansion, $700,000; and chamber lighting upgrade, $200,000.

                                                       OPERATIONS
                                              [Dollar amounts in thousands]
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                              Fiscal year 2008 vs.
                                                                               Fiscal year      fiscal year 2007
                                                                  Fiscal year      2008    -------------------------
                                                                  2007 budget    request                   Percent
                                                                                               Amount     Incr/Decr
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    General Operations & Maintenance:
        Salaries................................................      $16,799      $18,230       $1,431          8.5
        Expenses................................................       $5,852       $6,027         $175          3.0
                                                                 ---------------------------------------------------
          Total General Operations & Maintenance................      $22,651      $24,257       $1,606          7.1
                                                                 ===================================================
    Mandated Allowances & Allotments............................      $16,562      $16,665         $103          0.6
    Capital Investment..........................................  ...........       $3,450       $3,450          N/A
    Nondiscretionary Items......................................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                                                 ---------------------------------------------------
          TOTAL.................................................      $39,213      $44,372       $5,159         13.2
                                                                 ===================================================
    Staffing....................................................          300          306            6          2.0
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Operations Division consists of the Central Operations Group (Director/Management, Parking Office, Printing,
      Graphics and Direct Mail, Photo Studio, and Hair Care Services), Facilities, and the Office Support Services
      Group (Director, Customer Support, State Office Liaison, and Administrative Services).

        The general operations and maintenance salaries budget request is
    $18,230,000, an increase of $1,431,000 or 8.5 percent. The salary
    budget increase is due to the addition of six FTEs, an expected COLA,
    and merit increases. Printing, Graphics and Direct Mail plans to add
    five new FTEs, including two Lead Data Production Specialists, a
    Reprographics Supervisor, and two Service Workers. The Photo Studio
    requests one FTE, a Photo Imaging Specialist, to support increases in
    photo service requests.
        The general operations and maintenance expenses budget request is
    $6,027,000, an increase of $175,000 or 3.0 percent.
        The mandated allowances and allotments budget request is
    $16,665,000, an increase of $103,000 or 0.6 percent.
        The capital investment budget request is $3,450,000. This request
    includes funds for modular furniture replacement in SAA office space,
    $2,000,000; a networked color printer and layout and design server
    replacement, $650,000; replacement of the PhotoBrowser database system,
    $500,000; and three production scanners, $300,000.

                                                 TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT
                                              [Dollar amounts in thousands]
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                              Fiscal year 2008 vs.
                                                                               Fiscal year      fiscal year 2007
                                                                  Fiscal year      2008    -------------------------
                                                                  2007 budget    request                   Percent
                                                                                               Amount     Incr/Decr
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    General Operations & Maintenance:
        Salaries................................................      $11,930      $13,357       $1,427         12.0
        Expenses................................................      $21,438      $26,199       $4,761         22.2
                                                                 ---------------------------------------------------
          Total General Operations & Maintenance................      $33,368      $39,556       $6,188         18.5
                                                                 ===================================================
    Mandated Allowances & Allotments............................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........
    Capital Investment..........................................         $671       $7,240       $6,569        979.0
    Nondiscretionary Items......................................       $4,640       $5,279         $639         13.8
                                                                 ---------------------------------------------------
          TOTAL.................................................      $38,679      $52,075      $13,396         34.6
                                                                 ===================================================
    Staffing....................................................          130          140           10         7.7
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Technology Development Services includes the Technology Development Director, Network Engineering and
      Management, Enterprise IT Operations, Systems Development Services, Information Systems Security and Internet/
      Intranet Services.

        The general operations and maintenance salaries budget request is
    $13,357,000, an increase of $1,427,000 or 12.0 percent. The salary
    budget increase is due to the addition of ten FTEs, a COLA and merit
    funding for fiscal year 2008. Technology Development requires ten FTEs
    to support the growing demand on IT Security, to meet expanding hours
    and additional requirements for the ACF such as COOP RDR, and to
    eliminate of a backlog of development projects.
        The general operations and maintenance expense budget request is
    $26,199,000, an increase of $4,761,000 or 22.2 percent. This increase
    is due to costs to support increased bandwidth for the Senate Internet
    access, professional services for applications support to AssetCenter
    and TranSAAct, technical support, and maintenance and technical support
    of hardware and software.
        The capital investment budget request is $7,240,000, an increase of
    $6,569,000 or 979.0 percent. Major projects include the SAN Upgrade,
    $2,700,000; data network engineering costs, $2,300,000; data network
    upgrade, $1,500,000; and the centralized back-up system, $680,000.
        The nondiscretionary items budget request is $5,279,000, an
    increase of $639,000 or 13.8 percent. The request consists of three
    projects that support the Secretary of the Senate: contract maintenance
    for the Financial Management Information System, maintenance and
    necessary enhancements to the Legislative Information System, and
    maintenance and enhancements to the Senate Payroll System.

                                                   IT SUPPORT SERVICES
                                              [Dollar amounts in thousands]
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                              Fiscal year 2008 vs.
                                                                              Fiscal year       fiscal year 2007
                                                                 Fiscal year      2008    --------------------------
                                                                 2007 budget    request                    Percent
                                                                                              Amount      Incr/Decr
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    General Operations & Maintenance:
        Salaries...............................................       $6,492       $6,834         $342           5.3
        Expenses...............................................      $27,217      $32,254       $5,037          18.5
                                                                ----------------------------------------------------
          Total General Operations & Maintenance...............      $33,709      $39,088       $5,379          16.0
                                                                ====================================================
    Mandated Allowances & Allotments...........................      $35,268      $37,907       $2,639           7.5
    Capital Investment.........................................      $10,565         $575      ($9,990)        -94.6
    Nondiscretionary Items.....................................  ...........  ...........  ............  ...........
                                                                ----------------------------------------------------
          TOTAL................................................      $79,542      $77,570      ($1,972)         -2.5
                                                                ====================================================
    Staffing...................................................          113          113  ............  ...........
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The IT Support Services Department consists of the Director, Office Equipment Services, Telecom Services and
      Desktop/LAN Support branches.

        The general operations and maintenance salaries budget request is
    $6,834,000, an increase of $342,000 or 5.3 percent. The salary budget
    will increase due to an expected COLA and merit funding for fiscal year
    2008.
        The general operations and maintenance expenses budget request is
    $32,254,000, an increase of $5,037,000 or 18.5 percent. This increase
    is primarily due to increased maintenance costs under the IT Support
    Contract, $4,054,000.
        The mandated allowances and allotments budget request is
    $37,907,000, an increase of $2,639,000 or 7.5 percent. This budget
    supports voice and data communications for Washington D.C. and state
    offices, $17,535,000; computer equipment, $10,915,000; maintenance and
    procurement of Member and Committee mail systems, $6,000,000;
    procurement and maintenance of office equipment for Washington D.C. and
    state offices, $3,940,000; and the Appropriations Analysis and
    Reporting System, $250,000.
        The capital investment budget request is $575,000, a decrease of
    $9,990,000 or 94.6 percent. The current budget request includes funds
    to help manage constituent e-mail traffic and support new CSS
    applications.

                                                      STAFF OFFICES
                                              [Dollar amounts in thousands]
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                              Fiscal year 2008 vs.
                                                                              Fiscal year       fiscal year 2007
                                                                 Fiscal year      2008    --------------------------
                                                                 2007 budget    request                    Percent
                                                                                              Amount      Incr/Decr
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    General Operations & Maintenance:
        Salaries...............................................       $9,381       $9,565         $184           2.0
        Expenses...............................................       $5,611       $6,531         $920          16.4
                                                                ----------------------------------------------------
          Total General Operations & Maintenance...............      $14,992      $16,096       $1,104           7.4
                                                                ====================================================
    Mandated Allowances & Allotments...........................  ...........  ...........  ............  ...........
    Capital Investment.........................................         $475  ...........        ($475)       -100.0
    Nondiscretionary Items.....................................  ...........  ...........  ............  ...........
                                                                ----------------------------------------------------
          TOTAL................................................      $15,467      $16,096         $629           4.1
                                                                ====================================================
    Staffing...................................................          103          104            1           1.0
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Staff Offices Division consists of Education and Training, Financial Management, Human Resources, Employee
      Assistance Program, Process Management & Innovation, and Special Projects.

        The general operations and maintenance salaries budget request is
    $9,565,000, an increase of $184,000 or 2.0 percent. The salary budget
    increase is due to the addition of one FTE, a COLA, and merit funding.
    Process Management and Innovation requires one Principal IT Specialist
    in System Architecture and Integration to replace an on-site contractor
    providing support and maintenance.
        The general operations and maintenance expenses budget request is
    $6,531,000, an increase of $920,000 or 16.4 percent. This increase will
    fund enhancements of the Senate's Active Directory and Messaging
    Architecture and metro subsidy.
                                     ______

        Madam Chair and Members of the Committee, I am honored to appear
    before you today to discuss the U.S. Capitol Police fiscal year 2008
    Budget Request. With me today is Phil Morse, Chief of Police.
        Before I begin Madam Chair, I would like to thank the Committee for
    their ongoing support of the men and women of the U.S. Capitol Police.
    Your commitment to their continued and diligent efforts to develop
    better security operations, response forces and law enforcement
    capabilities has significantly contributed to the Capitol Police's
    ability to provide a safe and secure environment for Members of
    Congress, staff, and the general public.
        The Capitol Police Board appreciates this opportunity to appear
    before you. The security challenge confronting the U.S. Capitol Police
    today remains constant and complex. However, it is a challenge that the
    Department successfully manages each day of the year.
        Having been the Chief and now Sergeant at Arms and Capitol Police
    Board Chairman, I am acutely aware of the security challenges that
    confront the men and women of the U.S. Capitol Police. The challenges
    they face are in the magnitude of the mission they perform. The Capitol
    Police stand between those intent on doing harm and those they have
    sworn to protect. The ability of the Congress to perform its mission is
    directly related to the ability of the men and women of the Capitol
    Police to successfully perform their mission.
        The Capitol Police Board works closely with the Department in
    assessing security risks and determining approaches for mitigation. The
    Capitol continues to be foremost symbol of democracy, a prime terrorist
    target. We must always be one step ahead of the terrorist in order to
    be successful. This is a challenge because of cost, balancing freedoms
    and the professional challenge of constant vigilance. Security systems,
    and the infrastructure that supports them, are expensive. The Capitol
    Police have prepared a budget request that reflects the needs of the
    Department in meeting critical security requirements as they are
    currently understood. They have been judicious in the initiatives they
    have included in their request. They have the full support of the
    Capitol Police Board in their efforts, especially in determining the
    number of personnel needed, evaluating threats, maximizing the use of
    technology and working with other agencies.
        The Board will continue supporting the Department in its on-going
    work with the recommendations of the Government Accountability Office
    (GAO) and the new Inspector General.
        As the threat environment changes, or additional mission
    requirements are added the Department will in all probability need
    additional personnel with concomitant costs, space and technology. For
    instance the opening of the CVC is an additional responsibility. Longer
    hours of operation, more visitors or the opening of secured doors have
    the potential to be unfunded mandates.
        Chief Morse and his team are steadfast in their efforts to
    efficiently use their personnel. The men and women of the United States
    Capitol Police (USCP) work hard and often long hours in very difficult
    weather conditions. They have met or exceeded nearly every demand
    placed upon them. There is however a point where we overwork the cadre
    of USCP personnel, sworn and civilian.
        The Capitol Police have done an exemplary job of protecting the
    Congress, its legislative process, Members, employees and visitors from
    crime, disruption or terrorism. I want to offer my thanks to the men
    and women of the U.S. Capitol Police. They coordinate the people,
    organizations, and resources necessary to respond to the variety of
    threats we face today. It is an extremely difficult job to maintain a
    legislative complex that is completely open to the public, while at the
    same time ensuring the safety of the Congress, staff and visitors
    against increased dangers.
        The men and women of the Capitol Police have my greatest respect. I
    know from personal experience that each one considers it an honor to
    protect, serve, and welcome our citizens and people from around the
    world to our Nation's Capitol who come to participate in the
    legislative processes, to witness democracy in action, and partake in
    the history of this unique place. We have a leader in Chief Morse and
    he is assembling a powerful management team.
        Madam Chair, 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.
        I would now like to introduce Chief Morse who will present the
    Capitol Police's fiscal year 2008 Budget in more detail.
                          UNITED STATES CAPITOL POLICE

    STATEMENT OF PHILLIP D. MORSE, CHIEF
    ACCOMPANIED BY DAN NICHOLS, ASSISTANT CHIEF

        Senator Landrieu. Chief.
        Chief Morse. Good morning Madam Chair, members of the
    subcommittee----
        Senator Landrieu. Can you pull the microphone a little
    closer to you.
        Chief Morse. Good morning, Madam Chair, members of the
    subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before
    you today to discuss the United States Capitol Police fiscal
    year 2008 budget request.
        I am honored to have been chosen as the Chief of Police and
    I look forward to continuing the transformation of the Capitol
    Police to a premiere, well managed security law enforcement
    operation that the Congress both deserves and expects.
        After over 21 years in the Department, I have seen
    firsthand how we have changed and grown particularly since 9/11
    and the anthrax incidents. Through all the changes, the United
    States Capitol Police steadfastly maintains our core duty of
    protecting the Congress, its legislative processes, as well as
    staff and visitors, from harm. It is our duty and honor to
    protect and secure Congress so it can fill its constitutional
    responsibilities in a safe and open environment.
        Congressional operations are highly visible targets for
    individuals and organizations intent on causing harm to the
    United States and disrupting the legislative process of our
    Government. It is the men and women of the Capitol Police who
    stand between those intent on causing harm and those who we
    protect.
        Teamwork and leadership are essential qualities of a well-
    managed security law enforcement operation and I recognize the
    hard work of all the sworn and civilian staff of the United
    States Capitol Police who exhibit their leadership and
    dedication to teamwork in meeting our mission. It is these
    dedicated individuals, with the support of the Capitol Police
    Board and the Congress, who ensure the safety of members,
    staff, and the millions of visitors each and every hour of the
    day, each and every day of the year--without exception.
        It is the duty of the men and women of the Capitol Police
    to do what is in our power to prevent acts against this body
    and if such acts should occur, to respond appropriately to
    ensure the safety and well being of our stakeholders.
        Madam Chair, I submit the remainder of my testimony for the
    record and I am happy to answer any questions that you may
    have.
        [The statement follows:]
                  Prepared Statement of Phillip D. Morse, Sr.
        Madam Chair and Members of the Committee, thank you for the
    opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the United States
    Capitol Police's fiscal year 2008 budget request. I am honored to have
    been chosen as the Chief of Police and look forward to continuing the
    transformation of the Capitol Police into the premiere, well-managed
    security and law enforcement operation the Congress both deserves and
    expects. After over 21 years in the Department, I have seen, firsthand,
    how we have changed and grown, particularly since the 9/11 and Anthrax
    incidents. Through all of the changes, the United States Capitol Police
    steadfastly maintains our core duty of protecting the Congress, its
    legislative process, as well as staff and visitors from harm. It is our
    duty and honor to protect and secure Congress, so it can fulfill its
    Constitutional responsibilities in a safe and open environment.
    Congressional operations are a highly visible target for individuals
    and organizations intent on causing harm to the United States and
    disrupting the legislative processes of our government, and it is the
    men and women of the Capitol Police who stand between those intent on
    causing harm and those we protect.
        Teamwork and leadership are essential qualities of a well-managed
    security and law enforcement operation, and I recognize the hard work
    of all of the sworn and civilian staff of the United States Capitol
    Police who exhibit their leadership and dedication to teamwork in
    meeting our mission. It is these dedicated individuals, with the
    support of the Capitol Police Board and the Congress, who ensure the
    safety of the Members, staff and millions of visitors each and every
    hour of the day, each and every day of the year, without exception. It
    is the duty of the men and women of the Capitol Police to do all in our
    power to prevent acts against this body, and if such acts should occur,
    to respond appropriately to ensure the safety and well-being of our
    stakeholders.
        The employees of the United States Capitol Police are dedicated to
    their work, and thus; we as a team have had significant accomplishments
    in the past year, including:
      --Responding to the Rayburn Active Shooter Incident, the 9/18 armed
            intruder incident, and the Russell and Dirksen Hazmat
            incidents;
      --Greeting and screening nearly 7 million staff and visitors,
            coordinating over 2,600 VIP notifications from visiting
            dignitaries, screening nearly 76,000 vehicles and 78,000
            individuals at the Capitol Visitor Center as work proceeded
            uninterrupted; and responding to and investigating nearly 300
            suspicious package incidents, investigating over 3,000 threat
            and direction-of-interest cases against Members of Congress and
            other congressional officials;
      --Providing incident-free protection to congressional Leadership and
            visiting officials, which included five visits by the
            President, 33 visits by the Vice President, and 69 visits from
            heads of state;
      --Planning, preparing, coordinating and executing police services for
            multiple National Special Security Events, as well as
            emergencies affecting the U.S. Capitol complex. These included
            the lying in state of former President Gerald Ford, the
            President's State of the Union address, the lying in honor of
            civil rights activist Rosa Parks, Supreme Court confirmation
            hearings for Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice
            Samuel Alito; as well as the Million More Movement, the Peace
            Officers' Memorial Day Service; the National Memorial Day,
            Labor Day and 4th of July Concerts;
      --Developing a real-time backup information technology and
            communications capability, which will provide critical command
            and control functionality within minutes of a failure at United
            States Capitol Police Headquarters;
      --Developing and implementing a comprehensive Internal Controls
            Program within the Department and conducting initial internal
            controls assessments and enhanced processes to better control
            and manage the Department; and
      --Implementing a new financial management system to provide better
            accountability and control over financial operations of the
            Department as well as implementing the first phase of an asset
            management system, which will allow better tracking of assets
            and inventory.
        In this ever-changing threat environment, the U.S. Capitol Police
    accomplishes its mission through varied and complementary functions to
    provide round-the-clock protection to Congress. In an effort to
    maintain the flexibility of Department operations and maintain
    operational readiness, the United States Capitol Police, with the
    support of Congress, has made significant investments in human capital
    and Department infrastructure. We have concentrated our efforts on
    augmenting our intelligence capabilities and coordination among the
    intelligence community; hardening our physical security and counter-
    surveillance capabilities; automating antiquated security and
    administrative support systems; enhancing our detection and response
    capabilities for explosive devices, as well as chemical and biological
    agents; and augmenting our incident command and emergency response and
    notification systems. The initial investments in these important areas
    were significant, and these capabilities require substantial resources
    for maintenance in order to ensure that our systems are operational at
    all times. The majority of these infrastructure investments were funded
    with emergency, supplemental funds or reprogrammed prior year funding
    and now require annual, on-going operational maintenance and life cycle
    replacement.
        The United States Capitol Police budget for fiscal year 2008 is
    $299.1 million, which includes personnel costs of $237.1 million and
    non-personnel costs of $62 million. Compared to the fiscal year 2007 CR
    level of $255.6 million, there is an overall increase of $43.5 million
    (17.0 percent).
        Over the past several years, Congress has generously allowed us to
    significantly augment daily operating costs through the reprogramming
    of existing unobligated balances. As a result, our annual appropriation
    for general expenses does not reflect the actual annual operating
    requirements that the Congress has authorized to be spent in a given
    year. It is important to recognize that while Congress has been
    generous in its support of the USCP through creative mechanisms to
    provide critical resources, these one-time financing sources are nearly
    depleted. Our fiscal year 2008 request provides permanent annual
    funding for critical requirements of the Department and reflects our
    anticipated annual requirements to operate the Department in fiscal
    year 2008.
        The Congress has made the commitment through resources and policy
    support to create a formidable Police Department with diverse
    capabilities designed to deter or respond to any threat to the Capitol
    Complex. Over the last five years, the Department has grown in human
    capital, security infrastructure, command and control, and security and
    law enforcement capabilities. The intent of this budget request is to
    address targeted civilian manpower needs and the annual sustainment of
    the Department's capabilities, which have been sourced through a
    variety of means. From a manpower perspective, the Department is
    continually reviewing its operational concept to determine the most
    effective manner in which to conduct operations. The intent of this
    effort is to be as effective and efficient as possible. In an effort to
    maintain and further develop a culture committed to excellence, the
    Department has engaged an outside entity to evaluate our operations as
    they relate to operational staffing and human capital management. This
    year-long study will assess every aspect of USCP operational sworn and
    civilian manpower management and will provide feedback and
    recommendations for operational alternatives for maximizing manpower
    while enhancing congressional security. Final results of the assessment
    are expected in October 2007.
        New initiatives in our fiscal year 2008 budget request include
    additional personnel resources for both sworn and civilian; security
    for the fiscal year 2008 Republican and Democratic Conventions; funding
    for the biennial promotions process; costs of the transfer of functions
    from other agencies; essential maintenance and life cycle replacement
    of security and information technology infrastructures as well as
    maintenance related to our aging radio system. The following represents
    a more detailed look at the United States Capitol Police fiscal year
    2008 request.
        Personnel.--The personnel portion of the request, $237.1 million,
    supports the current authorized FTE level of 1,671 sworn and 414
    civilians as well as mandatory cost increases for COLAs, promotions,
    within-grade increases, annualization of fiscal year 2007 positions,
    health benefit and retirement costs and an additional 10 FTEs for
    Library of Congress (LOC) attrition, and 30 civilian FTEs. The new LOC
    officers would bring the fiscal year 2008 sworn FTE level to 1,681,
    while the civilian FTE level would increase to 444 for a total
    Department FTE level of 2,125.
        Included in the personnel budget is a request for overtime.
    Staffing levels are driven by security needs and are augmented with
    overtime to meet critical security requirements. The requested overtime
    of approximately $23 million is made up of approximately 460,000 hours.
    There are three main contributors to fiscal year 2008 estimated
    overtime increases over fiscal year 2006/fiscal year 2007.
      --Increased pace/workload of the Congress;
      --Support for the Democratic and Republican National Conventions; and
      --Additional workload to maintain security equipment.
        Non-Personnel.--The fiscal year 2008 request for non-personnel
    items is $62 million to support Capitol Police responsibilities for law
    enforcement, Capitol complex physical security, dignitary protection,
    intelligence analysis, crowd control, information technology, hazardous
    material/devices and other specialized response as well as logistical
    and administrative support.
        There are several factors affecting the rate of increase in the
    fiscal year 2008 Budget Request. First, in fiscal year 2006, the United
    States Capitol Police received authority for reprogramming of
    approximately $4.6 million into the General Expenses appropriation to
    fund fiscal year 2007 operating expenses. This made the total available
    amount for fiscal year 2007 General Expenses approximately $43.1
    million, which was the approximate spending for fiscal year 2006
    operations. In fiscal year 2008, the USCP seeks permanent funding for
    these forward funded items as well as additional resources to support
    the Democratic and Republican conventions, the biennial promotions
    process, the maintenance of security and other systems previously
    purchased with annual and no-year funds and to make critical
    maintenance investments in IT infrastructure. The major increases for
    the non-personnel request for the United States Capitol Police
    includes:
      --$8,163,600 is for Information Systems.--Information systems
            increases are related to contractor support for the radio
            system previously transferred from the Senate as well as costs
            for command center maintenance, communications support
            activities, licensing and support of new systems, life cycle
            replacement and repair of computer equipment and peripherals.
      --$4,193,620 is for Security Services.--Security services' increases
            relate to the maintenance contract and other items that were
            forward funded, and life cycle replacement items.
      --$4,641,500 is for Protective Services.--Protective services'
            increases are primarily related to convention support for the
            Democratic National Convention (DNC) and Republican National
            Convention (RNC). The DNC and RNC are scheduled for August 2008
            and September 2008 respectively.
      --$2,218,500 is for Human Resources.--The human resources increases
            include an increase for the National Finance Center computer
            programming for workers' compensation and time and attendance
            upgrades, the sworn promotion process contract (occurs every
            two years), funding for the tuition reimbursement program, as
            well as the addition of a system module for sworn manpower
            scheduling that is expected to improve the efficiency of
            scheduling the 1,671 sworn manpower assets that are currently
            managed through a manual process.
      --$1,358,500 is for Logistics.--Increases for logistical operations
            consist of uniform refreshment, outfitting the Practical
            Applications Center at Cheltenham, MD, and vehicle repairs,
            service and maintenance.
      --$1,385,500 is for Planning and Homeland Security.--Increases to
            Planning and Homeland Security consist of the security control
            operator's contract, which was forward funded.
      --$585,400 is for Financial Management.--Increases to financial
            management are attributed to increased costs for the financial
            management system, continuation of the help desk, and
            contractor support for accounts payable.
      --$177,680 is for Training Services.--Increases to training services
            include costs related to role players for training exercises at
            the Practical Applications Center in Cheltenham, MD and
            training for instructors requiring certification.
      --$771,700 represents increases to other areas of the department that
            primarily support newly requested personnel, increases
            requested by the Office of Inspector General, as well as minor
            increases to training, contractor services, and supplies.
        The U.S. Capitol is still faced with numerous threats, including a
    vehicle-borne explosive attack, terrorist-controlled aircraft attack,
    armed attacks on the Capitol Complex, suicide bombers or positioned
    explosive attacks, chemical, biological and/or radiological attacks,
    and attacks on Members and staff as well as ordinary crime. To
    accomplish this mission, the Department will continue to work
    diligently to enhance its intelligence capabilities and provide a
    professional 21st Century workforce capable of performing a myriad of
    security and law enforcement duties, supported by state-of-the-art
    technology to prevent and detect potential threats and effectively
    respond to and control incidents. With the help of Congress and the
    Capitol Police Board, the Department will continue developing
    professional administrative capabilities based on sound business and
    best practices, while raising the caliber and capability of its sworn
    and civilian personnel.
        The United States Capitol Police must maintain the ability to be
    prepared for any situation. The attainment of that goal depends, in
    part, on having the right strength and the numbers of well-trained and
    prepared people, organized into an effective and flexible blend of
    capabilities and skills. The Department continues to prepare and train
    officers by holding Department-wide intelligence briefings when
    significant or critical information is gathered; disseminating
    intelligence and tactical information in daily roll-calls, and
    conducting field and table-top exercises in efforts to equip officers
    with the necessary tools to do their jobs. Additionally, the
    Department's officials routinely participate in a wide-range of table-
    top exercises with top experts from Federal, state and local law
    enforcement.
        As Chief of the Capitol Police, I take great pride in the
    accomplishments of the men and women of the Department. We at the
    United States Capitol Police look forward to working collaboratively
    with the Congress to continue to safeguard the Congress, staff, and
    visitors to the Capitol Complex during these challenging times.
        I thank you for the opportunity to appear here today and am ready
    to address any questions you may have today.

                SAA deg.SECURITY ON THE CAPITOL CAMPUS

        Senator Landrieu. Thank you very much. I do have some
    questions and I would like to begin. We'll do probably 5-minute
    rounds and just see how the time goes.
        Mr. Gainer, I have spoken with you about this issue several
    times and I want to address this issue in my first question.
    Too many Members have expressed to me a concern about turning
    the Capitol into an armed encampment and while we want to be
    very careful and understand the need to step up security, we
    understand the breaches that have occurred and why it is
    important to make it secure.
        We also want to balance the need for security with the
    openness that we need to do our work effectively and
    efficiently throughout the day as well as keep the spirit of
    the Capitol, which is very important, a spirit of openness,
    trust, and friendliness actually. So it is a very difficult
    balance. When people go into maybe a courthouse or they go into
    another Federal building, I don't think they expect openness
    and friendliness. But they do expect openness when they come
    here to the Capitol, that they own. This is their Capitol, it's
    a symbol of their democracy. There is a lot about this building
    that's very different than any other Federal building that we
    protect and secure. So achieving that balance here is very
    important to me. Can you explain how you're trying to reach
    that balance, if that is an objective of yours? Do you share
    that or do you have questions or disagreements about that?
        Mr. Gainer. I certainly don't have any disagreements. Both
    Chief Morse and I are united in our belief as is the Police
    Board, about the necessity to keep the Capitol open and very
    viable. Over the 4 years I had the chance to lead the Capitol
    Police, I think the men and women went out of their way to be
    both welcoming and helpful even as they stood ready to ward off
    someone who might attack.
        In both of our opening statements, we concentrate on the
    antiterrorism approach, but there will be some 12 to 15 million
    visitors to Capitol Hill, as well as the 30,000 employees for
    which everything is really pretty seamless as they come
    through.
        I think with the proper mix of technology and making that
    technology nearly invisible to everybody; with having men and
    women of the Capitol Police understand their roles; and with
    the Senate Sergeant at Arms staff, whether it is the doorkeeper
    or the appointment desk or the people cleaning the floors,
    greet visitors and make them feel comfortable, we can achieve
    that balance of security and openness. But we are not going to
    be able to take away, for instance, the heavily armed offices
    on the Senate side of the east front.
        The opening of the CVC, which as I said is actually more
    work because there are more doors to be manned, will increase
    the flow of people and make it seamless as we go in. But we do
    need to be vigilant.

            SAA deg.U.S. SECRET SERVICE SECURITY ASSESSMENT

        Senator Landrieu. Okay. The U.S. Secret Service recently
    completed a security assessment of the Capitol complex and made
    recommendations regarding the security of the complex. Can you
    describe the scope of this assessment? Did it include the
    entire complex or the Capitol Building only? How are you
    collaborating with the Capitol Police to address the
    recommendations made? What is the timeframe for addressing
    these recommendations? I'm assuming that some of this review
    was classified, but what is not classified, if you could share
    with us, I'd be appreciative.
        Mr. Gainer. From a macro view, let me say that the survey
    that was requested by the Police Board, at the direction of the
    committees, really covered the Capitol Square complex more than
    it did the office buildings. If we just put that one aside for
    a moment, there have been ongoing and other studies of the
    other buildings and we haven't cast those aside. As to this
    particular Secret Service study, which is a classified
    document, the Police Board has directed the Department and each
    member of the Police Board, the House Sergeant at Arms, myself,
    the Architect of the Capitol and Chief Morse, to put together a
    working group to review that security survey and categorize its
    findings into action items that can be done today, mid-term,
    and then longer term.
        Looking at it from a people point of view, a technology
    point of view, and a cost point of view, at the direction of
    Chief Morse, as that study was conducted some issues were
    identified that could be fixed immediately and some have been
    implemented. There were about 200 recommendations and we're
    working collaboratively with the Architect of the Capitol and
    the members of the Police Board to implement them.
        I brought on board retired Chief Ramsey from the
    Metropolitan Police Department, a 37-year veteran of law
    enforcement--he's the chairman of the International Association
    of Chiefs of Police, Homeland Security and he has studied and
    consulted in Northern Ireland, England, and Israel. So I think
    with Chief Ramsey and along with the members from Phil's team
    and the other members of the Board, we're in good stead to
    analyze the recommendation and implement as we can.
        Senator Landrieu. Okay. I'm going to review some of those
    recommendations and, of course, the Senators have clearance to
    do so. But we want to be sensitive that the Secret Service's
    primary mission is to guard the life of the President and to
    keep the White House safe. The White House is not the People's
    House, it's the President's house. But the Capitol is the
    People's House and the Secret Service has to understand while
    we're very happy to have their recommendations, and we will
    absolutely take them seriously, it is not the same thing
    guarding the White House as guarding the Capitol.
        Mr. Gainer. Yes ma'am.

               SAA deg.RISK AND VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT

        Senator Landrieu. I understand you have efforts underway to
    assess the risk and vulnerabilities, including the Senate's
    State Office Preparedness Program. To what extent are the
    results of these assessments shared with the Capitol Police who
    might also benefit from the results of these assessments?
        Mr. Gainer. The work that portion of the office does is
    very much done in coordination and cooperation with the Police
    Department. Several of Chief Morse's people are actually
    involved and do some of the onsite work. So it is
    collaborative. When we are looking at the physical security, we
    also discuss continuity of their own operations and continuity
    of the Government from their perspective. We do work closely
    together with the police. We try to make it as seamless as
    possible. We consult with some of the experts on Chief Morse's
    team because of their expertise on physical security. So we are
    linked and will continue to be so.

           SAA deg.TELECOMMUNICATIONS MODERNIZATION PROGRAM

        Senator Landrieu. This subcommittee has provided over $20
    million in funding for telecommunications modernization. While
    I agree these upgrades were needed, I'm curious to know what
    the program entails and where we are with this particular
    program. It's a considerable amount of money. Why is it
    necessary? Where are we? What are our goals and objectives?
        Mr. Gainer. The telephone modernization program was one of
    the things I asked about during my first couple of days as
    Sergeant at Arms. I had just come from a corporation, L3
    Communications, where we had voice over Internet protocol and I
    saw the magic of that system, which is used in most major
    corporations across the United States to link computer work,
    telephone calls and scheduling and meetings.
        I understand we're about 10 percent into the design phase
    of that program and over the next 12 months the design will be
    completed. The contract was left to the vendor to do that. The
    upgrade program will affect our telephone switch, the blue
    button phones that the Members use, and the audio-
    teleconferencing group alert, and voicemail systems. It really
    will bring the Senate community into the overused phrase--``the
    21st century.''
        I know that our CIO is concerned about introducing it, and
    making sure that the training for the community is available.
    Again, with my limited experience in the corporate world, I
    think people will be bedazzled and wonder why we didn't do it
    sooner.

          SAA deg.IMPACT OF THE CAPITOL VISITOR CENTER DELAY

        Senator Landrieu. Thank you. The subcommittee has spent a
    lot of time over the years performing oversight on the Capitol
    Visitor Center construction project. It now appears that the
    opening date has been delayed again to the spring or early
    summer. Will this further delay in opening have any impact on
    the operations of your office?
        Mr. Gainer. Indirectly, it may be a bit more costly because
    the movement of our studios into the CVC has been contracted
    out and I understand we have to re-evaluate our moving plans
    because of the delays. We are adjusting for that. The delays
    are actually having a domino effect on the movement of some of
    our offices to the CVC. We're trying to be efficient in Postal
    Square, and some of the offices ultimately will be moved from
    there and to the CVC. It is something we are on top of. It is
    not inexpensive. The delay might cost an additional $1.5
    million or $2 million to adapt our plans to the new time line.
    But we're aware of the delay and we're working on it.
        Senator Landrieu. Okay and Chief, I will ask you one
    question and then shift to Senator Allard and then we will go
    to a second round if we need to.

           CPB deg.GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE REPORT
                                RECOMMENDATIONS

        In response to the GAO report on your efforts to improve
    management, and I know this is a focus of yours, please update
    us in a little bit more detail than you did in your opening
    statement about the status of your efforts to implement some of
    GAO's specific recommendations and what your specific timeframe
    is for addressing all of the outstanding recommendations that
    this report has indicated?
        Chief Morse. Thank you, Madam Chair. First, I also have the
    same concerns as you do in the information that was contained
    in the GAO report. What we are doing is very aggressively
    working to extract the things we need to work on and prioritize
    them. What has helped us do that is the inspector general as
    well as the CAO's office are working very hard to remedy that
    situation.
        We have put in place an internal controls process, which is
    helping us manage and meet the performance measures that we
    need to accomplish that goal. We are assessing each process
    that we do in bringing forward best business practices,
    repeatable, and validated processes, so that we don't continue
    to go down this path.
        The timetable that we plan to sort of connect the dots and
    bring all this together is really dependent on how well we
    complete the things we're doing in the Office of Financial
    Management.
        Asset inventory--we have a human capital plan. We have a
    manpower study so we are incorporating all of those things into
    an action plan that Mr. Stamilio, our CAO, has put together.
        Connecting the dots--and we hope to be able to do this, a
    great deal of the most important issues by the end of this
    fiscal year. So as we meet today, we are meeting with GAO
    across the street. We have established a relationship with
    them. We have put our people together in a very cooperative
    effort to resolve the issues and they have been extremely
    helpful.
        The final thing is, there is accountability and I have put
    in place, along with the Assistant Chief and our CAO,
    accountability at all levels. And accountability also includes
    perhaps even personnel changes. So we are very aggressively
    working on this. We understand the concerns and we understand
    the importance of getting our management in order.
        Senator Landrieu. Thank you. Senator Allard.

                  CPB deg.DEPARTMENTAL ACCOUNTABILITY

        Senator Allard. Madam Chair, I'm going to follow up with
    Chief Morse since we are on that subject. I really think for
    management by objectives to work, every police officer has to
    buy into that and I think every division inspector that you
    have, has to buy into it and has to work with each sponsor. I
    think both the Chair and I would like to see us be able to do a
    lot for the Police Department but in order to get our
    colleagues to understand, we have got to have this
    accountability and assurance that things are managed well. It
    is easier then for them to approve some sizeable increases.
        I'm not denying we don't have some problems there and I
    think you've got a horrendous job ahead of you because other
    people before you have not been that successful in pulling
    things together. So I think you really have to get everybody to
    buy into it.

            SAA deg.SENATE SERGEANT AT ARMS STAFFING LEVEL

        I'd like to ask a few questions to you, Mr. Gainer. You've
    identified in your own remarks the increase in employees that
    you've requested of 19 and the Chairwoman has mentioned it. It
    is a sizeable increase. I understand that there are issues that
    are driving this--security issues, the CVC, technology.
        When do you see this annual staff increase plateauing and
    when can we begin to say okay, we're where we should be. We've
    taken care of our security needs and everything. Do you have
    any idea when we might reach this plateau?
        Mr. Gainer. Senator, I think we're close but strangely
    enough, at least for an old sociologist street guy like myself,
    technology seems to keep driving the need for more people. I
    think there is a thought sometimes that when you introduce
    technology, you can remove the person, but when we keep
    increasing the technology, we are adding complexity and there
    will be a need for more people to maintain and support that
    technology.
        When I went over this budget upon arrival here, I sat down
    with my staff and asked a very similar question and no one said
    that this was it and I can't tell you that it is. I think as we
    get the recording studio up and running or printing and
    graphics and our network engineers implement the voice over IP
    protocol, it will be close.
        Technology will require additional people. Having said
    that, I also ask if we improve technology and do away with the
    human element--does that mean we can attrite those people out
    or lose those positions? And what we are trying to do where
    increased technology requires more staff, is to train existing
    staff and bring them up to speed. So I don't see an end in
    sight. I hope it will moderate in the future.
        Senator Allard. Well, thank you and I recognize the
    challenges you face as far as technology. At some point here,
    SAA should begin to level off.
        Mr. Gainer. I think that is a good point. I think we will
    be getting close to leveling off.

                SAA deg.SECURITY IN THE CAPITOL COMPLEX

        Senator Allard. Very good. I would also follow up on Madam
    Chairwoman's comments on security, the degree of security we
    have around here. I think most Members of Congress are fairly
    comfortable with a lot of the security that you have to have.
        The one thing that really raises their ire on my side of
    the aisle and I think on her side of the aisle too, is if
    anybody mentions a fence around the Capitol. That has been
    mentioned before and I've had to deal with it in my conferences
    and I'm sure it has been brought up in her conference too and
    that just brings everyone up off their chair. I know there is a
    fence around the White House, but it's not something that would
    be acceptable here so we have to look at other ways in order to
    secure the Capitol.

         SAA deg.SERGEANT AT ARMS COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGIC PLAN

        Last year, your predecessor, Bill Pickle, testified that
    the Sergeant at Arms was working on developing a comprehensive
    strategic plan. Can you describe how your office uses
    performance measures to ensure it is meeting the needs of its
    clients in a cost-effective and service orientated manner?
        Mr. Gainer. Yes sir, I can. In fact, we left at your desk
    place, our strategic plan that was developed under Bill
    Pickle's guidance and by many of the people sitting behind me.
    And I will note, if I may, on page 11 you'll see an example of
    how we've taken performance and accountability very seriously
    and then tied in an example of our performance metrics.
        So we have the main strategic points, which are then broken
    down into the different divisions, and down to section levels
    where those performance levels and metrics of success are
    indicated. For instance, in the human resources section, 100
    percent of employee performance evaluations will be completed
    on time. In technology, the help desk and computer customer
    satisfaction will be a minimum of 95 percent, or accurately
    sorting and delivering mail from the Postal Service on the day
    it clears testing will be 100 percent.
        This is but an example of how we are implementing our
    straightforward strategic plan to turn our vision and mission
    into concrete performance goals with realistic measurement
    standards and tools. We do take this seriously.

        SAA deg.ROLE OF FORMER METROPOLITAN POLICE CHIEF RAMSEY

        Senator Allard. Well, thank you. I think that is a step in
    the right direction and I urge you to continue those efforts.
    Also, I understand that you've hired former D.C. Chief Ramsey.
    Would you share with me what he will be doing, again without
    compromising security, give us an overview of what he will be
    doing.
        Mr. Gainer. Yes, Senator and Madam Chair. One of the major
    duties he is performing is a review of the Secret Service study
    that we mentioned earlier. Chief Ramsey, in his capacity of
    working for me and, I, in my capacity as the Board Chair, are
    the coordinators of the Board's effort to take that plan and
    see what is viable, what would work here, what needs to be
    implemented, has already been implemented, or can be
    implemented in 30 days, 90 days, or 120 days and how it may
    affect the budget.
        His major contribution will be to concentrate on that
    security plan, but also he's already engaged with the Capitol
    Police and others to review a number of the other studies that
    have been undertaken.

              SAA deg.PRIORITIES OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL

        Senator Allard. Thank you. Do you have the inspector
    general with you today?
        Mr. Gainer. We do have him, Carl Hoecker.
        Senator Allard. I would like to ask him a question, if I
    may.
        Mr. Hoecker, you've been on board now since July. The
    inspector generals are the eyes and ears of the Members of
    Congress.
        Mr. Hoecker. Yes, sir.
        Senator Allard. So the reason we put inspector generals in
    the various agencies is so that we know what is going on as far
    as management issues, and fraud, waste and abuse. I'd like to
    hear from you as to your priorities and what you see as the
    biggest challenges facing the United States Capitol Police?
        Mr. Hoecker. If I can, I would just kind of read from the
    notes here that kind of, in case this happened then I think it
    will answer your question, sir.
        As you've said, I've been on since July. In these 9 months,
    the OIG has done the following major items. We hired staff,
    established administrative systems and processes to manage the
    OIG, developed a strategic plan that is linked to the
    Department's strategic objectives, we have an annual work plan,
    which is on track and that annual work plan is where we focus
    on our priorities, sir.
        In October we developed the first semiannual report to
    Congress and we've identified management challenges for the
    Chief, which the Chief has factored into his priorities for the
    Department.
        We have issued three full reports and we have four ongoing
    projects right now. The management challenges, the first of the
    top three, financial management, human capital, and security.
    I've had discussions with the Chief on a weekly basis in terms
    of how best I can positively help the organization more up
    front than consultative type arrangements working on business
    processes improvements as I'm walking through the organization
    in that type of an arena, sir.

                SAA deg.SEMIANNUAL CONGRESSIONAL REPORT

        Senator Allard. It is my understanding there was not as
    much substance as we would like in your semiannual report. I
    would urge you to give us more detail of what you are finding
    and what your recommendations are. That is real important,
    particularly as we are focusing more on financial
    accountability within the Capitol Police.
        Mr. Hoecker. Yes, sir.

               CPB deg.CHIEF MORSE'S DEPARTMENTAL VISION

        Senator Allard. Chief Morse, again I want to congratulate
    you on your position. Can you describe your vision and plans
    for the agency and tell us whether you intend to make any
    significant changes to how the agency operates?
        Chief Morse. Thank you, Senator. My vision for the Police
    Department is to build on the very strong foundation that we
    have in place from my predecessors. We're working toward being
    a premiere law enforcement agency and in order for us to do
    that, initially, we're trying to--or my vision is and you
    talked about inclusiveness earlier and we have put this vision
    out from the top down and that is to instill the core values of
    the Police Department--to be unflinching, sincere, courteous,
    and principled.
        With that, we marry that up with the best business
    practices and repeatable processes, internal controls and we're
    linking that with our strategic plan and our business plans to
    ensure that we're doing the things necessary to take care of
    our people and to make the best security for the complex
    itself.
        We're going to be concentrating our efforts this year on
    connecting those dots and working with the inspector general
    and our CAO. We hope to meet those major challenges that we've
    identified in the GAO report as well as the ones that we're
    identifying.
        What is most important is the inclusiveness of everyone in
    the organization. One of the things I did initially was to
    establish an executive management team, a senior management
    team and first line supervisors' and officers' management team.
    Everything that we are doing, everything that we are
    evaluating, each one of the studies that we are conducting is
    inclusive of everyone from the top down. I believe that meets
    your challenge that everyone be on the same page.
        With that, we're also improving our relationships not only
    with the community and stakeholders, but also with Members of
    Congress. I meet routinely and I've met with you and have had
    very good discussions. I meet with Mr. Gainer and Mr. Livingood
    routinely and we also have an effort to reach out to our
    community with our Community Outreach Program.
        So we're being very inclusive of everyone and we're being
    professional in that we're establishing business processes for
    everything that we do, we're measuring our success, we're
    holding people accountable and we're ensuring that our
    stakeholders are well informed of what we're doing all the way.

                    CPB deg.NEW CIVILIAN POSITIONS

        Senator Allard. The additional 30 civilian staff you have
    requested include four for the Office of Financial Management.
    Is this enough to stabilize this office and address completely
    the GAO recommendations and complete a full financial audit?
        Chief Morse. There was a study that was conducted on
    manpower within the Office of Financial Management and
    realizing some of the fiscal restraints we were being measured
    in our requests for four. I believe the actual number was eight
    that the process brought about, but we're working with four.
    But the way I feel about it is we need to get in there and make
    these corrections that need to be made in order to get a better
    assessment of where we are, so we want it to be very measured
    in asking for people for that area.
        Senator Allard. So four is going to get you started, but at
    some point in time you may have to have an additional four. Is
    what you're stating?
        Chief Morse. Well, there certainly could be a possibility
    that we could ask for more people. I would hope that we would
    be able to instill the internal controls that we need, make the
    changes and put the accountability there so that we get the
    most effective and efficient use of the people that we have.

     CPB deg.CIVILIAN POSITIONS IN OFFICE OF FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

        Senator Allard. How many people do we have in that office
    now?
        Chief Morse. The specific number--27.
        Senator Allard. In the Office of Financial Management you
    have 27?
        Chief Morse. Yes, sir.
        Senator Allard. So these four that come in--what will they
    be doing?
        Chief Morse. Let me just take a quick look and I can give
    you the breakdown. The request is for two in accounting and two
    in budget.
        Senator Allard. Is that going to be enough in that area for
    you to meet the GAO recommendations?
        Chief Morse. For the budget and accounting portion, yes.
    The additional four are in other areas of financial management
    but we saw these as the priorities to help us with the
    challenges that we currently have.

             CPB deg.MANAGING VISITORS TO THE U.S. CAPITOL

        Senator Landrieu. Let me follow up with just a couple of
    thoughts here. Getting back to the notion of making this
    building work for everybody that uses it, from Members to
    staff. I know lobbyists have a bad name but they actually do
    good work here by bringing issues to Members and representing
    our constituents. They are in and out of this building all the
    time.
        There are tour groups that come regularly and then there
    are the occasional tour group, the groups like Close-Up that
    every year bring thousands of young people because we see them
    in our offices. Before I was a Senator, I actually came up as a
    Close-Up student. So I look forward to meeting the Close-Up
    groups all the time. Then there are any number of other
    organizations.
        Just as an observer, as I'm moving around the Capitol
    complex, I notice particularly in the spring, the March/April,
    May, and June, the very long lines of people trying to get into
    the building. Are we making any plans or do we have any ideas
    about how we could sort in a better way, the visitors? Not to
    stratify them but to allow the people that are working staff
    professionals, to move a little more quickly. Obviously the
    students and the tourists who are not on direct assignment can
    move a little differently. Have we ever thought about that? Or
    is it just a matter of manpower? Mr. Gainer, do you want to
    take that, or Chief Morse?
        Mr. Gainer. Go ahead and start.
        Chief Morse. Well, I think with the CVC coming on board,
    there is a lot of effort and signage and people hired to give
    direction and move people. It is a centralized point of
    screening for us, which helps security but it's also a much
    easier access point than we find here in some of the buildings.
        We have very tight access points and spaces, which I think
    contribute to a lot of the slow down in processing. Certainly
    officers work very hard at processing people into the buildings
    and the technology we have is the best in the world. So I think
    there is probably more effort in signage and direction and
    perhaps even some changes in the locations that we bring people
    in.

                    SAA deg.VISITOR STRATIFICATION

        Senator Landrieu. Well, I just want to press this issue and
    I'll do this here and continue to work with you all on it. Have
    we developed a difference between a casual visitor and a
    business visitor? Yes or no?
        Mr. Gainer. Well, there have been discussions about
    stratification. Over the years, we've all discussed the fact
    that, on some days, it seems strange that we would give as much
    scrutiny to a person who has been employed here for 25 years as
    someone who might visit for 1 day. There were discussions about
    whether there would be a frequent visitor procedure, similar to
    that the FAA and TSA are using. But even as to staff, when you
    start thinking that staff can be treated one way and visitors
    another, we have a circumstance, not more than 1 week ago,
    where we had a gun being brought in by a staff member,
    inadvertent as it may have been. So it just makes everyone
    pause as to how different procedures for staff and visitors
    could work.
        Senator Landrieu. I agree and I'm not actually suggesting
    that because I don't agree that there should be different
    levels of security. But I'm suggesting that there might be
    different lines with similar security. Identical security
    required, but waiting in line for a casual visit for 45 minutes
    is not a problem for a Close-Up student. It is a major problem
    for a constituent that has a scheduled meeting with a Senator
    or a House Member, led by a mayor of whatever town, large or
    small or a meeting. People are having difficulty getting to
    their meetings. Now, not to say that students should be second
    class--please, don't anyone interpret what I'm saying and I am
    also not saying that there should be different levels of
    security. I think there should be very serious security.
        But as this visitor center opens, I'm going to work with
    Senator Allard and our other members to see if there is a way
    that we can make the work of the people more efficient. For
    everybody that has to wait in line 45 minutes, there is
    somebody else at the other end sitting and waiting for them.
    Schedules are getting mixed up all through the Capitol.

                       SAACPB deg.TUNNEL ACCESS

        The other question is, I understand that you used to be
    able to walk from under the House to the Senate and vice versa
    and that access has been closed off. Is that correct, the
    tunnel has been closed off?
        Chief Morse. That is correct. You cannot move from the
    House side to the Senate or vice versa.
        Mr. Gainer. Unless you have an appointment. If there is an
    appointment, there is a process, that if you are on one side
    and have an appointment on the other side, for the appointment
    desk, to verify that appointment and then let you pass through.
        Senator Landrieu. Okay, so if you do have an appointment,
    you can pass through the tunnel underneath the House and the
    Senate. Because again, I'm just sensitive to the constituents
    that huff and puff and pant into my office and they constantly
    say, ``Senator, I wish we could have been here but we were in
    line.'' Or, ``Senator, I wish we could have been here but we
    had to go a circuitous route to get to you.'' I just want to be
    very sensitive to them and of course, the people we serve.
        Let me just see if there are other questions and I'll turn
    it back to Senator Allard.

        SAACPB deg.COORDINATING WITH SURROUNDING LOCAL POLICE
                                  DEPARTMENTS

        Before I was the Chair of this subcommittee, I chaired the
    D.C. Subcommittee and also was Chair of the Emerging Threats
    Subcommittee on Armed Services and we did a lot of work before
    and after 9/11 to make sure that the Capitol complex and our
    security was coordinated with the D.C. Police, with the
    Maryland law enforcement and Virginia law enforcement in the
    event that there is a serious situation as did occur on 9/11.
    Evacuating hundreds of thousands of people from this core out
    takes a lot of cooperation in terms of the Metro, in terms of
    which way the highways are moving, et cetera. Could you all
    both just give me a brief update, about the ongoing efforts to
    be cooperative with the D.C. Police and the Maryland and
    Virginia police operations? Mr. Gainer, maybe we could start
    with you and then I'll talk with the Chief.
        Mr. Gainer. Thank you, Madam Chair. We certainly did learn
    our lessons after these incidents. While I was the Chief, one
    of the many things that was done was station a Metropolitan
    Police officer in the command center, in addition to the ring
    down phones and the constant communications. But that was the
    perspective 1 year ago, so Phil can tell us where we are today.
        Chief Morse. We're also--the Chiefs of Police in this area
    meet routinely once a month and also we have a telephone
    conferencing that we do, which has developed over time. We have
    those conferences when there is a threat that each one of us
    needs to know about. So there is a lot of coordination with the
    local law enforcement.
        One of the things, as you bring to our attention, is not
    only in the municipal area but also Maryland and Virginia. Our
    radio system, as far as communication is concerned--in an
    incident where we would have to evacuate the city or Capitol
    Hill, in a critical incident where we need the support of other
    law enforcement agencies, our radio system does not allow us
    the interoperability with them.
        Many of the State, local, and Federal law enforcement
    agencies have interoperable radio systems so one of my
    priorities is to modernize our radio system so that we can meet
    that expectation, especially in a critical incident, where we
    can coordinate our efforts.
        Senator Landrieu. Well, let me really strongly encourage
    you, having survived through Hurricanes Katrina and Rita and
    the total collapse of the communications system that existed
    during those natural disasters. Then, of course, we all went
    through the 9/11 experience here--that that is one of the
    absolute fundamental critical tools necessary to manage people
    fleeing in an orderly way that doesn't cause panic and more
    death and injury, et cetera.
        So I really want to encourage you all and I can say that
    Senator Allard and I will work with you every step of the way
    to try to press this interoperability. There are some extra
    monies being appropriated, as you know, in the other budgets. I
    know that there are serious needs around the country but I
    think we could successfully argue that starting at the Capitol
    for interoperability would be the highest priority for the
    Nation and for this region, to become as interoperable as
    possible as soon as possible. So those are the questions that I
    have. I'll turn it over to Senator Allard.

                     CPB deg.STAFFING AND OVERTIME

        Senator Allard. Thank you, Madam Chair. There are two other
    issue areas I want to cover, one on staffing and overtime and
    the other issue has to do with the Library of Congress. We'd
    like to get that resolved as quickly as possible.
        On staffing and overtime, I have been through the Capitol
    at various odd hours, on the weekend, sometimes in the middle
    of the night, at around 10 o'clock to 1 o'clock in the morning,
    I've been through the Capitol early in the morning on weekdays
    and sometimes late at night. I've been pretty pleased with the
    level of security.
        At one point in time, particularly right after 9/11, I
    think perhaps we had too many people standing around after
    hours but I understood the urgency of the situation at that
    time. So I think everything has generally operated pretty
    efficiently from what I can tell. I know that there are some
    entrances that we used to keep open almost all the time. We've
    closed those down.
        As a Member of Congress, I haven't found it particularly
    inconvenient. I think you've used good judgment in that, as
    long as we can figure out which gate to come in, we're okay. I
    look in the budget and I see overtime would increase 15 percent
    over last year's level and I'm trying to understand what's
    happening here that we have to increase overtime so much? What
    is driving that?
        Chief Morse. Well, the fiscal year 2008 overtime estimates
    were based on the last 2 fiscal years and what we actually
    spent. But with that comes some additions in 2008 that we just
    started experiencing here in 2007, are demonstrations. We have
    a convention in 2008 that will drive some overtime but what we
    are doing to ensure that we're getting the best bang for buck
    is we've educated our managers and we've made it a performance
    measure that they meet expectations that the Assistant Chief
    has set for them as far as internal controls and managing their
    overtime.
        The second part of that is the manpower study. We have to
    ensure that we use our people in the most efficient and
    effective manner and with this manpower study, they are looking
    at every single process and everything that we do as far as
    manpower is concerned. So we hope to be able to reduce that and
    find a balance here in the near future.
        But for 2008, our concerns are for the number of
    demonstrations, the increased workload of Congress and the
    conventions that are upcoming in 2008.
        Senator Allard. Is the Capitol Visitor Center driving that
    need for additional staff or have you already compensated for
    that?
        Chief Morse. We've already compensated for that in our
    initial estimates but as operations change, designs change,
    brings more people to do the job and if you don't get the
    people, then it drives overtime.
        Senator Allard. I'm not entirely satisfied with your
    response, particularly in light of the fact that we've already
    compensated for the CVC. Maybe we can sit down and go over
    that, have a meeting and see what you're looking at.
        Chief Morse. Sure.

               CPB deg.LIBRARY OF CONGRESS POLICE MERGER

        Senator Allard. On the Library of Congress, Dr. Billington
    has expressed concerns that the Library is not getting their
    vacancies filled. There are some 22 vacancies over there,
    apparently. We've been pushing to merge the Library of Congress
    security with the Capitol Police so that everybody is operating
    with the same standards and the same level of protection. Dr.
    Billington has expressed some concern about those vacancies.
    What's going on there?
        Chief Morse. Well, in regards to personnel, we met with the
    CAO of the Library approximately 2 weeks ago to come to a
    number because there have been many numbers out there and 17
    was the number.
        Senator Allard. So there are 17 vacancies?
        Chief Morse. That's correct. We have a recruit class, which
    is in field training right now and will complete that April 22
    and April 23, we will be sending 10 officers to the Library of
    Congress. That number was derived by looking at security
    campus-wide because we have not only a responsibility at the
    Library of Congress, we have a responsibility campus-wide. We
    have to ensure that load leveling was equal there and that we
    weren't sacrificing any security or manpower here.
        Senator Allard. Particularly with that tunnel that we're
    putting in there.
        Chief Morse. Yes. So there are some issues that have to be
    resolved. We're certainly trying to execute the will of
    Congress here. We've identified issues and we have put our
    recommendations into a decision paper for the Capitol Police
    Board to help us facilitate.
        Mr. Gainer. May I add, just recently, the Police Department
    did give the Board recommendations and the onus is on the
    Police Board now to take some action. We'll move on it very
    quickly. We have a series of things that we think needs to be
    done in order to expedite the closure of this long-term issue.
        Senator Allard. The Congress has spoken on this.
        Mr. Gainer. Yes, sir.
        Senator Allard. We want to have a unified security force
    and I think the sooner we can get this resolved, the better.
    I'd like to get it off our plate and I'm sure you'd like to get
    it off your plate.
        Mr. Gainer. Yes.
        Senator Allard. Now, do you see any major roadblocks in
    getting this finalized?
        Chief Morse. The Capitol Police support the merger in that
    we want to execute the will of Congress. So there will be
    challenges here. We've identified issues that need to be
    resolved. I don't think that they can't be resolved with people
    sitting down and discussing them but I think that they are
    critical and they need to be resolved to the satisfaction of
    Congress and certainly any liabilities to the Police
    Department, et cetera, have to be examined very closely.
        Senator Landrieu. If you don't mind, I may ask Senator
    Allard if he would, to facilitate that meeting. I intend to
    push on that legislation, to merge the Capitol Police with the
    Library of Congress Police. It was done last year but I don't
    think it passed completely through the process. So I think the
    Members of Congress feel like this is what we should do but we
    need to go ahead and try to bring that to closure this year and
    work out the details.

     SAA deg.UNITED STATES CAPITOL POLICE SALARY BUDGET INCREASES

        I have one more question and then I'm finished. I don't
    know if Senator Allard has anything else but I asked the staff
    to put in graphic form, the increase in the salaries of the
    Capitol Police and you can see, it's fairly dramatic when you
    look at it here. In 1998, the salary level looks to me on this
    graph to be about $70 million. Now we're up to $220 million in
    a relatively short period of time, from 1998 to 2007.
        Now, 9/11 happened here and the attack on the Capitol and
    we've had other incidents that are driving this. There has been
    an increase of the need for security in all of Washington, DC,
    so I'm sure that's been a factor in driving up salaries, et
    cetera.
        But Mr. Gainer, would you comment on your perspective of
    this increase and then Chief Morse, about how this is fairly
    significant? What are we starting our officers or what is our
    current salary range for them? And why or how would you justify
    this increase? I realize you all weren't in charge in all these
    years but as you can see, this salary for officers is from $70
    million to $220 million in just a few years.
        Mr. Gainer. If I may, I would like to address that as the
    one who was in charge over these past 5 years. To the extent
    that Chief Morse and his Deputy inherited a Department that is
    not perfect yet, I take responsibility. We tried to lay the
    foundation but the cracks in that foundation happened under my
    watch and I think Chief Morse and his Deputy will be better
    Chiefs, and I applaud them.
        But the ultimate accountability is mine. The numbers grew
    under my watch, with the work of the Congress because of the
    expanding mission requirement. The individual salaries have
    been driven because competition is unbelievably tough in this
    area between these multiple jurisdictions, to attract these
    individuals. So we have faired better than almost any police
    agency to hire highly qualified people. So that goes to the
    size of their salary, and, I think during the 4 years that I
    was there, we added nearly 400 officers for the different
    missions. It is mission driven. When we get back to that
    question, how do we secure it and keep it open and make it
    convenient for everybody, it is personnel driven.

    SAA deg.COMPARISON OF UNITED STATES CAPITOL POLICE SALARIES TO
                              LOCAL JURISDICTIONS

        Senator Landrieu. Well, could you just submit for the
    record and I don't know, Chief, if it would be better for you
    or for Mr. Gainer, to submit the regional salary levels. I'd
    just like to know. I think this subcommittee would like to
    know, what the State police in Virginia are making? What are
    the State police in Maryland making? What the local police
    officers here that you're competing with are making so we can
    review. I'm sure your Board does that but I personally would be
    interested in that information if you'd submit it to the
    subcommittee.
        Mr. Gainer. Yes, ma'am.
        [The information follows:]
      Comparison of Starting Salaries Between USCP and Local Jurisdictions
        The Department continues to be a model employer and a competitive
    leader in the law enforcement employment market when it comes to
    starting salaries for new recruit officers as well as pay at most
    levels. During the past year, the Office of Human Resources has worked
    with other Federal, state and local government entities in several
    compensation symposiums for market pay analysis. During these
    semiannual meetings, human resources personnel compare job titles and
    duties, entry-level and journey-level pay averages, and share
    information on recruiting trends and separation statistics. Many of
    these local entities are required from their governing authorities/
    boards to obtain data, to the extent possible, from USCP when
    determining their pay recommendations. The entities that the Department
    routinely works with are Fairfax County, Loudoun County, Prince
    George's County, Metropolitan Police Department of Washington DC,
    Montgomery County, and others within the Washington DC Metropolitan
    area. The Office of Personnel Management lists the USCP in its 2004
    study of law enforcement officer (LEO) pay and benefits as having the
    highest starting salary of all Federal law enforcement entities. It is
    important to note that 2 Federal organizations, the Library of Congress
    and the U.S. Supreme Court are required in statute to follow USCP pay
    determinations and as such pay their law enforcement positions
    equivalently.
        In 2006, the USCP matched its entry level officer positions with
    those of other local law enforcement jurisdictions as positions that
    patrol assigned areas, enforce security and protection, assess threat
    environments, investigate a variety of criminal offenses involving
    crimes against property, participate in investigations of crimes
    against persons, etc. Positions at USCP require a high school degree or
    equivalent and completion of police recruit training. The data
    highlighted in the chart is the result of the Department's
    participation in local market survey analysis as administered by
    Fairfax County for 2006.

          SURVEY OF ENTRY LEVEL COMPENSATION FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT IN THE WASHINGTON, DC METROPOLITAN AREA
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                             No. in
         Police Organization           Position Match 2006        Min        Mid        Max      Average     Survey
                                                                                                  Actual      Pool
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Alexandria...................  Police Officer I..........       43.0       57.1       71.1       45.1         89
    Arlington....................  Police Officer I..........       44.6       59.2       73.8       46.8         58
    Capitol Police...............  Private-Priv w/Training-         48.4       67.8       87.1       51.0         99
                                    PFC.
    District of Columbia.........  Police Recruit............       46.4       57.5       68.5  .........  .........
    Loudoun......................  Deputy I (Field/Civil            40.3       52.4       64.5       47.7         54
                                    Process/Community
                                    Policing).
    Montgomery...................  Police Officer I..........       41.6       55.7       69.7       44.5        115
    Prince George's..............  Police Officer............       44.1       52.6       61.1       46.0        442
    Prince William...............  Police Officer I..........       39.3       51.1       62.9       41.4         80
    Fairfax County...............  O-17-2....................       44.4       58.4       72.4       52.1        253
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

        USCP competes in various labor markets with state and local
    governments for individuals with law enforcement skills. As a result of
    the September 2001 terrorist attacks, the Department and its
    stakeholders were most concerned about its ability to recruit and
    retain high-quality personnel for its LEO positions. Central to those
    concerns was the level of pay the Department was compensating its
    officers as compared to those of other Federal LEO positions, as well
    as state and local government positions. The Department was provided
    with authority and funding to increase the base pay structure of all
    law enforcement positions sufficient to recruit a significant number of
    new officers, as well as retain more seasoned officers to ensure
    institutional knowledge and experience needed to address Congressional
    concerns for an enhanced security and protection environment. The
    decision to increase the USCP pay structure placed USCP on average 4
    percent above the market in which it competes.
        An important factor to consider in comparing the compensation of
    USCP law enforcement personnel with state and local entities is the
    extent to which other compensation factors into total compensation. For
    example, Montgomery County, as others, compensates new officers for
    Assignment Pay Differentials such as Hazardous Materials, Language Pay,
    etc. While USCP received authority and has implemented its Specialty
    Pay Program, it is typically not for new recruit officers.
        In addition, USCP law enforcement positions that earn compensation
    for overtime work do so without the earnings being contributed to their
    retirement or 401K savings programs. Depending on authorities for other
    Federal, state and local government organizations, individuals working
    overtime can receive credit for retirement and 401K benefits. One
    significant difference in the payment of premium pay (non base pay) for
    USCP personnel as compared to state and local government is the
    limitation on the accumulation of differentials. USCP personnel are
    capped on the total amount of premium pay differentials earned on a bi-
    weekly basis. While the USCP has the highest biweekly limitation on
    premium pay for its non-exempt sworn workforce compared to Federal
    organizations, state and local governments typically do not limit the
    accumulation of differential pay, just the limitation on aggregate pay.
        Much work has been accomplished in reviewing compensation in the
    Federal and state and local government law enforcement community. Most
    recently, in August 2005, the Congressional Budget Office published its
    report, ``Comparing the Pay of Federal and Nonfederal Law Enforcement
    Officers,'' which describes the competitive environment for recruiting
    and retaining law enforcement officers. USCP has used this report to
    remain pay competitive in terms of looking at the total compensation
    package. Statistically, the critical period for USCP to achieve a
    return on recruiting and training investment for new recruit officers
    is after the first 3 years. The progression of pay during the first 3-5
    years is critical to the retention of a deployable workforce. Upon
    promotion from Private, Private with Training and Private First Class
    (typically after 30 months), individuals are limited in seeking other
    employment as their salary in the grade is significantly higher than
    most Federal and state and local governments and to leave USCP service
    would typically result in a decrease in pay and law enforcement service
    credit. Service under USCP as a law enforcement officer is not
    creditable service under other Federal LEO retirement systems. In order
    for an LEO to leave USCP for other Federal service, he/she would have
    to start over their retirement service credit.
        USCP recognizes that other law enforcement entities deploy
    attractive recruitment strategies designed to capture high quality and
    Federally trained (at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center)
    individuals. The Department has not experienced a significant increase
    in attrition such that it would require the department to offer
    recruitment bonuses. While USCP has had several individuals leave USCP
    service for other Federal, state and local government employment; their
    responses on exit surveys indicate that compensation was not a
    significant factor in their decision to leave the Department, but
    rather individuals indicated their decisions to leave were for personal
    and/or professional reasons.
        Although USCP starting salary and benefits are competitive with
    local agencies, the potential for ``moonlighting'' (outside security
    officer employment) and other benefits offered by local law enforcement
    agencies might also factor into the equation and equalize the
    difference in compensation. Educational benefits and recruiting/
    retention bonuses offered by local, state and some Federal law
    enforcement agencies, may also prove to be a better draw for LEOs than
    the initial higher salary rate. Also, the USCP may not be as
    competitive with uniformed services in other federal law enforcement
    agencies. The Department competes strongly with the Transportation
    Security Administration and U.S. Secret Service under the Department of
    Homeland Security that offer a career ladder for higher paying
    investigative and LEO positions. In some circumstances, these agencies
    are able to offer opportunities for advancement and relocation. This
    career potential may outweigh the higher beginning salary for recruits
    who are planning their careers more long term.
        Another factor to consider in measuring salary competitiveness in
    the Federal arena is that many Federal criminal investigators and other
    LEOs regularly receive a 25 percent supplement for overtime work--
    either administratively uncontrollable overtime (AUO) pay or law
    enforcement availability pay. While this supplement is a stable
    addition to salary, it is appropriately not included in salary
    comparisons, which compare non-overtime salary rates. Providing a
    virtually guaranteed 25 percent supplement gives the Federal Government
    a competitive advantage over USCP who does not guarantee such an
    overtime supplement.
        USCP believes most job seekers give great weight to the total
    regular pay they would receive in a job, since it is that total pay
    that determines their standard of living. While the value of AUO pay
    and availability pay may not be as great as the overtime rates paid by
    non-Federal employers on an hourly basis, those supplements are highly
    valued as stable additions to salary. Furthermore, since the AUO pay
    and availability pay received by non-USCP LEOs is creditable as basic
    pay in determining retirement and certain other benefits, the value of
    these payments is even greater. For example, an availability pay
    recipient will receive a defined benefit pension that is 25 percent
    higher than another employee at the same salary level. Also, Thrift
    Savings Plan holdings will be proportionally larger as an availability
    pay recipient is entitled to a larger Government match than another
    employee at the same salary level.
        When establishing recruiting and compensation strategies for the
    Department, USCP strives to remain competitive given the unique
    security and protection environment our employees serve. It is
    important that our recruiting and pay systems reflect the significant
    mission and objectives that are fundamental to the principles of the
    Department.

        Senator Landrieu. Senator Allard?
        Senator Allard. Well, just one additional comment in that
    regard. I've been told that we're the highest paid police force
    in the country. I'd like to look at those figures, in
    comparison to other police forces.
        Mr. Gainer. Yes, sir. Thank you.

                         ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

        Senator Landrieu. Any additional questions from Members
    will be submitted to you for response in the record.
        [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 Wayne Allard
                                 sworn staffing
        Question. USCP's Manpower Management Task Force conducted an
    internal manpower study. The goal of that study was to develop a
    staffing plan for efficiently managing and allocating resources based
    on threat. This study was completed a couple of months ago.
        How is USCP using the results that study?
        To what extent is the contractor using the results of the internal
    manpower study?
        What recommendations were made in the study regarding allocating
    resources based on the threat?
        Does USCP plan to implement the recommendations from this study? If
    not, what is USCP's reason(s) for not implementing them?
        USCP hired a contractor (Enlightened Leadership Solutions) to
    conduct a manpower study of USCP's sworn staff. How will USCP ensure
    that it will receive useful results from this study, and how will this
    study enable USCP to develop and implement the congressionally mandated
    strategic workforce plan?
        Answer. A high level review of the task force report has been
    accomplished by the USCP and appropriate recommendations provided to
    ELS for consideration in the overall manpower study. Other
    recommendations have been implemented based on our threat assessment
    and operational needs. The Department is working, with close support
    from ELS, to ensure that the broader recommendations of the task force
    report are considered. Senior management receives regular updates from
    ELS and provides course corrections as necessary to ensure useful
    results are obtained from the study. ELS will deliver a staffing
    formula for sworn officers based on our current and proposed concept of
    operations, which is based on the threat matrix. In effect, the USCP
    implements a force development process that utilizes the threat
    assessment to define the needs of the Concept of Operations in order to
    make resource decisions. The ELS study will also help to provide a
    methodology for the USCP to make future manpower requirement decisions
    and lend credible foundation for its manpower levels. This study
    addresses the guidance we have received in our close working
    relationship with GAO. This process will also lead to the eventual
    development of the strategic workforce plan, as mandated by Congress.
    This process will also lead to the development of future training
    plans, technology investment plans and other operational and support
    decisions.
                              financial management
        Question. Will USCP be able to prepare a fiscal year 2006 balance
    sheet with complete and accurate asset and inventory balances that will
    pass an audit?
        Answer. For fiscal year 2006, USCP will be generating a SBR, and
    for the first time, a draft Balance Sheet utilizing Generally Accepted
    Accounting Principles applicable to federal entities. USCP will
    generate a full set of financial statements for fiscal year 2007, with
    the completion of the inventory process.
        The USCP had planned to prepare a full-set of draft financial
    statements at the conclusion of fiscal year 2006; however the
    completion of the USCP inventory, which was required to validate asset
    balances, was delayed to April 2007. The USCP has prepared a draft
    Balance Sheet for 2006, but does not expect that the independent
    auditor will be able to validate all asset balances and would not
    expect a ``clean'' opinion on the Balance Sheet for fiscal year 2006.
        Question. When was the physical inventory count originally
    scheduled to be completed? How far behind schedule is this effort? What
    is the current estimated completion date? Will the inventory count be
    completed in time for the data to be included in the financial
    statements for fiscal year 2006? If not, why?
        Answer. In the statement of work, the physical inventory count, to
    include the actual count of assets owned by USCP and the valuation of
    these assets, had a projected completion date by March 31, 2007. Since
    that time, the contractor requested a thirty-day extension at no
    additional cost to ensure that they have adequate time to provide
    accurate data.
        Currently, this effort is on schedule (including the thirty-day
    extension) and baring any unforeseen circumstances, will be completed
    by April 30, 2007. Once the contractor has presented all data, there
    are additional steps needed to complete the reconciliation. These steps
    include the review and acceptance, by the independent auditors, of the
    valuation of the USCP assets, researching and identifying the
    documentation that supports the valuation of each asset and final
    reconciliation with the financial statements presented by the Office of
    Financial Management. The current estimated completion date for the
    physical inventory count, to include the valuation of all assets done
    by the contractor, is estimated to be completed on April 30, 2007. This
    does not include the review and acceptance of the data by the
    independent auditors.
        The inventory count will not be completed in time to be included in
    the fiscal year 2006 financial statements. At the conclusion of the
    count, USCP estimates approximately three million assets and
    consumables that will be identified as a result of the count. Once that
    information has been reviewed and approved, the formal validation and
    documentation of the inventory will be conducted. This work will not be
    completed in time for the fiscal year 2006 audit.
        Question. What issues has USCP encountered as a result of efforts
    to complete a first-time agencywide inventory effort? Was the agency
    prepared to take on such a monumental task at the same time while
    implementing other agency wide initiatives (internal control program,
    implementation of new asset management system, etc.)
        Answer. We have discovered through the inventory process that USCP
    has a wide array of assets distributed throughout multiple locations.
    Locating and identifying ownership of these assets has been a much
    bigger challenge than originally anticipated.
        The process was unexpectedly slowed by having to coordinate with
    the inventory contractor, the independent auditors and USCP property
    custodians within each division to ensure that all assets were being
    properly identified and captured.
        Many of these assets are constantly in use. Although legacy systems
    still remain to keep track of assets until collected data is uploaded
    into the Maximo database, there still remains a challenge.
    Specifically, that the movement of assets could possibly be overlooked;
    thus, compromising the effort of the count. Until the final transition,
    this will continue to be followed closely to mitigate issues.
        Completion of the physical inventory is an integral step in
    producing a Department balance sheet, as recommended by Congress and
    GAO. Completion of a balance sheet is a priority for the USCP and is
    part of the Department's fiscal year 2007 business plan. In addition,
    Senate Report 109-267 directed the USCP to prepare a plan to move to a
    full-scope financial audit for fiscal year 2007. Although the language
    was not included in the final fiscal year 2007 appropriation for the
    USCP, the Department took the direction very seriously. Considering the
    time required to complete such an inventory, it was prudent to begin
    procuring contract support for this task in fiscal year 2006. The
    contract was awarded on September 30, 2006. The inventory project began
    on Monday, October 30, 2006, and proceeded forward as scheduled. As of
    Friday, March 16, 2007, the inventory project has completed 75 percent
    of USCP sites, with all data loaded into the asset management system.
        Once the contractor has presented all data, there are additional
    steps needed to complete the reconciliation. These steps include the
    review and acceptance, by the independent auditors, of the valuation of
    the USCP assets, researching and identifying documentation that
    supports the valuation of each asset and final reconciliation with the
    information maintained by the Office of Financial Management.
        This project represents a cross-cutting working coordination
    between Property and Asset Management Division, the Office of
    Logistics, the Office of Financial Management, the Office of
    Information Systems, the Office of the Inspector General, and the
    auditing firm of Cotton and Company. We project that, without any
    unforeseen issues in the future, this project will be completed to the
    fulfillment of the Senate direction.
        Question. What are your plans to assess the effectiveness and
    validity of Momentum's processing within the unique environment at
    USCP? For instance, whether the electronic controls in place are
    performing as intended and ensuring the operating effectiveness of the
    USCP system and internal control environment?
        Answer. The external auditors have not yet completed their
    assessment of Momentum automated controls to provide assurance the
    system is working efficiently and effectively. This assurance is
    expected with the completion of the financial statement audit that is
    currently on-going.
        Per the GAO report, the auditors acknowledged that the controls
    might be better with the implementation of Momentum.
        The USCP has also performed several Momentum reviews as part of its
    internal control Program. These reviews provide assurance that the
    system is working as designed and that proper segregation of duties and
    compensating controls exist. GAO did not review these internal reviews.
        The USCP will continue to work with GAO and the auditors to ensure
    Momentum operates as efficiently as possible.
        USCP will continue to make Momentum controls a top priority as the
    Department moves forward with its Internal Control Program.
        Question. We understand that you recently conducted a user
    satisfaction survey (customer survey). What are some of the actual
    concerns highlighted by Momentum users? Going forward, how do you plan
    to address those concerns?
        Answer. The USCP implemented the Momentum financial management
    system in a 12-month period, with few technical implementation issues.
        However, with any significant change in business processes, change
    management and effective communications with users of the system are
    critical.
        Prior to the implementation of Momentum, the USCP operated under a
    paper-intensive workflow process that required no system input from
    most of USCP's administrative staff.
        Momentum introduced cutting-edge technology that required users,
    who had never interfaced with a financial management system to enter
    data, scan documents and provide approval paths for transactions, as
    well as, verify funds availability within an automated system. This
    proved to be the biggest challenge to the system implementation.
        In order to address these issues, the USCP made a significant
    investment in training to ensure all users had/have the skill sets
    required to operate this new technology. We offered a cadre of 21
    courses to all users of the system covering the basics of data entry
    and approval processes prior to implementation, refresher courses after
    implementation as well as segments on procurement policy and processes,
    a 2 day course on appropriations law, and a 2 day course on internal
    controls to ensure that staff had the necessary tools to process
    transactions appropriately in the system and within the confines of our
    appropriation and applicable law.
        Momentum provides customer access to real-time enhanced reporting
    and access to data (including real-time budget updates) for users at
    all levels of the organization via online queries, reporting and
    accessibility to data.
        Momentum supports such internal control principles as segregation
    of duties and delegation of authority. USCP has strengthened internal
    controls with the use of automated workflow and on-line approvals. This
    best business practice has dramatically improved controls, has enabled
    better management and tracking of our procurement processes and allowed
    for better requisition tracking and has significantly reduced the
    paper-intensive processes of the past while improving efficiency.
        USCP has now been operating successfully with Momentum for over 17
    months. This is the same software utilized at over 80 federal agencies,
    including several legislative branch agencies.
        Inherent with any commercial off-the-shelf package, software issues
    arise. USCP prioritizes and tracks open issues with the software owner
    to ensure issues are fixed timely.
        Recent surveys of Momentum users completed by USCP indicate that
    the vast majority of system users indicate that they understand and are
    able to complete their financial management responsibilities with the
    Momentum system.
        Question. USCP developed a 2-year plan to implement a first-ever
    agencywide internal control program. Is USCP on target with its phased-
    approach? What are some of the expected and unexpected issues that USCP
    has encountered?
        Answer. The Department is on target. According to GAO, USCP has
    taken some strong first steps. These steps include providing training
    to a significant number of leaders and managers, developing a Control
    Environment Assessment, developing a plan/schedule for conducting
    assessments, engaging an Internal Control Working Group and Review
    Board in an on-going evaluation of how to improve the process--linking
    it to other management improvement efforts, and integrating the work
    into the Business Planning System. This year, we will be spreading the
    internal controls program throughout the Department, and one of the
    most important ways we are facilitating that is by incorporating
    internal controls analysis into the work of the Manpower Study Project.
    In addition, the USCP participates in the Legislative Branch Financial
    Managers Council internal controls group to learn and share internal
    control methodologies with other Legislative Branch agencies.
        Following GAO's lead, we used an organizational development
    approach to implement an internal controls program. This approach
    (using team leadership, integrating this program with an ongoing
    management improvement program) helped us overcome the expected issues
    related to building ownership, commitment, and changing the
    organizational culture to see internal controls as a tool for
    application, daily.
        Accomplishing such a major change in business process without the
    funding normally attached for maximizing return on investment was an
    unexpected issue. The risk for sub-optimizing such a key investment
    will be greater in the out-years and so we will ensure that the ELS
    Manpower Study accurately captures the degree of time and expertise
    required to sustain the progress in decreasing vulnerabilities.

                              SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS

        Senator Landrieu. If there are no further questions, this
    subcommittee will stand in recess until April 13 when we'll
    meet to take testimony on the fiscal year 2008 budget request
    for the Secretary of the Senate and the Library of Congress.
        [Whereupon, at 11:22 a.m., Friday, March 30, the
    subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of
    the Chair.]

             LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008

                                  ----------

                             THURSDAY, MAY 3, 2007

                                           U.S. Senate,
               Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The subcommittee met at 10:05 a.m., in room SD-124, Dirksen
    Senate Office Building, Hon. Mary L. Landrieu (chairman)
    presiding.
        Present: Senators Landrieu and Allard.

                                  U.S. SENATE

                            Office of the Secretary

    STATEMENT OF HON. NANCY ERICKSON, SECRETARY OF THE
                SENATE
    ACCOMPANIED BY:
            SHEILA DWYER, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE SENATE
            CHRIS DOBY, FINANCIAL CLERK

                     STATEMENT OF SENATOR MARY L. LANDRIEU

        Senator Landrieu. Good morning. The subcommittee will come
    to order.
        This morning we meet to take testimony on the fiscal year
    2008 budget request for the Secretary of the Senate and the
    Library of Congress (LOC). Nancy Erickson is with us this
    morning, and the Librarian of Congress, Dr. Billington.
        This is our fourth and final hearing of the 2008 budget
    process. I am joined this morning by my ranking member, Senator
    Allard, and I understand that Senator Alexander may join us
    this morning.
        We have two separate panels today. First, the Secretary of
    the Senate, and I understand she may be joined by Sheila Dwyer,
    the Assistant Secretary and the Financial Clerk of the Senate,
    Chris Doby.
        Mr. Doby, while we're on the subject of your shop and the
    Disbursing Office, I asked my office manager if she could give
    me a list of some of the people from the Disbursing Office
    who've been helpful. She gave me a list too long to read this
    morning, so I'm going to just submit it for the record and
    thank you very much for the help of your wonderful staff. We
    really appreciate it.
        [The information follows:]

        Chris Doby, Financial Clerk, Tim O'Keefe, Margaret Fibel,
    Neil Elliott, Gerry Thrasher, Melissa Stewart, Paul Jochum,
    LaKisha Haggerty, Ivan Shnider, Bob Millett, Kim Cone,
    Ileanexis Deese, Ted Ruckner, Sean Malloy, Debbie Shnider, Gene
    Barton, Linda Sothern, Martin Tanabe, Donna Nance, Rachel
    Morris, Monica Billups, Cathy Strodel, Lauren Bliss, Dianna
    Gilkerson, and Cynthia Handwork.

        Senator Landrieu. I also want to thank all of your other
    employees. Nancy, I think this is the first time you've
    testified before this subcommittee as the Secretary. We're
    pleased to have you this morning. We'll look forward to hearing
    the details of your budget, which totals $25.5 million. This is
    an increase of $2.5 million, or 11 percent above the current
    year. So, we hope that you're prepared to justify the request
    that you have submitted to us, because while it's not
    exorbitant, it is higher than inflation and we look forward to
    hearing from you about that.
        I'd like to turn now to Senator Allard for his opening
    remarks.

                       STATEMENT OF SENATOR WAYNE ALLARD

        Senator Allard. Thank you, Madam Chairman. I'd like to put
    my full statement in the record and proceed to the testimony
    from the witnesses.
        I'd like to personally welcome Secretary of the Senate,
    Nancy Erickson, thank you for being here, and also, Dr.
    Billington.
        I will have a few questions on the Government Performance
    and Results Act (GPRA) as a result of the inspector general
    study on performance-based budgeting at the Library, and maybe
    another question or two on the Library.
        Madam Chairman, that's all I have. Just put my full
    statement in the record if you would please.
        Senator Landrieu. Without objection.
        [The statement follows:]

                   Prepared Statement of Senator Wayne Allard

        Thank you, Madam Chairman. Welcome Secretary of the Senate
    Nancy Erickson, Assistant Secretary Sheila Dwyer, Senate
    Financial Clerk Chris Doby, and their very able team.
        Also, good morning to Librarian of Congress Dr. James
    Billington and Chief Operating Office Jo Ann Jenkins.
    Congratulations, Ms. Jenkins, on your appointment as the
    Library's ``number 2,'' a well-earned appointment. I also note
    the presence of the Library's top team and welcome them all
    today.
        Madam Chairman, I have a number of concerns about the
    Library's request, when we get to the second panel. In
    particular, while some improvements have been made by the
    Library to come into compliance with the spirit and intent of
    the Government Performance and Results Act, the Library's
    Inspector General has found resistance within the Library to
    improvements in their budget process.
        We absolutely must ensure that the Library has a solid
    performance-based budget. According to the IG's report,
    ``Performance-based budgeting enables policy makers to
    determine if programs are contributing to their stated goals,
    coordinating efforts with related initiatives elsewhere,
    targeting those most in need of agency services, achieving
    desired outcomes, and experiencing cost-beneficial results. The
    success of performance-based budgeting can be measured by the
    quality of the decision-making process, the transparency of
    decision-making information, and the meaningfulness of the
    information to key stakeholders.''
        Madam Chairman, I will focus some of my questions on this
    issue when we turn to questions.

        Senator Landrieu. Please proceed.
        Ms. Erickson. Thank you, Chairman Landrieu and Senator
    Allard, for this opportunity to testify today before your
    subcommittee on behalf of the Office of the Secretary and its
    employees. I ask that my full statement, including our
    department reports, be submitted for the record.
        With me today is Sheila Dwyer, the Assistant Secretary, and
    Chris Doby, our Financial Clerk, who I know has worked closely
    with your subcommittee staff over the years. I'm also joined
    today by many of our department heads.
        Before turning to my formal remarks, I want to take a
    moment to publicly thank my predecessor, Emily Reynolds, and
    her Assistant Secretary, Mary Suit Jones, for their assistance
    during my transition. Their graciousness has been a testament
    to the strength of the traditions in the Office of the
    Secretary.

                                 BUDGET REQUEST

        Our budget request for fiscal year 2008 is $25.5 million,
    of which $23.5 million is salary costs, and $2 million is
    operating costs. This increase from fiscal year 2007 of $2.446
    million is comprised totally of cost-of-living and merit
    increases, so that we can continue to attract and retain the
    caliber of people the Senate deserves for its operations.
    Notably, our request also factors in necessary funding for the
    implementation and maintenance of the electronic supporting
    systems in the Office of Public Records.
        If enacted this year, Senate bill 1, the Ethics Reform
    bill, and Senate bill 223, a bill that would require electronic
    filing of Federal Election Campaign documents, will
    significantly increase the volume of reports filed with the
    Office of the Secretary.
        Prior to taking the oath of office on January 4, many
    people shared with me their high regard for the staff who work
    for the Office of the Secretary. Their unsolicited comments
    were a real tribute to the men and women who work in our 26
    departments. After serving 4 months as Secretary of the Senate,
    I can attest to the wealth of institutional knowledge and their
    pride in serving the Senate every day. It is indeed a privilege
    to work with this talented group of people.
        Since 1789, the Office of the Secretary has traditionally
    provided support for the Senate in three areas: legislative,
    administrative, and financial. And, today I'd like to share
    some of our staff's accomplishments in each area.

                             LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT

        The state of our Legislative Department, the people who
    support the Chamber's legislative functions, is strong. Our
    legislative positions are fully staffed with a healthy mix of
    experienced veterans and newer staff, each of whom have a good
    amount of experience. Our legislative offices operate with an
    emphasis on teaching, passing on institutional knowledge, and a
    real concern for succession planning. Today, we employ much
    more crosstraining than in the past. We work closely with our
    partners in the Sergeant at Arms Office to practice our
    continuity of operations planning to ensure that we can support
    the Chamber under any circumstance.
        Our legislative staff work with the Sergeant at Arms on
    ATS, to improve the online amendment tracking system. Now,
    Senate staff have access to not only offered amendments, but
    also submitted amendments. The feedback from the Senate
    community has been extremely positive.

                                PARLIAMENTARIAN

        I'm pleased to report today that the Office of the
    Parliamentarian intends to complete, by the end of this
    Congress, a supplement to the Senate precedents. This will be
    an enormous undertaking, but will be a valuable resource for
    Members and their legislative staff.

                                    CURATOR

        With regard to administrative responsibility, the Senate
    Curator's staff recently organized the Senate Commission on
    Art's unveiling ceremony in the old Senate Chamber for Senator
    Dole's leadership portrait, which was attended by many of
    Senator Dole's former colleagues. We also celebrated the
    completion of the mural commemorating the Connecticut
    Compromise in an unveiling ceremony in the Senate reception
    room, where we were honored by Senator Byrd's keynote remarks.
    The Senate Commission on Art anticipates an unveiling ceremony
    later this fall for Senator Daschle's leadership portrait.
        Educating the public about the Senate's arts and historic
    furnishings collection is a priority. This past year, the
    Curator's staff, working with our Senate webmaster, worked
    together to launch several interactive exhibits on Senate.gov.

                                SENATE HISTORIAN

        With respect to publications, our Senate historian authored
    a wonderful book entitled, ``200 Notable Days,'' which
    highlights 200 colorful short stories about significant events
    in the Senate's 218-year history. Just in time for new Member
    orientation, the Senate Historical Office, with the assistance
    of our Printing and Documents Department, published a ``New
    Member's Guide to Traditions of the United States Senate''.
        During my first visit in January to the Senate Library, I
    had the pleasure of meeting a staff member who, single-
    handedly, completed a 13-year project cataloging all of the
    Senate's hearings dating back to 1889, an impressive
    accomplishment, which provides legislative staff with online
    access to the library's collection of over 36,000 Senate
    hearings.
        Senator Landrieu. Is that employee here in the room?
        Could you stand up please? And we'll give you a round of
    applause.
        Ms. Erickson. In addition to managing a collection that
    dates back from the Continental Congress, the library staff has
    witnessed a 90-percent increase in information inquiries. The
    library is significantly expanding the use of web technology to
    meet the Senate's growing demand for accurate and timely
    information. As the Senate's purveyor of information, our
    Senate website, Senate.gov, received 70 million visits last
    year, 20 million more than the previous year.

                                STATIONERY ROOM

        Unlike the first Secretary of the Senate, Samuel Otis, we
    do not provide quill pens anymore, but the Keeper of the
    Stationery sells pre-flown flags. Last year's pilot program was
    a success, and the program is now available to all Senate
    offices. It allows Senate offices to fulfill constituent
    requests for flags that have flown over the Capitol in a time-
    sensitive manner.
        We also appreciate the funding your subcommittee provided
    us to complete the point-of-sale project in our Stationery
    Room. The project modernized our 20-year-old computer system.
    And, I'm pleased to report today that it was completed under
    budget and ahead of schedule. We hope the system will allow us
    to offer e-commerce options in Senate offices.

                               DISBURSING OFFICE

        With respect to our financial duties, the Senate Disbursing
    Office processes payroll for the nearly 6,500 people on the
    Senate payroll every 2 weeks. In addition, it administers
    health insurance, life insurance, and retirement programs for
    Members and their staff. The office processed 158,000 vouchers
    last year. The Disbursing Office also provided transition
    assistance to staff who chose retirement or whose employment
    was affected by the November elections.
        Finally, our web-based financial management information
    system, known as FMIS, was upgraded to allow offices to better
    track cash and travel advances to make it easier for staff to
    prepare travel expense reports. We will continue our effort to
    improve FMIS, including the goal of implementing a paperless
    voucher system.

                               PREPARED STATEMENT

        I look forward to working with you and your staff in the
    coming year and I appreciate your support for the Office of the
    Secretary. I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have.
        [The statement follows:]
                      Prepared Statement of Nancy Erickson
        Madam Chairwoman, Senator Allard, 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 2008.
        It is a pleasure to have this opportunity to draw attention to the
    accomplishments of the dedicated and outstanding employees of the
    Office of the Secretary. The annual reports which follow provide
    detailed information about the work of the 26 departments of the
    office, their recent achievements, and their plans for the upcoming
    fiscal year.
        My statement includes: Presenting the fiscal year 2008 budget
    request; implementing mandated systems, financial management
    information system (FMIS) and legislative information system (LIS);
    continuity of operations planning; and maintaining and improving
    current and historic legislative, financial and administrative
    services.
                 presenting the fiscal year 2008 budget request
        I am requesting a total fiscal year 2008 budget of $25,500,000. The
    request includes $23,500,000 in salary costs and $2,000,000 for the
    operating budget of the Office of the Secretary. The salary budget
    represents an increase of $2,446,000 over the fiscal year 2007
    Continuing Resolution funds, which were held at fiscal year 2006
    levels. The increase is a result of the costs associated with annual
    salaries and merit increases in fiscal year 2007 not previously funded
    ($1,112,000), the costs associated with the annual Cost of Living
    Adjustment for fiscal year 2008 ($650,000), and funding for merit
    increases and other staffing ($684,000). The operating budget
    represents an increase of $20,000 from fiscal year 2007.
        The net effect of my total budget request for 2008 is an increase
    of $2,466,000. Our request is consistent with the amounts requested and
    received in recent years through the Legislative Branch Appropriations
    process, aside from last fiscal year when funding as a result of the
    Continuing Resolution was held to the previous year's level. 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
                                  Items                                 fiscal year      estimates      Difference
                                                                       2007, Public     fiscal year
                                                                         Law 110-5         2008
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Departmental operating budget:
        Executive office............................................        $630,000        $550,000        -$80,000
        Administrative services.....................................      $1,290,000      $1,390,000       +$100,000
        Legislative services........................................         $60,000         $60,000  ..............
                                                                     -----------------------------------------------
          Total operating budget....................................      $1,980,000      $2,000,000        +$20,000
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                         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 140 Senate offices. Consistent with our five year
    strategic plan, the Disbursing Office continues to modernize processes
    and applications to meet the continued demand by Senate offices for
    efficiency, accountability and ease of use. Our goals are to move to an
    integrated, paperless voucher system, improve the Web FMIS system, and
    make payroll and accounting system improvements.
        During fiscal year 2006 and the first half of fiscal year 2007,
    specific progress made on the FMIS project included:
      --Web FMIS was upgraded twice, once in January 2006 and again in
            December 2006. This system is used by office managers and
            committee clerks to create vouchers and manage office funds, by
            the Disbursing Office to review vouchers and by the Senate
            Committee on Rules and Administration to sanction vouchers.
            These two releases provided both technical and functional
            changes. Most significant of these is the integration of the
            travel advance and cash advance tracking functionality of the
            standalone Funds Advance Tracking System (FATS). As a result of
            this change, an office manager knows before coming to the
            Disbursing Office front counter whether a travel advance can be
            issued. The system changes support the underlying rules
            associated with travel advances that were issued by the Senate
            Committee on Rules and Administration in December 2006. As a
            result of the integration of the advance functions into Web
            FMIS, the standalone FATS system was shut down during the first
            week of March.
      --The Senate Automated Vendor Inquiry (SAVI) System was upgraded in
            December 2006. It is used by Senate staff to create expense
            summary reports (ESRs) online and to check the status of
            reimbursements. It is integrated with Web FMIS so that vouchers
            are created in Web FMIS from ``imported'' ESRs without re-
            typing the expense and itinerary data shown on the ESR. SAVI
            release 4.0 addressed requests from SAVI users to reduce the
            number of pages for an average travel ESR from 3 to 2 by
            collapsing any sections in which there are no expenses.
      --ADPICS was upgraded twice, once in March 2006 and again in October
            2006. Used primarily by the Sergeant at Arms (SAA) finance
            staff, it is a mainframe system that provides integrated
            procurement, receiving and voucher preparation functions that
            are not included in Web FMIS. In response to requests from the
            SAA finance staff, functional and ``ease-of-use'' changes to
            ADPICS were made to approximately 40 ADPICS and FAMIS screens.
            These included adding fields on specific screens, modifying
            calculations, modifying query results, and facilitating
            ``round-trip'' linking from one screen to another and then back
            to the original.
      --The computing infrastructure for FMIS is provided by the SAA. Each
            year the SAA staff upgrades the infrastructure hardware and
            software. Two major upgrades were accomplished during the last
            year. The first, upgrading the FMIS database software, DB2 from
            version 7 to version 8, was done in three ``steps'', the last
            of which was completed in August 2006. The second, installing a
            new mainframe, first at the Alternate Computer Facility (ACF)
            and then at the Primary Computing Facility in the Postal Square
            Building (PCF), was completed in December 2006. For each
            activity, the Disbursing Office staff tested the changes in the
            FMIS testing environment and then validated the changes in the
            production environment.
      --Disaster operation services for FMIS are provided at the ACF. In
            October 2006, the SAA conducted a day-long disaster recovery
            test of the Senate's computing facilities, including FMIS
            functions. The test involved switching the Senate's network
            from accessing systems at the PCF, to the ACF, our backup
            location, and powering down the PCF. The Disbursing Office
            staff successfully tested all critical online components of
            FMIS, including Payroll, ADPICS, FAMIS, SAVI, Web FMIS, and
            Checkwriter. Two components were not tested: printing documents
            from ADPICS for SAA finance, which required hardware that was
            not yet at the ACF; and running the overnight batch processes.
        During the remainder of fiscal year 2007 the following FMIS
    activities are anticipated:
      --Implementing additional system and reporting enhancements for the
            SAA.
      --Implementing a new release of Web FMIS that:
        --Integrates additional functionality from the FATS system to track
                election moratorium periods that informs an office manager
                when a voucher includes travel related expenses that are
                not allowable during the 60 days prior to an election;
        --Enhances the pages used by the Senate Committee on Rules and
                Administration Audit staff to review and sanction vouchers
                to use newer technology and make functional changes to
                support imaging and electronic signature functions;
        --Enhances the Office Budget page to simplify creation of a budget;
                and
        --Allows ``importing'' of data from the Bank of America credit card
                program in order to simplify voucher creation.
      --Completing analysis of the appropriate hardware/software
            acquisition strategy for electronic signatures, and imaging of
            supporting documentation, and beginning acquisition.
      --Implementing online distribution of payroll system reports.
      --Implementing e-mail notification to vendors of payments made via
            direct deposit.
      --Upgrading the Hyperion Financial Management (HFM) system, the
            software to be used for creating financial statements should
            the Senate decide to issue such statements.
      --Testing and verifying an upgrade of the mainframe operating system
            to Z/OS version 1.7
      --Participating in the yearly disaster recovery test.
        During fiscal year 2008 the following FMIS activities are
    anticipated:
      --Eliminating the Social Security number (SSN) as the key field in
            the payroll system and all Senate systems receiving data from
            the payroll system (e.g., FMIS employee vendor numbers).
      --Converting all data in FMIS using employee vendor number based on
            SSN to new employee vendor number.
      --Conducting a pilot of the technology for paperless payment. This
            assumes identification of satisfactory hardware and software
            for electronic signatures and imaging of supporting
            documentation, and resolution of related policy and process
            issues.
        A more detailed report on FMIS is included in the departmental
    report of the Disbursing Office which follows.
                             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 issues
    that might impact the status of the project or the operation of
    Congress in general.
        Although the construction creates numerous temporary inconveniences
    to Senators, staff and visitors, completion of the CVC 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
    Background
        The Office of the Secretary maintains a 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, the Office has successfully implemented COOP plans
    during the anthrax and ricin incidents, and has conducted more than
    thirty drills and exercises to test and refine our plans. In
    conjunction with the SAA, USCP, and the Offices of the Attending
    Physician (OAP) and the AOC, the Office of the Secretary has
    established and exercised Emergency Operations Centers, Briefing
    Centers, the Leadership Coordination Center 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 of the Office of the Secretary. Multiple copies of each fly-
    away kit have been produced; some are stored in offices, and back-up
    kits are stored nearby but off the main campus, as well as at other
    sites outside the District of Columbia. This approach will enable the
    Office of the Secretary to resume essential operations in 12 to 24
    hours, even if the staff cannot retrieve anything from their offices.
        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 12 hours on campus, and within 24 to 72 hours off
            campus, 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;
      --activate an Emergency Operations Center at Postal Square or another
            near-campus site within one hour; and
      --activate an Emergency Operations Center at another site within the
            National Capital Region within three hours.
    Activities in the Past Year
        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:
      --Updated plans for use of the Leadership Coordination Center, to
            support Leadership response to an incident, and the Office of
            the Secretary's Emergency Operations Center.
      --Worked with the Sergeant at Arms on development of a joint program
            to facilitate writing, maintaining and implementing COOP plans.
      --Worked with the SAA, the OAP, and the AOC on contingency plans for
            a pandemic influenza outbreak.
      --Conducted and participated in 10 emergency preparedness drills and
            exercises.
        The central mission of the Office of the Secretary is to provide
    the legislative, financial and administrative support required for the
    conduct of Senate business. Our emergency preparedness programs are
    designed to ensure that the Senate can carry out its Constitutional
    functions under any circumstances. These programs are critical to our
    mission and are a permanent, integral part of our operations.
                              legislative offices
        The Legislative Department of the Office of the Secretary of the
    Senate provides the support essential to Senators to carry out their
    daily chamber activities and 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, which are supervised by the Secretary through the Director of
    Legislative Services. 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 18 years. The experience of these senior
    professional staff is a great asset for the Senate. In order to ensure
    well-rounded expertise, the legislative team cross-trains extensively
    among their specialties.
                                 1. bill clerk
        The Office of the Bill Clerk collects and records data on the
    legislative activity of the Senate, which becomes the historical record
    of official Senate business. The Bill Clerk's office keeps this
    information in its handwritten files and ledgers and also enters it
    into the Senate's automated retrieval system so that it is available to
    all House and Senate offices via the Legislative Information System
    (LIS). The Bill Clerk records actions of the Senate with regard to
    bills, resolutions, 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 into the database more than 1,500
    additional legislative items and 50 additional roll call votes than the
    previous session. Of most significant note, the number of Senate
    Resolutions submitted increased dramatically to reach 634, the highest
    number submitted in any one Congress.
        For comparative purposes, below is a summary of the second sessions
    of the 108th and 109th Congresses, followed by a cumulative summary of
    final numbers from each Congress:

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  108th         109th
                                                                Congress,     Congress,       108th         109th
                                                               2nd Session   2nd Session    Congress      Congress
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Senate Bills............................................         1,032         1,953         3,035         4,122
    Senate Joint Resolutions................................            16            14            42            41
    Senate Concurrent Resolutions...........................            66            48           152           123
    Senate Resolutions......................................           204           287           487           634
    Amendments Submitted....................................         1,857         2,544         4,088         5,239
    House Bills.............................................           322           325           604           611
    House Joint Resolutions.................................            12             8            32            19
    House Concurrent Resolutions............................            87            77           165           165
    Measures Reported.......................................           317           233           659           519
    Written Reports.........................................           208           157           428           369
                                                             -------------------------------------------------------
          Total Legislation.................................         4,121         5,646         9,692        11,842
    Roll Call Votes.........................................           216           279           675           645
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Assistance with the Government Printing Office
        The Bill Clerk's office maintains a good working relationship with
    the Government Printing Office (GPO) and seeks to provide the best
    service possible to meet the needs of the Senate. GPO continues to
    respond in a timely manner to the Secretary's request, through the Bill
    Clerk's office, for the printing of bills and reports, including the
    expedited printing of priority matters for the Senate chamber. To date,
    at the request of the Secretary through the Bill Clerk, GPO expedited
    the printing of over 100 measures for consideration by the Senate
    during the 109th Congress.
                        2. office of captioning services
        The Office of Captioning Services provides realtime captioning of
    Senate floor proceedings for the deaf and hard-of-hearing and
    unofficial electronic transcripts of Senate floor proceedings to Senate
    offices via the Senate Intranet.
        Accuracy continues to be the top priority of the office. Overall
    caption quality is monitored through daily Translation Data Reports,
    monitoring of captions in realtime, and review of caption files on the
    Senate Intranet. Dedication to this process has produced an overall
    average office accuracy rate above 99 percent this past year, the 13th
    year in a row the office has achieved this feat.
        Continuity of Operations Planning (COOP) and preparation throughout
    2006 also was a priority to ensure that staff are prepared and
    confident about the ability to relocate and successfully caption from a
    remote location in the event of an emergency.
        The office continues to prepare and plan for its relocation to the
    Senate expansion space in the Capitol Visitor Center (CVC), where it
    will be housed with the Senate Recording Studio.
                             3. senate 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 appears in the Extensions of Remarks section of
            the Congressional Record.
      --To enter into LIS 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
            roll call votes. (See Chart--Resume of Congressional Activity)
      --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 916 meetings during the second session of
    the 109th Congress, 153 more than were held during the second session
    of the 108th Congress.
        All hearings and business meetings (including joint meetings and
    conferences) are scheduled through the Office of the Senate Daily
    Digest, published in the Congressional Record and entered in LIS.
    Meeting outcomes are also published by the Daily Digest in the
    Congressional Record each day.
    Chamber Activity
        The Senate was in session 138 days, for a total of 1,027 hours and
    48 minutes, and conducted one live quorum call and 279 roll call votes.
    (See 20-Year Comparison of Senate Legislative Activity)
    Computer Activities
        The Digest continues the practice of sending a disc containing the
    complete publication along with a duplicate hard copy to GPO at the end
    of the day. GPO receives the Digest copy by electronic transfer, which
    promotes the timeliness of publishing the Congressional Record. The
    office continues to feel 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 Digest office will soon implement a new procedure for preparing
    copy. Information System staff has worked closely with the Daily Digest
    staff to develop a Daily Digest Authoring System. The system will
    streamline the process for creating, editing, and managing files for
    the publication of the Daily Digest, and the publishing of the
    Congressional Record. Also, Digest staff continue to work closely with
    computer staff to refine the LIS/DMS system, including further refining
    the Senate Committee Scheduling application.
    Government Printing Office
        The Daily Digest continues to work with GPO on issues related to
    the printing of the Digest and is pleased to report that editing
    corrections, especially the insertion of page reference numbers, and
    transcript errors are infrequent. Discussions with GPO continue
    regarding the inclusion of online corrections.
    Office Summation
        The Daily Digest consults on a daily basis with the Senate
    Parliamentarians, the Official Reporters of Debates, and the
    Legislative, Executive, Journal, and Bill Clerks, as well as the staffs
    of the policy committees and other committee staffs, and is grateful
    for the continued support from these offices.

                              DATA ON LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITY--SECOND SESSION, 109TH CONGRESS
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                          Senate           House           Total
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Days in Session.................................................             138             101  ..............
    Time in Session.................................................   1,027 hrs 48"    850 hrs, 19"  ..............
    Congressional Record:
        Pages of proceedings........................................          S11849           H9202  ..............
        Extension of remarks........................................  ..............           E2187  ..............
    Public bills enacted into law...................................              73             175             248
    Private bills enacted into law..................................               1  ..............               1
    Bills in conference.............................................               1               4               5
    Measures passed, total..........................................             635             710           1,345
        Senate bills................................................             142              87  ..............
        House bills.................................................             211             319  ..............
        Senate joint resolutions....................................               2               2  ..............
        House joint resolutions.....................................               8               8  ..............
        Senate concurrent resolutions...............................              20               8  ..............
        House concurrent resolutions................................              41              77  ..............
        Simple resolutions..........................................             211             209  ..............
    Measures reported, total \1\....................................             231             345             576
        Senate bills................................................             160              10  ..............
        House bills.................................................              57             223  ..............
        Senate joint resolutions....................................               3  ..............  ..............
        House joint resolutions.....................................  ..............               1  ..............
        Senate concurrent resolutions...............................               4  ..............  ..............
        House concurrent resolutions................................  ..............               9  ..............
        Simple resolutions..........................................               7             102  ..............
    Special reports.................................................               9              12  ..............
    Conference reports..............................................               1               9  ..............
    Measures pending on calendar....................................             303             159  ..............
    Measures introduced, total......................................           2,302           2,451           4,753
        Bills.......................................................           1,953           1,785  ..............
        Joint resolutions...........................................              14              27  ..............
        Concurrent resolutions......................................              48             174  ..............
        Simple resolutions..........................................             287             465  ..............
    Quorum calls....................................................               1               2  ..............
    Yea-and-nay votes...............................................             279             287  ..............
    Recorded votes..................................................  ..............             252  ..............
    Bills vetoed....................................................  ..............               1  ..............
    Vetoes overridden...............................................  ..............  ..............  ..............
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ These figures include all measures reported, even if there was no accompanying report. A total of 155
      reports have been filed in the Senate, a total of 366 reports have been filed in the House.

                               NOMINATIONS--RESUME
    [Disposition of Executive Nominations (109-2) From: 01/03/2006 to 12/31/
                                      2006]
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Civilian Nominations, totaling 618 (including 148
     nominations carried over from the First Session),
     disposed of as follows:
        Confirmed.....................................                   415
        Withdrawn.....................................                    21
        Returned to White House.......................                   182
    Other Civilian Nominations, totaling 3266
     (including 780 nominations carried over from the
     First Session), disposed of as follows:
        Confirmed.....................................                 3,263
        Withdrawn.....................................                     1
        Returned to White House.......................                     2
    Air Force Nominations, totaling 7830 (including
     100 nominations carried over from the First
     Session), disposed of as follows:
        Confirmed.....................................                 7,829
        Returned to White House.......................                     1
    Army Nominations, totaling 9785 (including 608
     nominations carried over from the First Session),
     disposed of as follows:
        Confirmed.....................................                 9,772
        Returned to White House.......................                    13
    Navy Nominations, totaling 7036 (including 21
     nominations carried over from the First Session),
     disposed of as follows:
        Confirmed.....................................                 7,035
        Returned to White House.......................                     1
    Marine Corps Nominations, totaling 1293 (including
     2 nominations carried over from the First
     Session), disposed of as follows:
        Confirmed.....................................                 1,289
        Returned to White House.......................                     4
    Summary:
        Total Nominations carried over from the First                  1,659
         Session......................................
        Total Nominations Received this Session.......                28,169
        Total Confirmed...............................                29,603
        Total Unconfirmed.............................  ....................
        Total Withdrawn...............................                    22
        Total Returned to the White House.............                   203
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                            20-YEAR COMPARISON OF SENATE LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITY
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              1987          1988          1989          1990          1991          1992          1993          1994          1995          1996
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Senate Convened.....................................           1/6          1/25           1/3          1/23           1/3           1/3           1/5          1/25           1/4           1/3
    Senate Adjourned....................................         12/22         10/21         11/21         10/28        1/3/92          10/9         11/26         12/01        1/3/96          10/4
    Days in Session.....................................           170           137           136           138           158           129           153           138           211           132
    Hours in Session....................................      1,21452"      1,12648"      1,00319"      1,25014"      1,20044"      1,09109"      1,26941"      1,24333"      1,83910"      1,03645"
    Average Hours per Day...............................           7.1           8.2           7.4           9.1           7.6           8.5           8.3           9.0           8.7           7.8
    Total Measures Passed...............................           616           814           605           716           626           651           473           465           346           476
    Roll Call Votes.....................................           420           379           312           326           280           270           395           329           613           306
    Quorum Calls........................................            36            26            11             3             3             5             2             6             3             2
    Public Laws.........................................           240           473           240           244           243           347           210           255            88           245
    Treaties Ratified...................................             3            15             9            15            15            32            20             8            10            28
    Nominations Confirmed...............................        46,404        42,317        45,585        42,493        45,369        30,619        38,676        37,446        40,535        33,176
    Average Voting Attendance...........................         94.03         91.58          98.0         97.47         97.16          95.4          97.6         97.02         98.07         98.22
    Sessions Convened Before 12 Noon....................           131           120            95           116           126           112           128           120           184           113
    Sessions Convened at 12 Noon........................            12            12            14             4             9  ............             6             9             2            15
    Sessions Convened after 12 Noon.....................            25             5            27            17            23            10            15            17            12             7
    Sessions Continued after 6 p.m......................            97            37            88           100           102            91           100           100           158            88
    Sessions Continued after 12 Midnight................             6             7             9            13             6             4             9             7             3             1
    Saturday Sessions...................................             3  ............             1             3             2             2             2             3             5             1
    Sunday Sessions.....................................             1  ............  ............             2  ............  ............  ............  ............             3  ............
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                      20-YEAR COMPARISON OF SENATE LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITY--Continued
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              1997          1998          1999          2000          2001          2002          2003          2004          2005          2006
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Senate Convened.....................................           1/3          1/27           1/6          1/24           1/3          1/23           1/7          1/20           1/4           1/3
    Senate Adjourned....................................         11/13         10/21         11/19         12/15         12/20         11/20          12/9          12/8         12/22          12/9
    Days in Session.....................................           153           143           162           141           173           149           167           133           159           138
    Hours in Session....................................      1,09307"      1,09505"      1,18357"      1,01751"      1,23615"      1,04223"      1,45405"      1,03131"      1,22226"      1,02748"
    Average Hours per Day...............................           7.1           7.7           7.3           7.2           7.1           7.0           8.7           7.7           7.7           7.4
    Total Measures Passed...............................           386           506           549           696           425           523           590           663           624           635
    Roll Call Votes.....................................           298           314           374           298           380           253           459           216           366           279
    Quorum Calls........................................             6             4             7             6             3             2             3             1             3             1
    Public Laws.........................................           153           241           170           410           136           241           198           300           169           248
    Treaties Ratified...................................            15            53            13            39             3            17            11            15             6            14
    Nominations Confirmed...............................        25,576        20,302        22,468        22,512        25,091        23,633        21,580        24,420        25,942        29,603
    Average Voting Attendance...........................         98.68         97.47         98.02         96.99         98.29         96.36         96.07         95.54         97.41         97.13
    Sessions Convened Before 12 Noon....................           115           109           118           107           140           119           133           104           121           110
    Sessions Convened at 12 Noon........................            12            31            17            25            10            12             4             9             1             4
    Sessions Convened after 12 Noon.....................             7             2            19            24            21            23            23            21            36            24
    Sessions Continued after 6 p.m......................            96            93           113            94           108           103           134           129           120           129
    Sessions Continued after 12 Midnight................  ............  ............  ............  ............             2             3             8             2             3             3
    Saturday Sessions...................................             1             1             3             1             3  ............             1             2             2             2
    Sunday Sessions.....................................             1  ............  ............             1  ............  ............             1             1             2  ............
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Prepared by the Senate Daily Digest--Office of the Secretary.

                               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 2006, 99 enrolled bills (transmitted to the President), 2
    enrolled joint resolutions (transmitted to the President) and 9
    concurrent resolutions (transmitted to Archives) were prepared,
    proofread, corrected, and printed on parchment for official enrollment.
    In addition, the office processed a total of 571 additional pieces of
    legislation that were passed or agreed to by the Senate.
        Throughout 2006 the enrolling clerks met with personnel of the LIS
    Project Office to integrate and test the LEXA application for
    processing bills for printing. The LEXA training manual was updated in
    early February 2006; and, as of January 2007, the enrolling clerks are
    now incorporating the new legislative drafting tool. Senate Enrolling
    will embark in this new challenge to continue to help incorporate these
    changes into the process to further its primary mission of providing
    the most timely and accurate product for the Senate.
                               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 Journal of the Executive
    Proceedings of the Senate at the end of each session of Congress. The
    Executive Clerk also prepared the Executive Calendar daily as well as
    all nominations and treaty resolutions for transmittal to the
    President. Additionally, the Executive Clerk's office processes all
    executive communications, presidential messages and petitions and
    memorials.
    Nominations
        During the second session of the 109th Congress, there were 1,049
    nomination messages sent to the Senate by the President, transmitting
    28,169 nominations to positions requiring Senate confirmation and 22
    messages withdrawing nominations sent to the Senate during the second
    session of the 109th Congress. Of the total nominations transmitted,
    370 were for civilian positions other than lists in the Foreign
    Service, Coast Guard, NOAA, and Public Health Service. In addition,
    there were 2,486 nominees in the ``civilian list'' categories named
    above. Military nominations received this session totaled 25,213
    (7,730--Air Force; 9,177--Army; 7,015--Navy and 1,291--Marine Corps).
    The Senate confirmed 29,603 nominations this session. Pursuant to the
    provisions of paragraph six of Senate Rule XXXI, 203 nominations were
    returned to the President during the second session of the 109th
    Congress.
    Treaties
        There were 14 treaties transmitted to the Senate by the President
    during the second session of the 109th Congress for its advice and
    consent to ratification, which were ordered printed as treaty documents
    for the use of the Senate (Treaty Doc. 109-9 through 109-22). The
    Senate gave its advice and consent to 14 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 11 executive reports relating to treaties ordered
    printed for the use of the Senate during the second session of the
    109th Congress (Executive Report 109-9 through 109-19). The Senate
    conducted 29 roll call votes in executive session, all on or in
    relation to nominations and treaties.
    Executive Communications
        For the second session of the 109th Congress, 4,186 executive
    communications, 192 petitions and memorials and 23 Presidential
    messages were received and processed.
    LIS Update
        The Executive Clerk consulted with the computer staff during the
    year to improve the LIS processing of nominations, treaties, executive
    communications, presidential messages and petitions and memorials.
                                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 Journal of the Proceedings of the
    Senate, or Senate Journal, as required by Article I, Section V of the
    Constitution. The Senate Journal is published each calendar year, and
    in 2006, the Journal Clerk completed the production of the 1,090 page
    2005 edition.
        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 at the end of each calendar
    year of the Senate Journal.
        The LIS Senate Journal Authoring System continues to be updated as
    needed to further assist in the efficiency of production. The 2006
    Senate Journal is expected to be sent to GPO for printing at the end of
    April.
                              7. legislative clerk
        The Legislative Clerk sits at the Secretary's desk in the Senate
    Chamber and reads aloud bills, amendments, the Senate Journal,
    Presidential messages, and other such materials when so directed by the
    Presiding Officer of the Senate. The Legislative Clerk calls the roll
    of members to establish the presence of a quorum and to record and
    tally all yea and nay votes. The 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. The office is responsible for verifying the accuracy of
    information entered into LIS by the various offices of the Secretary.
    Summary of Activity
        The second session of the 109th Congress completed its legislative
    business and adjourned on December 9, 2006. During 2006, the Senate was
    in session 138 days and conducted 279 roll call votes. There were 231
    measures reported from committees and 635 total measures passed. In
    addition, there were 2,545 amendments processed.
    Cross-Training
        Recognizing the importance of planning for the continuity of Senate
    business, under both normal and possibly extenuating circumstances,
    cross-training continues to be strongly emphasized among the
    Secretary's legislative staff. To ensure additional staff are trained
    to perform the basic floor responsibilities of the Legislative Clerk,
    as well as the various other floor-related responsibilities of the
    Secretary, approximately 50 percent of the legislative staff are
    currently involved or have recently been involved in cross-training.
    Amendment Tracking System Feedback
        The Senate's Web-based application that allows users to access
    images of Senate amendments proposed to legislation is called the
    Amendment Tracking System (ATS). Developed in 1997 to provide the
    Senate with online access to amendments, ATS provides legislative staff
    with scanned images of the amendments, and descriptive information
    about them, including their purpose, sponsor, cosponsors, submitted
    date, proposed date, and status.
        In September of 2005, the scope of information available on ATS was
    expanded to include submitted amendments, those amendments that have
    been submitted but have not been proposed on the Senate floor. Staff
    members now have the option to view all, just submitted, or just
    proposed amendments. ATS also expanded the size of amendment images
    from 25 to 50 pages, so users are now able to see up to 50 pages of a
    submitted or proposed amendment.
        After utilizing the expanded version of the ATS for a full year,
    reaction from the Senate community continues to be extremely positive.
                        8. official reporters of debates
        The Official Reporters of Debates prepare and edit a substantially
    verbatim report of the proceedings of the Senate for publication in the
    Congressional Record, 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 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. The office provides formatting guidelines to
    Senate offices which has facilitated an accurate and timely printing of
    each day's Congressional Record.
                               9. parliamentarian
        The Parliamentarian's Office continues to perform its essential
    institutional responsibilities to act as a neutral arbiter among all
    parties with an interest in the legislative process. These
    responsibilities include advising the Chair, Senators and their staff,
    as well as 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 Parliamentarian or one of his assistants is
    always present on the Senate floor when the Senate is in session,
    standing ready to assist the Presiding Officer in his or her official
    duties, as well as to assist any other Senator on procedural matters.
    The Parliamentarians work closely with the staff of the Vice President
    of the United States and the Vice President himself whenever he
    performs his duties as President of the Senate.
        The Parliamentarians monitor all proceedings on the floor of the
    Senate, advise the Presiding Officer on the competing rights of the
    Senators on the floor, and advise all Senators as to what is
    appropriate in debate. The Parliamentarians keep track of the
    amendments offered to the legislation pending on the Senate floor, and
    monitor them for points of order. In this respect, the Parliamentarians
    reviewed more than 1,000 amendments during 2006 to determine if they
    met various procedural requirements (such as germaneness). 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, as well as all
    communications received from the executive branch, state and local
    governments, and private citizens. In order to perform this
    responsibility, the Parliamentarians do extensive legal and legislative
    research. During 2006, the Parliamentarian and his assistants referred
    2,245 measures and 4,403 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
    jurisdictional questions posed by the creation of the new Department of
    Homeland Security, by the adoption of S. Res. 445 reorganizing
    intelligence and homeland security jurisdiction of the Senate's
    committees, and by the enactment of the Intelligence Reform and
    Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004. 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 six years, rules relating to legislation
    on appropriations bills, and the scope of conference reports on all
    bills were reinstated. As a result, the Parliamentarians have been
    asked to review hundreds of Senate amendments and now have the
    responsibility of potentially reviewing every provision of every
    conference report considered by both Houses of Congress.
        In 2006, as in all election years, the Parliamentarians received
    all of the certificates of election of Senators elected or reelected to
    the Senate, and reviewed them for sufficiency and accuracy, returning
    those that were defective and reviewing their replacements.
                    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
    of the United States Senate, and to Members and employees of the
    Senate. To accomplish this mission, the Senate Disbursing Office
    manages the collection of information from the distributed accounting
    locations within 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 and provides responsive, personal attention to
    Members and employees on an unbiased and confidential basis. The Senate
    Disbursing Office also manages the distribution of central financial
    and human resource information to the individual Member offices,
    committees, administrative and leadership offices in the Senate while
    maintaining the confidentiality of information for Members and Senate
    employees.
        To support the mission of the Senate Disbursing Office, the
    organization is structured 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 judgment, and interpersonal skills that reflect the
    unique nature of the United States Senate.
                   deputy for benefits and financial services
        The principal responsibility of this position is to provide
    expertise and oversight on federal retirement, benefits, payroll, and
    financial services processes. Coordination of the interaction between
    the Financial Services (Front Office), Employee Benefits, and Payroll
    Sections is also a major responsibility of the position, in addition to
    the planning and project management of new computer systems and
    programs. The Deputy for Benefits and Financial Services ensures that
    job processes are efficient and up to date, modifies computer support
    systems, as necessary, implements regulatory and legislated changes,
    and designs and produces up-to-date forms for use in all three
    sections.
        After year-end processing of payroll for the calendar year 2005,
    minor enhancements to the cost of living allowance (COLA) process were
    smoothly completed. W-2's were issued promptly and made immediately
    available on the Document Imaging System (DIS). During the year, other
    minor changes were made to the Human Resources Management System (HRMS)
    to promote greater efficiency.
        DIS, which contains electronic images of employee personnel
    folders, documents, records, W-2 statements, as well as other pay and
    service history records, has proven to be a valuable resource for the
    Disbursing Office. As DIS began nearing its storage capacity, research
    was conducted and projections were made on future uses and capacity
    requirements. New SQL servers were requisitioned and installed. In
    addition to transferring data from old to new, including replication
    for the Alternate Computing Facility (ACF), testing of the new server
    has begun, and it is expected to be fully operational later this month.
    This upgrade will allow us the ability to expand the scope of our
    document imaging and to bring it into full compliance with COOP
    guidelines.
        The Senate Service Facility (SSF) was completed in February.
    Revolving vertical file cabinets were installed in the Disbursing
    Office's enclosed, secure and environmentally controlled area. In
    addition, a dedicated, secure ``cage'' was provided for organized and
    elevated box storage. Access was granted and security codes were
    authorized to those in need of access. All Disbursing Office files and
    employee personnel folders in the offsite warehouses were transported
    to the SSF. Employee personnel folders were then transferred from the
    70 outdated file cabinets into the state-of-the-art revolving vertical
    cabinets. This required a great deal of planning and organization to
    integrate the personnel folders from many groupings into one
    alphabetical run for ease of access and organization. During the
    summer, 18,000 of the older employee personnel folders maintained on-
    site in the Disbursing Office were purged. These folders were
    transported to the SSF and interfiled with those folders already
    located there. This alleviated overcrowding of the Disbursing Office
    files and has made the older folders readily accessible.
        As a result of legislation passed in 2004, the new pre-tax Federal
    Employees Dental and Vision Insurance Program (FEDVIP) was implemented
    in 2006. In preparation for implementation, disbursing staff attended
    agency-wide meetings and seminars. The Office of Personnel Management
    (OPM) provides guidance for this program which is administered by a
    third-party administrator. Programming specifications were determined
    for compliance with the program's parameters and its regulations, and
    provided to the SAA Computer Center for development. The Disbursing
    Office provided testing and trouble-shooting for the new programming.
    Preparations for the first annual FEDVIP Open Season (OS) were made,
    including training, education and distribution of materials. The
    initial FEDVIP OS coincided with the Federal Employees Health Benefits
    (FEHB) and Flexible Spending Accounts (FSA) OS, and enrollments were
    effective 12-31-2006. This new program will be monitored with
    programming and procedures modified as needed.
        Updates and revision of many Disbursing Office forms were
    completed, and many were made available electronically through Webster.
    The Disbursing Office also worked with the SAA Computer Center to
    provide internal electronic storage and retrieval of reports and to
    eliminate the need for paper production and distribution of those
    reports.
        In addition, the Disbursing Office administers the retirement and
    benefits programs for the Senate Employees' Child Care Center (SECCC).
    In 2006 electronic imaging and storage of employee folders and
    documents for SECCC staff was completed as well as the creation of
    electronic retirement records.
        At the request of the Senate Committee Rules and Administration,
    the Disbursing Office worked to edit and update relevant portions of
    the Senate Handbook. In addition, Senator-elect information and
    guidance was also reviewed and updated for the orientation handbook.
              front office--administrative and financial services
        The Front Office is the main service area of all general Senate
    business and financial activity. The Front office maintains the
    Senate's internal accountability of funds used in daily operations.
    Reconciliation of such funds is executed on a daily basis. The Front
    office 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 Office 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. Staff is also provided verbal and written detailed
    information regarding pay and benefits. Authorization is certified to
    new and state employees for issuance of Senate identification cards.
    Advances are issued to Senate staff authorized 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
    office and become part of the Senate's accountability of federally
    appropriated funds and are then processed through the Senate's general
    ledger system.
    General Activities
        Processed approximately 2,300 cash advances, totaling approximately
    $1.1 million and initialized 800 check/direct deposit advances,
    totaling approximately $620,000.
        Received and processed more than 25,000 checks, totaling over
    $2,500,000.
        Administered Oath and Personnel Affidavits to more than 2,700 new
    Senate staff and advised them of their benefits.
        Maintained brochures for 12 Federal health carriers and distributed
    approximately 4,000 brochures to new and existing staff during the
    annual FEHB OS.
        Provided 20 training sessions to new administrative managers.
        In December, the advance functionality module of Web FMIS was
    implemented to replace the legacy FATS system for issuance and
    repayment of travel advances. This implementation required the ongoing
    dual run of both systems until testing was successfully completed in
    March of this year.
        The Front office continues its daily reconciliation of operations
    and strengthened internal office controls. New locks for cash drawers
    were ordered and scheduled for installation. This will allow for better
    central control of the cash accountability. Training and guidance to
    new administrative managers and business contacts continued, as did the
    incorporation of updates of the scanning and imaging project into daily
    operations. A major emphasis was placed on assisting employees in
    maximizing their Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) contributions and making
    them aware of the TSP catch-up program. The Front office continued to
    provide the Senate community with prompt, courteous, and informative
    advice regarding Disbursing Office operations.
                                payroll section
        The Payroll Section maintains the Human Resources Management System
    (HRMS) and is responsible for processing, verifying, and warehousing
    all payroll information submitted to the Disbursing Office by Senators,
    Chairmen and other appointing officials for their staffs, including
    appointments of employees, salary changes, title changes, transfers and
    terminations. It is also responsible for input of all enrollments and
    elections submitted by Members and employees that affect their pay
    (e.g. retirement and benefits elections, tax withholding, TSP
    participation, allotments from pay, address changes, direct deposit
    elections, levies and garnishments) and for the issuance of accurate
    salary payments to Members and employees. The Payroll Section jointly
    maintains the Automated Clearing House (ACH) FedLine facilities with
    the Accounts Payable Section for the normal transmittal of payroll
    deposits to the Federal Reserve. Payroll Expenditure, Projection and
    Allowance reports are distributed to all Senate offices. Issuance of
    the proper withholding and agency contributions reports to the
    Accounting Department is handled by Payroll as is transmission of the
    proper TSP information to the National Finance Center. In addition, the
    Payroll Section maintains earnings records for distribution to the
    Social Security Administration and employees' taxable earnings records
    for W-2 statements. The Payroll Section is also responsible for the
    payroll expenditure data portion of the Report of the Secretary of the
    Senate. The Payroll Section calculates, reconciles and bills the SECCC
    (Child Care Center) for their staff Employee Contributions and forwards
    payment of those contributions to the Accounting Section. The Payroll
    Section provides guidance and counseling to staff and administrative
    managers on issues of pay, salaries, allowances and projections.
    General Activities
        The Payroll Section processed a January 1, 2006 cost of living
    increase of 3.44 percent. The Payroll Section maintained the normal
    schedule of processing TSP election forms. Employees took full
    advantage of the increase of TSP deductions making the most of the new
    $15,000 maximum. For those employees over 50, the TSP catch-up program
    provided an opportunity to make additional contributions in excess of
    the standard limitations.
        Payroll Allowance, Expenditure and Projection reports are provided
    to all Senate offices on a monthly basis. A desire to provide these
    reports in an electronic format was identified. Brainstorming sessions
    were held within the Disbursing Office to determine possible paths for
    this project. Initial contacts between the Disbursing Office, SAA
    Computer Center and the appropriate contractor were made and early
    stage meetings have been held to identify requirements, possible
    strategies and means to provide the electronic reports. The goal is to
    make these reports available electronically in 2007.
        The Payroll Section provides administration of the Student Loan
    Repayment Program (SLRP). In response to the high volume of calls and
    e-mails, an exclusive SLP e-mail account has been established. This
    tool will speed responses to inquiries from offices and employees. In
    addition, meetings were held with office administrators to provide
    clarification about and to ensure compliance with Public Law 107-68
    that governs the Senate SLP.
        In November the Payroll Section gained access to the U.S. Treasury
    Pacer System, which allows us to resolve SLP lender issues and employee
    inquiries in an accurate and efficient manner by presenting physical
    evidence of payments negotiated. Disbursing continues to review
    internal processes and controls, seeking ways to improve efficiency and
    performance. In 2006, the office developed a database to provide better
    tracking and reporting for the SLP activities.
        In September the Payroll Section began to receive TSP reports,
    receipts, loans and error lists via TSP's Web-based secure system. This
    enabled us to handle all of these functions in a timely manner.
    Previously TSP correspondence was sent by mail and was subject to mail
    delays and loss.
        The Payroll Section was involved in the preparations and
    programming specifications for implementation of FEDVIPS. Flexible
    Spending Accounts, and Long Term Care Insurance processing continues.
    The office continues to refine and improve processes in working with
    third party administrators.
        The 2006 elections presented the Payroll Section with the need to
    prepare for the opening and closing of ten personal offices in addition
    to leadership changes. Disbursing Office staff looked into the
    specifics of S. Res. 478 to determine its impact on outgoing staff and
    to ensure that procedures allowed for the proper administration of the
    resolution.
        The Payroll Section again participated in disaster recovery
    testing. This year's test, conducted in October, entailed using the ACF
    processing equipment to operate the payroll/personnel system from the
    Hart Building while SAA programmers ran trial payrolls from dial up
    sources. Part of the test was for members of SAA Production Services to
    produce the payroll output from printers located at the ACF. The
    Payroll/Personnel Systems test proved that it could be run from
    multiple locations at the same time.
                           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 retirement and benefits laws and
    regulations. EBS staff is also expected to have a working knowledge of
    FSAs, the Long Term Care Insurance (LTCI) Program and FEDVIPS. 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 when
    Official Personnel Folders and Transcripts of Service from other
    federal agencies are received, verifies the accuracy of the information
    provided and reconciles as necessary. Senate 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 is responsible for the
    administration and tracking of employees placed in Leave Without Pay
    (LWOP) to perform military service and the occasional civilian
    appointment to an international organization. EBS also handles most of
    the stationery and forms inventory ordering and maintenance for the
    Disbursing Office. EBS processes employment verifications for loans,
    the Bar Exam, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), OPM, and
    Department of Defense (DOD), 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, as are the employee fees associated
    with FSAs. Designations of Beneficiary for Federal Employees' Group
    Life Insurance (FEGLI), Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS), Federal
    Employees Retirement System (FERS), and unpaid compensation are filed
    and checked by EBS.
    General Activities
        EBS assisted with the transition of Senator Corzine and his staff
    as he resigned his Senate seat to become Governor of New Jersey, as
    well as the transition of Senator Menendez and his staff to the Senate
    from his seat in the House. EBS also provided counseling to all
    outgoing Senators, and provided their outgoing staff with office talks
    and individual counseling. Additionally, EBS provided counseling to
    committee and leadership staff affected by leadership changes.
        EBS conducted agency-wide seminars on CSRS and FERS and hosted a
    seminar with the D.C. Department of Employment Services in December for
    all potentially outgoing staff. This seminar was very helpful to staff
    in providing pointers and references in applying for new employment.
        EBS staff attended interagency meetings on the development and
    understanding of the new FEDVIP program and the Benefeds Portal that
    will combine third-party administration of FSA, LTCI and the new FEDVIP
    programs. EBS also attended government-wide TSP meetings to keep
    abreast of new regulations and procedures.
        Approximately 500 employees changed plans during the annual FEHB
    OS. These changes were processed and reported to carriers very quickly.
    This year we were again able to offer Senate employees access to the
    online ``Checkbook Guide to Health Plans'' to research and compare FEHB
    plans. This tool will remain available to staff throughout the year.
    Once again, the Disbursing Office hosted a FEHB OS Health Fair, with
    over 1,200 employees attending. Senate enrollment in the new Dental and
    Vision Insurance plans was over 1,600.
        There has been significant coordination with the SAA Computer
    Center to effect computer enhancements and provide additional automated
    forms to the EBS database. This has provided greater efficiency and
    increased accuracy of information. In addition, EBS created several
    ``fillable forms'' for use by EBS staff.
        EBS is in the process of building a sectional electronic
    ``library'' of scanned documents on our shared directory. This library
    of samples, documentation, rulings and other benefits will help to
    teach new personnel to ensure consistent EBS output. The library will
    also be a valuable COOP resource.
                     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 work toward
    producing 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.
    Disbursing Office Financial Management is segmented into three
    functional departments: Accounting, Accounts Payable, and Budget. The
    Accounts Payable Department is subdivided into three sections: Audit,
    Disbursement and Vendor/SAVI. The Deputy coordinates the activities of
    the three functional departments, establishes central financial
    policies and procedures, acts as the primary liaison to the HR
    Administrator, and carries out the directives of the Financial Clerk
    and the Secretary of the Senate.
                             accounting department
        During fiscal year 2006, the Accounting Department approved in
    excess of 53,000 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 cancelled
    subscription refunds from Member offices. General ledger maintenance
    also prompted the entry of thousands of adjustment entries that include
    the entry of all appropriation and allowance funding limitation
    transactions, all accounting cycle closing entries, and all non-voucher
    reimbursement transactions such as payroll adjustments, COLA budget
    uploads, stop payment requests, travel advances and repayments, and
    limited payability reimbursements. The department began scanning all
    documentation for journal vouchers, deposits, accounting memos, and
    letters of certification to facilitate both storage concerns and COOP
    backup.
        This year the Accounting Department assisted in the validation of
    various system upgrades and modifications, including the testing
    required to implement Db2 version 8 Compatibility and New Features
    modes, and an upgrade to the mainframe operating system to Z/OS. During
    January 2006, the Accounting Department with contract support completed
    the 2005 year-end process to close and reset revenue, expense, and
    budgetary general ledger accounts to zero. The new CD log was developed
    and extensive regression testing was required. The log is now fully
    functional. Document purge and rollover were turned over to the IT
    group as the department geared up for 2006 fiscal year-end closing
    activities.
        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, reported to the
    Department of the Treasury on a monthly basis is the Statement of
    Transactions According to Appropriations, Fund and Receipt Accounts, a
    summary all activity of all monies disbursed by the Secretary of the
    Senate through the Financial Clerk of the Senate. All activity by
    appropriation account is reconciled with the Department of the Treasury
    on a monthly and annual basis. The annual reconciliation of the
    Treasury Combined Statement is also used in the reporting to the Office
    of Management and Budget (OMB) as part of the submission of the annual
    operating budget of the Senate.
        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 TSP.
        There are also 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, continues to work closely with the SAA Finance
    Department in completing the corrective actions that were identified
    during our Pro-forma financial statements auditability assessment.
    Based on the results of this exercise, 23 corrective actions were
    suggested including an action plan and proposed schedule to have them
    corrected. Some of the actions were rather simple to implement while
    others will take significantly longer. Of the 23 corrective actions
    noted, 18 have been completed and 5 are still in process.
        Accounting also has a budget division whose primary responsibility
    is compiling the annual operating budget of the United States Senate
    for presentation to the Committee on Appropriations. The Budget
    division is responsible for the preparation, issuance and distribution
    of the budget justification worksheets (BJW). In fiscal year 2006, the
    budget justification worksheets were mailed to the Senate accounting
    locations and processed in December. The budget baseline estimates for
    fiscal year 2007 were reported to OMB by mid-January, via the upgraded
    MAX database.
        During January, the Senate Budget Analyst is responsible for the
    preparation of 1099's and the prompt submission of forms to the IRS
    before the end of the month.
                                accounts payable

                 Vendor/Senate Automated Vendor Inquiry Section

        The Vendor/Senate Automated Vendor Inquiry (SAVI) Section maintains
    the accuracy and integrity of the Senate's central vendor (payee) file
    for the prompt completion of new vendor file requests and service
    requests related to the Disbursing office's Web-based payment tracking
    system known as SAVI. This section also assists the IT Department
    performing periodic testing and monitoring the performance of the SAVI
    system.
        Currently, more than 14,400 vendor records are stored in the vendor
    file. Daily requests for new vendor addresses or updates to existing
    vendor information are processed within 24 hours of being received. In
    2004, the A/P Department began paying vendors electronically via the
    ACH. Besides updating mailing addresses, the Vendor/SAVI section
    facilitates the use of ACH by switching the method of payment requested
    by the vendor from check to direct deposit. Whenever a new remittance
    address is added to the vendor file, a standard letter is mailed to
    vendors requesting tax and banking information. If a vendor responds to
    our letter and indicates they would like to receive ACH payments in the
    future, the method of payment is changed. Currently, more than 1,800
    vendors and over half of the home state office landlords are being paid
    via ACH.
        SAVI is the Disbursing office's Web-based payment tracking system.
    Senate employees can electronically create, save, and file expense
    reimbursement forms, track their progress, and get detailed information
    on payments. The most common service requests are requests for system
    user ids, system passwords and to activate deactivated accounts.
    Employees may also request an alternative expense payment method. An
    employee can choose to have their payroll set up for direct deposit or
    paper check, but can have their expenses reimbursed by a method
    different from their salary payment method.
        The Vendor/SAVI section works closely with the A/P Disbursements
    group resolving returned ACH payments. ACH payments are returned
    periodically for a variety of reasons, including incorrect account
    numbers, incorrect ABA routing numbers, and, in rare instances, a
    nonparticipating financial institution.
        The Vendor/SAVI section electronically scans and stores all
    supporting documentation of existing vendor records and new vendor file
    requests. Currently electronic records for over 9,000 vendors have been
    verified against paper records and the paper files certified for
    destruction. In the near future, this section will assist the IT
    Department in testing an automatic e-mail notification system which
    will alert vendors when an EFT payment has been made and will provide
    pertinent payment information.
        During 2006, the Vendor/SAVI section processed over 2,400 vendor
    file requests, completed nearly 1,800 SAVI service requests, mailed
    over 1,100 vendor information letters, and converted over 500 vendors
    to direct deposit.
        The SAVI web-based system was upgraded in 2006 to version 4.0, and
    the section participated in testing of new features and functionality.

                            Disbursements Department

        The department received and processed over 158,000 expense claims.
    The department also wrote more than 34,000 expense checks and
    approximately 57,500 direct deposit reimbursements were transmitted via
    ACH. The department has experienced a slight increase of roughly 5.7
    percent in the number of checks written and a slight increase of 2
    percent in the number of ACH payments. The department's goal is to
    reduce the number of checks and increase the number of ACH payments
    sent out. The department suffered no performance loss, ensuring that
    all vendors and employees continued to receive timely and accurate
    payments. ACH and check printing capabilities were established at the
    ACF. The ACF is stocked so COOP initiatives can be carried out. A new
    version of Checkwriter was installed as part of the release of Web FMIS
    version 11.
        After vouchers are paid, they are sorted and filed by document
    number. Vouchers are grouped in 6-month ``clusters'' to accommodate
    their retrieval for the semi-annual Report of the Secretary of the
    Senate. Currently, files are maintained for the current period and two
    prior periods in-house as space is limited. Previously, older documents
    were stored in the department's warehouse, but were successfully
    transferred to the SSF in February 2006.
        A major function of the department is to prepare adjustment
    documents. Adjustments are varied and include the following:
    preparation of foreign travel advances and vouchers, reimbursements for
    expenses incurred by Senate leadership, re-issuance of items held as
    accounts receivable collections, re-issuance of payments for which non-
    receipt is claimed, and various supplemental adjustments received from
    the Payroll Department. Such adjustments are usually disbursed by
    check, but an increasing number are now handled electronically through
    the ACH. Paper payroll check registers were replaced by an electronic
    version using Reveal software. A spreadsheet was also created to track
    cases of non-receipt of salary checks, including stop payment requests
    and reissuance.
        During 2006, while small in number, some ACH returns occurred. All
    rejected items are logged into an ACH Reports folder. They are
    classified as either Payroll or Accounts Payable, and the actual daily
    reports are also scanned into the folder. Once logged in, the payroll
    items are forwarded to the Payroll Department, and the non-payroll
    items are forwarded to Vendor/SAVI for appropriate corrective action.
        The Accounts Payable Disbursements Department prepares mailing
    labels for the distribution of the monthly ledgers to the 140
    accounting locations throughout the Senate. Although the ledgers are
    sorted and sent out by Accounting, the Disbursements Group maintains
    the file of how and where the statements are to be delivered. The main
    objective of this process is to have each office receive their ledger
    statements for the month just ended by the 10th of the following month.
        The Department also prepares the forms required by the Department
    of 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 continued
    using the Department of Treasury--Financial Management Service (FMS)
    online stop pay and check retrieval process known as PACER. The PACER
    system allows us to electronically submit stop-payment requests and
    provides online 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. During 2006, over 500 requests were
    received for check copies.
        The Disbursements Department continues the use of laser checks. The
    tractor-fed check writer system has been dismantled and a new, improved
    system was developed and implemented. The folder/inserter was purchased
    and has been installed. New hardware and further Checkwriter upgrades
    were implemented in 2006. The result was a user friendly system which
    has the additional benefits of greater security and a higher degree of
    accuracy.

                                Audit Department

        The Accounts Payable Audit Section is responsible for auditing
    vouchers and answering questions regarding voucher preparation and the
    permissibility of expenses and advances. This section provides advice
    and recommendations on the discretionary use of funds to the various
    accounting locations, identifies duplicate payments submitted by
    offices, monitors payments related to contracts, trains new
    administrative managers and chief clerks about Senate financial
    practices and the Senate's Financial Management Information System, and
    assists in the production of the Report of the Secretary of the Senate.
        A major function of the section is monitoring the Fund Advances for
    travel and petty cash. FATS was used to ensure that advances were
    charged correctly, vouchers repaying such advances were entered, and
    balances were adjusted for reuse of the advance funds. An ``aging''
    process was also performed to ensure that travel advances are repaid in
    the time specified by the travel advance regulations. Travel advances
    may be repaid via regular voucher processing, or may be canceled if the
    corresponding travel is not taken and the funds are returned.
        Late in 2006, a new advance module was placed into service for
    issuing and tracking advances. The module is part of Web FMIS version
    11 and is the first of a two-phase project. The first phase has been
    completed and accommodates issuance, tracking, and repayment of
    advances. The second phase will accommodate entry and editing of
    election dates and Senator-elect vouchers. There is no conceptual
    difference in the way advances are issued and repaid, only the
    methodology involved in using FATS versus Web. FATS will ultimately be
    replaced once phase two of Web FMIS advances is implemented.
        Concurrently, the Accounts Payable Manager, Deputy for Financial
    Management, and the IT Department participated in discussions with the
    Senate Committee on Rules and Administration which led to a major
    revision to the Senate Travel Regulations. Among the many changes was a
    standardization of the number of travel advances any one individual may
    have outstanding at any given time. Prior to this, different entities
    had different limits and some had no limits at all. A maximum of two
    per individual was established. The advance revisions were included in
    the latest version of Web FMIS.
        The Accounts Payable Audit Section processed in excess of 158,000
    expense vouchers in fiscal year 2006, as well as 45,000 uploaded items.
    In addition, the section sanctioned in excess of 56,000 vouchers under
    authority delegated by the Senate Committee on Rules and
    Administration. The voucher processing consisted of providing
    interpretation of Senate rules, regulations and statutes and applying
    the same to expense claims, monitoring of contracts, and direct
    involvement with the Senate's central vendor file. On average, vouchers
    greater than $100 that do not have any issues or questions are
    received, audited, sanctioned electronically by the Senate Committee on
    Rules and Administration using Web FMIS and paid within 10 business
    days.
        Uploaded items are of two varieties, certified expenses and vendor
    payments. Certified expenses have been around since the 1980's and
    included items such as stationery, telecommunications, postage, and
    equipment. Currently, the certifications include mass transit, mass
    mail, franked mail, excess copy charges, Photographic Studio, and
    Recording Studio charges. Expenses incurred by the various Senate
    offices are certified to the Disbursing Office on a monthly basis. The
    expenses are detailed on a spreadsheet which is also electronically
    uploaded. The physical voucher is audited and appropriate revisions are
    made. Concentrated effort is put forth to ensure certified items appear
    as paid in the same month they are incurred.
        Vendor uploads are fairly new, and are used to pay vendors for the
    Stationery Room, Senate Gift Shop, state office rentals, and refunds of
    security deposits for the Page School. The methodology is roughly the
    same as for certifications, but the payments rendered are for the
    individual vendors. Although these items are generally processed and
    paid quickly, the state office rents are generally paid a few days
    prior to the month of the rental in keeping with a general policy of
    paying rent in advance.
        The Disbursing Office has sanctioning authority for vouchers of
    $100 or less. These vouchers comprise approximately 60 percent of all
    vouchers processed. The responsibility for sanctioning rests with the
    Certifying Accounts Payable Specialists and are received, audited, and
    paid within 5 business days of receipt. As in the previous year,
    Disbursing continued to pass two post-payment audits performed by the
    Senate Committee on Rules and Administration.
        Additionally, advance documents and non-Contingent Fund vouchers
    are now posted in Audit. Currently, there are three Certifying Accounts
    Payable Specialists who handle the bulk of the sanctioning
    responsibilities within the group. This, coupled with the reduced flow
    of vouchers to the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, has
    allowed us to continue with their inclusion in the online sanctioning
    process.
        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 trained 10 new Administrative Managers and
    Chief Clerks and conducted three informational sessions for Senate
    staff through seminars sponsored by the Congressional Research Service
    (CRS). The Accounts Payable group also routinely assists the IT
    department and other groups as necessary in the testing and
    implementation of the new hardware, software, and system applications.
    Web FMIS version 10 was in use for most of the year with the
    electronic, importable expense summary report (ESR). The section
    participated in testing for the release of Web FMIS version 11 late in
    the year.
        The cancellation process for advances was upgraded and streamlined
    in 2006. This was necessary to ensure repayment of advances
    systematically for canceled or postponed travel in accordance with
    Senate Travel Regulations, as well as to provide functionality
    consistent with the release of the advance module in Web FMIS version
    11. The new process eliminates the need to create zero dollar vouchers,
    allows the Disbursing Office to completely handle the cancellations in
    FAMIS, and allows administrative managers to simply void their advance
    documents.
                    disbursing office information technology

                    Financial Management Information System

        The Disbursing Office Information Technology (IT) Department
    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 140
    Senate accounting locations (i.e., 100 Senator's offices, 20
    committees, 20 leadership and support offices, the Office of the
    Secretary of the Senate, the Office of the Sergeant at Arms, the Senate
    Committee on Rules and Administration Audit section, 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.
        The activities associated with each of these responsibilities are
    described in more detail in the sections that follow. Work during 2006
    was supported by the Sergeant at Arms (SAA) Technology Services staff,
    the Secretary's Information Systems 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, database software, and telecommunications;
    technical assistance for these components, including migration
    management, and database administration; and regular batch processing.
    BearingPoint, under contract with the SAA, is responsible for
    operational support, and under contract with the Secretary, for
    application development. The Disbursing office is the ``business
    owner'' of FMIS and is responsible for making the functional decisions
    about FMIS. The three organizations work cooperatively.
        Highlights of the year include:
      --Implementation of two releases of Web FMIS, including integration
            of the travel advance functionality of the FATS;
      --Implementation of a release of SAVI that reduced the number of
            pages of a standard Travel Expense Summary Report from 3 to 2;
      --Implementation of a release of Checkwriter;
      --Implementation of two sets of changes to ADPICS and FAMIS;
      --Testing of a major upgrade to the underlying database, from DB2v7
            to DB2v8;
      --Testing of a new mainframe computer;
      --Support of the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration's post
            payment audit of a statistically valid sample of vouchers of
            $100 or less;
      --Installing new PCs throughout the Disbursing Office;
      --Coordinating and participating in the FMIS portion of a disaster
            recovery exercise for the Alternate Computing Facility; and
      --Conducting monthly classes and seminars on Web FMIS.
        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.

                           Supporting Current Systems

        The IT section supports FMIS users in all 140 accounting locations,
    the Disbursing Office Accounts Payable, Accounting, Disbursements and
    Front Office Sections, and the Senate Committee on Rules and
    Administration 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 questions; and meet with chiefs of staff,
            administrative 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 database access optimization;
      --Security--maintaining user rights for all ADPICS, FAMIS, and Web
            FMIS users;
      --System administration--design, test and make entries to tables that
            are intrinsic to the system;
      --Support of accounting activities--perform functional testing of the
            cyclic accounting system activities such as rollover, the
            process by which tables for the new fiscal year are created,
            and archiving and purging for the current year tables data for
            lapsed fiscal years;
      --Support the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration post
            payment voucher audit process; and
      --Training--provide functional training to all Senate FMIS users.
        Under the supervision of the IT Group, the contractor created tools
    to determine the sample size, to enable selecting the sample from the
    universe of vouchers of $100 and less, and to determine the acceptable
    number of discrepancies given the sample size and the desired
    confidence interval. Both audits conducted in 2006 resulted in a
    favorable finding of zero discrepancies. The audit conducted in April
    2006 for the six-month period ending March 31, 2006, covered 26,162
    vouchers and the audit conducted in October 2006 for the six-month
    period ending September 30, 2006, covered 27,994 vouchers.

                                                                             SENATE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Subsystem                             Functionality                                Source                                 Primary Users                       Implementation
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    FAMIS (Mainframe)..................  General ledger..........................  Off-the-shelf federal system............  Disbursing Office.......................  October 1998
                                         Vendor file
                                         Administrative functions
                                         Security functions
    ADPICS (Mainframe).................  Preparation of requisition, purchase      Off-the-shelf federal system............  Sergeant at Arms........................  October 1998
                                          order, voucher from purchase order, and                                            Disbursing Office
                                          direct voucher documents.                                                          Secretary of the Senate
                                         Electronic document review functions
                                         Administrative functions
    Checkwriter (Client-server)........  Prints checks and check registers as      Off-the-shelf state government system     Disbursing Office.......................  October 1998
                                          well as ACH (Automated Clearing House)    purchased from and adapted to Senate's
                                          direct deposit transmission payments.     requirements.
    Web FMIS (Intranet)................  Preparation of voucher, travel advance,   Custom software developed by contractor.  All Senators' offices...................  October 1999--Client Server
                                          voucher from advance documents, credit                                             All Committee offices                     August 2004--Intranet
                                          documents and simple commitment and                                                All leadership & support offices
                                          obligation documents.                                                              Secretary of the Senate
                                         Entry of detailed budget                                                            Sergeant at Arms
                                         Reporting functions (described below)                                               Disbursing Office
                                         Electronic document submission and
                                          review functions.
                                         Administrative functions
    FATS (PC-based)....................  Tracks travel advances and petty cash     Developed by SAA Technology Services....  Disbursing Office.......................  Spring 1983
                                          advances (available to Committees only).
                                         Tracks election cycle information
                                         We are in the process of integrating
                                          FATS functionality into Web FMIS. The
                                          December 2006 Web FMIS release
                                          integrated the travel advance and petty
                                          cash advance functionality of FATS.
    Post Payment Voucher Audit (PC-      Selects a random sample of vouchers for   Excel spreadsheet developed.............  Senate Committee on Rules and             Spring 2003
     based).                              the Senate Committee on Rules and                                                   Administration And Disbursing Office.
                                          Administration to use in conducting a
                                          post payment audit. Sanctioning of
                                          these documents was delegated to the
                                          Financial Clerk.
    SAVI (Intranet)....................  As currently implemented, provides self-  Off the shelf system purchased..........  Senate employees........................  Pilot--Spring 2002
                                          service access (via the Senate's                                                                                             Senate-wide--July 2002
                                          intranet) to payment information for
                                          employees receiving reimbursements.
                                         Administrative functions
    Online ESR (Intranet)..............  A component of SAVI through which Senate  Custom software developed by contractor.  Senate employees........................  April 2003
                                          employees can create online Travel/Non-
                                          Travel Expense Summary Reports and
                                          submit them electronically to their
                                          Administrative Manager/Chief Clerk for
                                          processing.
    Secretary's Report (Mainframe        Produces the Report of the Secretary of   Custom software developed by contractor.  Disbursing Office.......................  Spring 1999
     extracts, crystal reports, and       the Senate.
     client-server ``tool box'').
    Ledger Statements (Mainframe         Produces monthly reports from FAMIS that  Developed by SAA Technology Serv-  ices.  Disbursing Office.......................  Winter 1999
     database extracts, and crystal       are sent to all Senate ``accounting                                                Senate Accounting Locations
     reports).                            locations''.
    Web FMIS Reports (mainframe          Produces a large number of reports from   Custom software developed by contractor.  Senate Accounting Locations.............  October 1999--Client Server
     database extracts, crystal           Web FMIS, FAMIS and ADPICS data at                                                                                           April 2005--Intranet
     reports, and Intranet).              summary and detailed levels. Data is
                                          updated as an overnight process and can
                                          be updated through an online process by
                                          accounting locations.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                         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. During 2005 the SAA implemented two major upgrades
    to the FMIS infrastructure--upgrading the database software, DB2, from
    version 7 to version 8, and installing a new mainframe computer.
        For each upgrade, the Disbursing office tests all FMIS subsystems
    in a testing environment and verifies all FMIS subsystems in the
    production environment after the implementation. The change is
    implemented and production validation is done by the IT section.
        The DB2 upgrade required three such testing and validation periods
    during the spring and summer of 2006 for operating system changes that
    were pre-requisites of the DB2 upgrade, DB2 v8 in ``compatibility
    mode'' and DB2v8 in new features mode. The new mainframe computer
    required one validation activity. The SAA installed a new mainframe at
    the ACF and later at the Primary Computing Facility in the Postal
    Square Building (PCF).

                  Managing and Testing New System Development

        During 2006, the FMIS team supervised development, performed
    extensive integration system testing, and implemented changes to FMIS
    subsystems. For each, implementation and production verification was
    done over a weekend in order to minimize system down time to users.
    Upgrades to the following systems were done during 2006: Web FMIS; SAVI
    and Online ESR; Checkwriter; and ADPICS and FAMIS (for the SAA Finance
    staff).
        The items selected for development and implementation are based on
    user requests, suggestions from the SAA technical staff, the
    contractor, and the Disbursing office IT section. The office meets
    regularly with users. During May and June the office met weekly with
    the Web FMIS users group in order to review the new page designs and
    functionality that were implemented in December 2006. Additionally, the
    office met with the ADPICS/FAMIS users group on a monthly basis.

                                    Web FMIS

        Over the last three years the office has revamped Web FMIS,
    creating a ``zero-client'' application that can be accessed via an
    intranet browser, an important milestone in providing critical systems
    in a disaster situation. This began in August 2004 with the
    implementation of Web FMIS r9.0 for pilot offices. By the end of April
    2005, all Web FMIS users were using the intranet version of Web FMIS. A
    total of five upgrades to Web FMIS were implemented in 2005. During
    2006, the office implemented two releases:
      --Web FMIS r10.3.--Implemented in January 2006, updated the
            technology for and provided more functionality on the Inbox
            pages and the travel reimbursement mileage rate maintenance
            page. Additional functionality was added to the Documents/
            Create page and the Budget page, and bugs were fixed.
      --Web FMIS r 11.--Implemented in December 2006, included a rewritten
            Document Create page that eliminated pop-ups so that the system
            is not impacted by pop-up blockers; made technical changes to
            support future functionality such as attaching scanned invoices
            and creating vouchers via importing data from vendors; and
            provided more payment information. Additionally, the travel
            advance and cash advance tracking functionality of the
            standalone FATS system were integrated into Web FMIS. The
            system edits performed when a travel advance document is
            submitted electronically indicate whether the office has
            sufficient funds for the travel advance, based on the total of
            all outstanding advances allowed for that office and whether
            the traveler can be given another advance, based on the total
            number of outstanding advances allowed for that individual. The
            system supports the underlying rules associated with travel
            advances that were issued by the Senate Committee on Rules and
            Administration in December 2006.
        During 2006, the office continued to work with the contractor to
    define the requirements for additional functionality required for the
    Web FMIS releases planned for 2007:
      --Web FMIS r12.--Planned for Summer 2007, will add the ability to
            ``import'' invoice data from an outside vendor in order to
            create a voucher with minimal retyping. (This process is
            similar to the ``import'' process by which data from an online
            ESR, created via SAVI, is used to create a travel voucher).
      --Web FMIS r13.--Planned for Winter 2007, will be a pilot of
            paperless voucher processing, which requires adding electronic
            signature and documentation imaging functionality.
        Senate Automated Vendor Inquiry and Online ESR.--SAVI enables
    Senate staff to check the status of reimbursements, whether via check
    or direct deposit referencing an online ESR. The Online ESR function
    enables Senate staff to create expense summary reports, both travel and
    non-travel. These documents can be imported into Web FMIS, reducing the
    data entry tasks for voucher preparation. The SAVI system was upgraded
    once in 2006. Release 4.0, implemented in December 2006, reduced the
    number of pages of an average Travel ESR from 3 to 2. The reformatted
    Travel ESR collapses any sections in which there are no expenses and
    has a condensed signature block.
        Checkwriter.--The Disbursing office makes payments via direct
    deposit and check using the Checkwriter software. Release 6.0,
    implemented in December 2006, contains a rewritten security component.
        ADPICS and FAMIS.--The Sergeant at Arms finance staff are the
    primary users of ADPICS. ADPICS is a mainframe system that provides
    integrated procurement, receiving and voucher preparation functions
    that are not included in Web FMIS. The SAA finance staff requested a
    number of changes that would support more efficient use of ADPICS.
    These changes were implemented in the following two releases during
    2006:
      --March 2006.--Changes were made to twenty-five ADPICS and FAMIS
            screens. The most important of these affected the master vendor
            table and enables storing the vendor's DUNS and TINS numbers at
            the vendor suffix level. This allows the Disbursing Office to
            continue to use the same vendor number when a company changes
            names. This helps the SAA finance staff query data by vendor
            number. Other changes ranged from adding fields on specific
            screens, modifying the titles of function keys that provide
            direct links to other screens so that they show the screen
            number instead of a short screen name, modification of query
            results, modification of calculations, and providing the
            ability to link directly from FAMIS to ADPICS; and
      --October 2006.--Changes were made to twelve ADPICS screens. Many of
            these changes facilitated ``round-trip'' linking from one
            screen to another and then back to the original. Others enabled
            seeing more records on a list by specifying a starting point or
            expanding the number of pages displayed.
    Planning
        The Disbursing Office IT group performs 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 2006, this group continued to hold two types of meetings among
    the Disbursing office, SAA and the contractor 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); and
      --Technical meeting--a weekly meeting among the Disbursing Office
            staff (IT and functional), SAA Technical Services staff, and
            the contractor to discuss the active projects, including
            scheduling activities and resolving issues.
    Strategic Planning
        The FMIS strategic plan has a longer time horizon than the rolling
    12-month time frame of the technical meeting schedule. It is designed
    to set the direction and priorities for further enhancements. In 2002 a
    five-year strategic plan was written by the IT and Accounting staff for
    Disbursing Office Strategic Initiatives. This detailed description of
    five strategic initiatives formed the base for the Secretary of the
    Senate's request in 2002 for $5 million in multi-year funds for further
    work on the FMIS project. The five strategic initiatives are:
      --Paperless Vouchers--Imaging of Supporting Documentation and
            Electronic Signatures.--Beginning with a feasibility study and
            a pilot, implement new technology, including imaging and
            electronic signatures, that will reduce the Senate's dependence
            on paper vouchers. This will enable continuation of voucher
            processing operations from any location should an emergency
            occur;
      --Web FMIS.--Respond to requests from the Senate's Accounting
            Locations for additional functionality in Web FMIS;
      --Payroll System.--Respond to requests from the Senate's Accounting
            Locations for online 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 and includes developing the task
    orders with contractors overseeing their work and reviewing invoices.
    In 2006, three new task orders were executed: Web FMIS FATS
    enhancement; Imaging and signature design and electronic invoicing
    enhancement continuation; and Service year 2007 extended operational
    support.
        In addition, work continued under two task orders executed in prior
    years: Web FMIS r10; SAA finance system and reporting enhancements; and
    Service year 2006 extended operational support (which covers activities
    from September 2005 to August 2006).
    Administering the Disbursing Office's Local Area Network (LAN)
        The Disbursing office administers its own Local Area Network (LAN),
    which is separate from the LAN for the rest of the Secretary's Office.
    Our LAN Administrator's activities included: Office-wide LAN
    Maintenance and Upgrade; and Projects for the Payroll and Benefits
    Section.
                Office-wide LAN maintenance and upgrade
        The Disbursing Office maintained the existing workstations with
    appropriate upgrades including: Installing new PCs for the staff;
    Installing new servers for the Disbursing office LAN; and Implementing
    the Web-based version of FedLine, the software through which direct
    deposit payments are sent to the Federal Reserve.
                Projects for Payroll and Employee Benefits Sections
        The Disbursing Office continued to support the Payroll/Benefits
    Imaging system, developed by SAA staff, which captures and indexes
    payroll documents turned in at the front counter electronically. This
    is a critical system for Payroll and Employee Benefits sections.
    Coordinating the Disbursing Office(s Disaster Recovery Activities
        In the fall, the Sergeant at Arms technical staff conducted a
    disaster recovery test of the Senate's computing facilities, including
    FMIS functions. The test involved switching the Senate's network from
    accessing systems at the PCF to the ACF and powering down the PCF. The
    SAA's primary purpose was to test the technical process of switching to
    the ACF, although due to work constraints, only a limited amount of
    time was available for functional testing. In essence, FMIS systems and
    data would be ``failed-over'' to the ACF, made available for testing
    for the functional testing window, and then the systems would be
    ``failed back'' to the PCF, but that the data would not be ``failed
    back''. Thus, any changes made while testing at the ACF would not be
    reflected in production data.
        The Disbursing Office staff set minimal goals of accessing all
    critical FMIS subsystems. While the Disbursing Office IT staff
    coordinated activities, the actual testing was done by Disbursing
    Office functional and technical staff, the contractor, and SAA
    technical staff. Disbursing IT staff and the contractor tested ADPICS/
    FAMIS, Web FMIS, SAVI, and Checkwriter. Disbursing payroll staff and
    SAA technical staff tested the payroll system.
        Within the limited scope of the test, the Disbursing Office
    successfully tested all the critical components of FMIS, with the
    exception of (a) printing requisition, purchase order and voucher
    documents from ADPICS for SAA finance (b) critical batch processes
    which were not tested (e.g. taking a a single document from data entry
    in Web FMIS through payment in FAMIS). The Disbursing Office has
    requested that the SAA conduct disaster recovery tests twice a year and
    that additional system components be available to test at each
    successive test.
    Disbursing Office COOP Activities
        The Disbursing Office has had a Continuation of Operations Plan
    (COOP) since 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. In addition to the
    success of disaster recovery testing in December, Disbursing has also
    completed the setup and pre-positioning of essential equipment and
    supplies.
                             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 includes: 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 335 books and matted and framed 551 items for Senate
    leadership, as well as matting and framing six items for the 55th
    Inaugural ceremonies. For more than 25 years, the office has bound a
    copy of Washington's Farewell Address for the annual ceremony. Last
    year, the office rebound in leather and added 96 new pages to the
    Farewell Address sign-in book for Senators who read the address and
    fabricated a new box to house the book. In 2006, a volume was bound and
    read by Senator Ken Salazar.
        As mandated in the 1990 Senate Library Collection Condition Survey,
    the office continued to conduct an annual treatment of books identified
    by the survey as needed conservation or repair. In 2006 conservation
    treatments were completed for 99 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 3,750 volumes.
        The office assisted the Senate Library with 608 books sent to the
    Library Binding section of the Government Printing Office (GPO) for
    binding. Additionally, the Office of Conservation and Preservation
    worked with the Senate Library to create four exhibits located in the
    Senate Russell building basement corridor. This office also completed
    the restoration of 55 volumes of House hearings for the Senate Library
    that had water and mold damage. These books were rebound with new end
    sheets and new covers using the old spines when possible.
        The Office of Conservation and Preservation continues to assist
    Senate offices with conservation and preservation of documents, books,
    and various other items. For example, the office continues to monitor
    the temperature and humidity in the Senate Library storage areas, the
    vault and warehouse for preservation and conservation purposes.
                                   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
    specific architectural features; and exercises supervisory
    responsibility for the historic 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
        A painting of Senator Bob Dole for the Senate Leadership Portrait
    Collection was officially unveiled in the Old Senate Chamber on July
    25, 2006 and a mural depicting the authors of the Connecticut
    Compromise was unveiled on September 12, 2006 in the Senate Reception
    Room. Other important commissioned works in progress include leadership
    portraits of Senators Robert C. Byrd, Tom Daschle, and Trent Lott; all
    three are scheduled to be completed in 2008.
        Three hundred sixty-two objects were accessioned into the Senate
    Collection, including: 126 Senate Chamber Gallery passes, dating from
    1890 to the present; tickets for various joint sessions of Congress
    held in 2006; ephemera related to nominations, new Congresses, laying
    in state ceremonies, and portrait unveilings; china used in the Senate
    Restaurant in the 1920s and 1930s; and historic prints and photographs
    of the Capitol and its interior, including a circa 1890 stereoview of
    the Senate Chamber, a rare 1827 wood engraving of the west front of the
    Capitol, and an 1872 cartoon by Thomas Nast.
        The Senate Commission on Art approved the acquisition of a
    monumental, Civil War-era painting (recently discovered in New York
    State) of Henry Clay in the U.S. Senate. This painting is a rare
    depiction of the historic Old Senate Chamber. Additionally, it serves
    as a group portrait memorializing Senator Clay and twelve of his 19th
    century Senate colleagues. The painting will require extensive
    conservation.
        As part of an ongoing effort to locate and recover historic objects
    associated with the Senate, a historic Russell Building partner desk,
    built by George Cobb, was located. It was recently returned to the
    Senate from the Lyndon Baines Johnson Library and Museum.
        Forty-four 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. Appropriate disposition of 27 foreign gifts was
    completed following established procedures.
        Preparations continued for new curatorial storage spaces in the CVC
    and the SSF. The office worked with the SAA staff to select a vendor to
    provide specialized preservation storage equipment for the two Curator
    storage rooms in the CVC. Installation of the equipment is planned for
    late 2007. Preparations are nearing completion for the storage room in
    the SSF, with specialized climate control and security. Objects will be
    moved into the space in the spring of 2007.
        Along with the expansion of curatorial storage spaces, improved
    monitoring plans were developed to track the environmental conditions
    in these spaces. Consistency in temperature and relative humidity will
    be monitored through a single electronic system that collects data from
    all collection storage areas, as well as some of the historic spaces in
    the Capitol where collections are on display. After careful review by a
    committee representing the Curator's Office, Senate Security,
    Secretary's Information Systems, and Senate IT, a system was selected
    earlier this year and installation should take place this spring.
    Temporary monitors were installed in the new SSF Curator room and have
    greatly aided in evaluating and adjusting the environmental systems.
        Monitoring for biological agents harmful to collections was
    addressed through the development of an Integrated Pest Management Plan
    (IPM). The office has initiated IPM monitoring in its current
    collection storage spaces.
        The Curator's office completed its project to photograph the 102
    historic Senate Chamber desks (which includes the 100 on the Senate
    floor and 2 desks currently in storage). One set of transparencies will
    be stored off-site for emergency purposes, while a second working set
    will be used for the web, image requests, and future publications. The
    project was completed ahead of schedule.
        The Curator's staff began a comprehensive and detailed survey of
    the Senate Chamber chairs. Twenty-seven chairs (seat and chair frames)
    were examined during Senate recesses to determine past occupants and to
    identify changes in Senate Cabinet Shop construction over the years. It
    is hoped that this study will enable the identification and
    preservation of important chairs that still remain in the Senate, and
    also educate Curator's staff so that timely and informed decisions can
    be made on chairs that might come up for sale or donation.
        In keeping with established procedures, all Senate Collection
    objects on display were inventoried, noting any changes in location. In
    addition, as directed by S. Res. 178 (108th Congress, 1st sess.), the
    office submitted inventories of the art and historic furnishings in the
    Senate to the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration. The
    inventories, submitted every six months, are compiled by the Curator's
    office with assistance from the SAA and the AOC Senate Superintendent.
    Conservation and Restoration
        A total of 12 objects received conservation treatment in 2006,
    including 9 paintings and 3 decorative art objects.
        Several conservation projects were carried out to prepare both fine
    and decorative art objects for loan. In February 2006, a fine art
    services company was contracted to remove a monumental painting, The
    Battle of Chapultepec, by James Walker, from display at the former
    Marine Corps Historical Museum in Washington, D.C., where it had been
    on loan since 1982. The company disassembled the frame and constructed
    four crates to transport the painting and frame to the Thomas Gilcrease
    Institute of American History and Art in Tulsa, Oklahoma, where it is
    now on loan. The Gilcrease Museum provides an excellent venue for
    continued public display of the painting within the context of the
    history of the southwest region of the country.
        Two large paintings displayed in the Senate wing received
    conservation treatment in situ during the August 2006 recess: The First
    Reading of the Emancipation Proclamation by President Lincoln by
    Francis Bicknell Carpenter, and Daniel Webster by James Henry Wright.
    The AOC assisted with both projects by providing scaffolding in the
    stairwells for access to the paintings by the conservators.
        Also during the August recess, conservators installed the oil on
    canvas painting depicting the authors of the Connecticut Compromise by
    Bradley Stevens on the upper west wall of the Senate Reception Room.
        The office contracted a report for a condition assessment and
    treatment options for the Senate's historic 19th century Cornelius &
    Baker armorial chandelier, and worked with staff at the Smithsonian
    Institution to study its finishes. Also, staff conducted research into
    the electrification of gasoliers in the Capitol; all in an effort to
    provide an informed use and treatment recommendation for the chandelier
    to the Commission on Art.
        The Curator's staff participated in training sessions for the USCP
    regarding the care and protection of art in the Capitol, and continued
    to educate the housekeeping personnel on maintenance issues related to
    the fine and decorative art collections.
    Historic Preservation
        The Curator's office worked with the AOC and the SAA to review,
    comment, plan, and document Senate-side construction projects that
    involve or affect historic resources. Construction and conservation
    efforts that required considerable review and assistance included: the
    Brumidi Corridor mural conservation; egress modifications; skylight
    repair of Senate grand stairwells; S-127 mural conservation; wireless
    antenna installation; Senate Chamber bench refinishing and re-
    upholstering. The office continued to refine communication procedures
    with those organizations that undertake building projects, as well as
    the Senate community. As a result of this effort, schedule coordination
    between the trade shops, the Curator, and the occupants has improved,
    and the art and architectural objects in project areas are better
    protected. In addition, the office worked to increase services by
    facilitating projects for Capitol offices.
        One of the most ambitious preservation undertakings by the office
    is the restoration and rehabilitation of the Senate Reception Room.
    Anticipated to be a joint venture with the AOC, the project will
    highlight the significant elements of the room through restoration and
    interpretation. An advisory board was impaneled by the Commission on
    Art to provide counsel with this prominent project and the advisory
    board held its first meeting.
        The Curator's office continued to provide research services
    regarding architectural history, and to disseminate important
    discoveries for the benefit of the Senate. During the past year, the
    office increased knowledge and holdings pertaining to room histories,
    architectural features, and historic images. Research projects
    included: international Minton tile repair and replacement; original
    doors in the Brumidi Corridors; and compiling searchable annual reports
    from the Secretary of the Senate, the SAA, and the AOC. Another new
    initiative, with the assistance of the SAA Photographic Studio, was to
    visually document the leadership suites and committee rooms in the
    Capitol during the 109th Congress.
    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 USCP, the Old Senate Chamber was
    closed to visitors after September 11, 2001. However, during eight
    Senate recesses the historic room is open to Capitol Guide and staff-
    led tours. Twenty-four requests were received from current Members of
    Congress for after-hours access to the Old Senate Chamber. Twenty-one
    requests were received by current Members of Congress for admittance to
    the Old Supreme Court Chamber after-hours.
        In order to enhance existing documentation and to provide an
    important resource for future planning, the office continued to work
    closely with the AOC and a contractor to oversee the creation of
    accurate, existing condition drawings of the Old Senate Chamber and the
    Old Supreme Court Chamber that meet the Historic American Building
    Survey standard. No such detailed drawings exist for these historic
    chambers, or any space within the Capitol, yet this is important
    historical and archival documentation. Currently, the Old Senate
    Chamber drawings are undergoing final edits and the Old Supreme Court
    Chamber is being measured.
    Loans To and From the Collection
        A total of 58 historic objects and paintings are currently on loan
    to the Curator's office on behalf of Senate leadership and officials in
    the Capitol. The staff added loans of one object, returned two
    paintings at the expiration of their loan periods to their respective
    owners, and renewed loan agreements for 32 other objects.
        The Secretary's china was distributed and returned four times in
    2006. It was used for events such as a dinner for the retiring Senators
    of the 109th Congress, and a luncheon and dinner for new Senators. The
    official Senate china was inventoried and used at 24 receptions for
    distinguished guests.
    Publications and Exhibitions
        The Curator's office published the United States Senate Catalogue
    of Graphic Art. This 500-page book features the Senate's collection of
    more than 900 historic engravings and lithographs and includes 2 full-
    length essays and almost 40 short essays discussing selected prints.
    The volume is the first comprehensive publication of the Senate's
    historic print collection, which represents a 30-year effort to
    document graphically the 19th and early 20th century history of the
    Senate, the Capitol, and American political history. The diverse
    illustrations range for inauguration ceremonies and impeachment trials
    to senatorial portraits and political cartoons. Represented in the
    Senate's graphic art collection are some of the most notable artists
    who worked in the printmaking medium: Augustus Kollner, Rembrandt Peal,
    Alexander Hay Ritchie, Thomas Nast, and Joseph Keppler. The Senate
    Curator and Associate Senate Historian co-authored the publication, a
    companion volume to the United States Senate Catalogue of Fine Art,
    published in 2003. The Curator's staff worked closely with the
    Government Printing Office (GPO) on the design and printing of the
    publication.
        The office completed and posted three major interactive exhibits on
    the Senate Web site: Isaac Bassett: A Senate Memoir; The Senate Chamber
    Desks; and Take the Puck Challenge! All three exhibits were developed
    in conjunction with the Secretary's Webmaster and a contractor. Isaac
    Bassett features selections from the historic Isaac Bassett manuscript
    collection, and is illustrated by images from the Senate's collection
    of art and historical objects. It uses Bassett's own words to
    illustrate life in the 19th century Senate as only the doorkeeper could
    have described it. His unique position as a trusted, long-time employee
    of the Senate and close confidant of many Senators make the stories he
    included in his memoir both engaging and enlightening. The Web site
    features actual images of Bassett's handwritten notes and an
    interactive time line.
        The Senate Chamber Desks Web site chronicles the history of these
    historic furnishings. Viewers are able to see where their Senators sit,
    learn specific information about each desk (including biographical
    information on Senators who occupied each desk, and conservation and
    restoration records), and read stories related to the history of the
    desks.
        Take the Puck Challenge! features quizzes, games, and puzzles to
    introduce viewers to the political cartoons of the 19th century
    satirical magazine Puck. It is part of a larger Web site that features
    all of the Senate's Puck cartoons.
        Another interactive Web exhibit, Advise and Consent: The Drawings
    of Lily Spandorf, recently went live. Advise and Consent explores the
    work of Lily Spandorf, an artist sent to sketch the filming of the Otto
    Preminger movie of the same name, filmed in and around the Capitol in
    1962. Ms. Spandorf's sketches are now owned by the Senate.
        As part of an ongoing program to provide more information about the
    Capitol and its spaces, the office developed a brochure for S-238, the
    Strom Thurmond Room, and posted several brochures on the Senate Web
    site, including: The U.S. Senate Leadership Portrait Collection; The
    U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee; and The Vice Presidential Bust
    Collection. The office also added to the Senate Web site's fine art
    pages by publishing the biographical and subject information from the
    United States Senate Catalogue of Fine Art for 160 works of art.
        In May 2006, at the request of the Senate Committee on Rules and
    Administration, six historic photographs of the Capitol were enlarged,
    framed, and installed in the basement of the Senate Russell Building in
    order to enhance the space. The Office of Senate Curator also continued
    to be a significant contributor to Unum, the Secretary of the Senate's
    newsletter.
        The office continued to develop an oral history program related to
    the Senate's art and historical collections. Several artists were
    interviewed related to their work on recently commissioned portraits.
    It is anticipated that a Web site on the first phase of this
    educational project will be posted this year.
    Policies and Procedures
        The Senate Curatorial Advisory Board met in February, 2006. The
    board reviewed the Battle of Chapultepec loan; the Connecticut
    Compromise mural; the Senator Bob Dole portrait; the Cornelius and
    Baker historic chandelier; as well as new acquisitions. The historic
    structures report for the Senate east vestibule, adjacent stairwell,
    and Small Senate Rotunda was presented, and the restoration of these
    historic spaces was discussed. The board continued to provide
    invaluable assistance to the Senate on curatorial and preservation
    matters throughout the year. Composed of respected scholars and
    curators, this 12-member board was established to provide expert advice
    to the Commission on Art regarding the Senate's art and historic
    collections and preservation program, and to assist in the acquisition
    and review of new objects for the collection.
        In 2006 the Senate passed legislation (S. Res. 629) establishing a
    procedure for affixing and removing permanent and semi-permanent
    artwork in the Senate wing of the Capitol and in the Senate Office
    Buildings. The new regulations require the Commission on Art to review
    any such proposals to add such permanent or semi-permanent art, and the
    Senate to give its formal approval before any such proposals may be
    adopted.
        Building on the historic mirror survey completed in 2005, the
    office developed a management policy and procedures for the collection,
    as well as care and maintenance plans. This program will ensure that
    the Senate's impressive collection of nearly 100 ornate mirrors in the
    Capitol receives the treatment necessary to preserve them for future
    generations.
    Collaborations, Educational Programs, and Events
        The much anticipated nine-hour documentary on the Capitol and
    Congress developed by C-SPAN aired in July. Providing a detailed
    history of the building and institution, the Curator's office and the
    Historical Office worked closely with C-SPAN over a two-year period on
    various aspects of the historical content, filming, and interviews.
        The office continued to assist CVC staff on several initiatives for
    the new Visitor Center. These include the interactive programs for the
    exhibition area and the development of a plan for artwork in the CVC.
        The Senate Curator and staff gave lectures on the Senate's art and
    historical collections to various historical groups and art museums.
    Office Administration
        The SSF was completed in late 2005. The office worked for several
    years with the SAA staff to develop plans for space within the
    warehouse. While the museum-quality space will be finalized this
    spring, other storage space assigned to the Curator was occupied in
    January, 2006. The office transferred several historic furnishings and
    other Senate-related objects, exhibit and art shipping materials, and
    publications to the completed storage area. As part of that task,
    material was re-inventoried, and new tracking numbers were assigned.
        With the assistance of the Office of Education and Training, the
    staff continued work on developing a three-year strategic plan for the
    Office of Senate Curator. This will be an important document for the
    office as it moves forward with its many conservation, preservation,
    and education initiatives.
    Automation
        The office continued to work on developing an organization plan and
    procedures for all types of files and media collected and maintained by
    the Curator's office. Paper and electronic files have increased
    substantially in the last ten years and maintaining systematic
    organization of these various documents is imperative. The results will
    greatly improve response time to information requests, search
    capabilities for researchers, and the safety of significant reference
    materials.
    Objectives for 2007
        Preparations to move Senate collections into the new curatorial
    storage spaces will be a major initiative in 2007. Once outstanding
    issues related to control of the environment are addressed at the SSF,
    the office will move more than 75 historic objects, including
    furniture, rugs, paintings, and a chandelier, to the museum-quality
    space. In association with the AOC and SAA, the office will also
    develop a Disaster Recovery Plan for this storage space, to mitigate
    the potential affect of disasters upon collection objects.
        The office will oversee installation of collection storage
    equipment for the two storage spaces in the CVC in the fall of 2007.
    Museum-quality storage equipment has been ordered to house collection
    objects in these new spaces, in accordance with a recently completed
    Collection Storage Plan. Objects in need of archival re-housing will be
    identified and prioritized as part of the preparations for a collection
    move that will take place in 2008.
        Proposals for an environmental monitoring system that will
    encompass all collection storage spaces will be assessed and reviewed
    by the Senate Curator's office with the assistance of other Senate
    offices. It is intended that environmental monitors will be purchased
    and installed in phases starting later this spring.
        Conservation and preservation continue to be a priority. Projects
    in 2007 will include conservation treatment to restore the historic
    frame and painting, Henry Clay in the U.S. Senate, by Phineas Staunton.
    Other conservation projects include: the monumental painting, The
    Battle of Lake Erie, by William Henry Powell, displayed in the east
    grand stairway of the Senate wing; the portrait of John Adams by
    Eliphalet Frazer Andrews; and the frame for the painting, Sergeants
    Jasper and Newton Rescuing American Prisoners from the British, by John
    Blake White.
        The office will continue its efforts to locate and recover
    significant historic Senate pieces. It will also embark on developing a
    plan to highlight the Russell Building furniture in preparation for the
    100th anniversary of these historic pieces in 2009.
        The microfiche of the Senate collection files will be sent off-site
    to the National Archives for contingency in case of a disaster, along
    with transparencies documenting several historic photographic albums,
    the Senate desks, and the more than 900 historic prints in the Senate
    collection.
        In 2007 the Office of Senate Curator will complete a reorganization
    of the Senate art Web site to provide easier, more intuitive access to
    the Senate's art, historical collections, and online exhibits and
    publications. This task will be undertaken in coordination with the
    Secretary's Webmaster and Senate Library staff, and will be an
    important first step in creating and organizing the Senate's Web
    content according to standardized metadata.
        Also related to the Web site, the office will work with the
    Historical office and staff of the Senate Page School to develop a Web
    exhibit for high school students on the history and art of the Senate.
    The conservation process for the newly acquired Henry Clay painting
    will be documented for use on the Senate art Web site as part of the
    office's education initiatives. Additionally, staff will update The
    Senate Chamber Desks Web site to reflect the 110th Congress, and will
    add additional historical facts about the desks.
        The office will review its public education programs with an eye
    toward leveraging office assets to greater effectiveness, and
    developing a long-range strategic plan for the program. Several
    publications will be reprinted, and the office will continue to enlarge
    its offering of brochures on historic rooms by producing one on the
    Democratic leader's suite in the Capitol.
        The Office of Senate Curator will continue to administer the
    current commissioned leadership portraits of Senators Byrd, Daschle,
    and Lott, and advance efforts to commission leadership portraits of
    Senators Frist and Stevens.
        Historic preservation activities will increase as the office takes
    a more active role in the Capitol's building projects and maintenance.
    The office will work to promote its preservation services for Senate
    offices, including providing architectural histories and facilitating
    projects. The office will also implement a preservation inspection
    program for the Senate side of the Capitol in order to ensure the
    immediate repair and continued protection of the Senate's architectural
    resources. Finally, with the AOC, adopting a preservation policy and
    appointing an historic preservation officer, the Curator's role in
    building project review will expand and become more formalized. The
    office will work with the AOC's historic preservation officer to define
    a review process and to ensure the highest preservation standards are
    applied to all Capitol projects.
        Responding to the critical conservation priorities identified for
    the Senate's historic mirror collection, the Curator's office will
    develop and contract a multi-phased conservation project. This work
    will include full conservation of at least three mirrors and on-site
    consolidation of two mirrors, and will establish procedures and
    standards for a mirror conservation program. Similarly, the office will
    embark on a comprehensive maintenance program for all Senate
    collections under the purview of the Office of Senate Curator. Such a
    program will help safeguard the objects for future generations.
        Additionally, the Senate Curatorial Advisory Board and Senate
    Reception Room Advisory Board will meet, review, and report on
    projects. The Senate Curator's COOP will be re-evaluated, tabletop
    exercises conducted, and the COOP document updated.
                   3. joint office of education and training
        The Joint Office of Education and Training provides employee
    training and development opportunities for all Senate staff in
    Washington D.C. and the states. There are three branches within the
    office. The Technical Training branch is responsible for providing
    technical training support for approved software packages and equipment
    used in either Washington, D.C. or the state offices. This branch
    provides instructor-led classes; one-on-one coaching sessions;
    specialized vendor provided training; computer-based training; and
    informal training and support services. The Professional Training
    branch provides courses for all Senate staff in areas including:
    management and leadership development, human resources issues and staff
    benefits, legislative and staff information, new staff and intern
    information. The Health Promotion branch provides seminars, classes and
    screenings on health and wellness issues. This branch also coordinates
    an annual Health Fair for all Senate employees and plans three blood
    drives every year.
    Training Classes
        The Joint Office of Education and Training offered 658 classes in
    2006, drawing 6,007 participants. This office's registration desk
    handled over 32,000 e-mail and phone requests for training and
    documentation.
        Of the above total, in the Technical Training area 273 classes were
    held with a total attendance of 1,226 students. An additional 410 staff
    received coaching in 160 sessions on various software packages and
    other computer related issues. In the Professional Development area 385
    classes were held with a total attendance of 4,781 students.
        The Office of Education and Training is available to work with
    teams on issues related to team performance, communication, or conflict
    resolution. During 2006, over 55 requests for special training and team
    building were met.
        In the Health Promotion area, 2,628 staff participated in Health
    Promotion activities throughout the year. These activities included:
    lung function and kidney screenings, blood drives, the Health and
    Fitness Day and seminars on health related topics.
    State Training
        Since most of the classes that are offered are only practical for
    D.C. based staff, the Office of Education and Training continues to
    offer the ``State Training Fair'' which began in March 2000. In 2006,
    two sessions of this program were attended by 63 state staff. This
    office also conducted the State Directors Forum, which was attended by
    25 state administrative managers and directors. In addition, this
    office has implemented the ``Virtual Classroom'' which is an internet-
    based training library of 3,000+ courses. To date, 392 state office and
    D.C. staff have accessed a total of 903 different lessons using this
    training option. Furthermore, the Professional Training branch offered
    22 Video Teleconferencing classes, which were attended by 323 state
    staff.
                        4. chief counsel for employment
        The Office of the Senate Chief Counsel for Employment (SCCE) is a
    non-partisan office established at the direction of the Joint
    Leadership in 1993 after enactment of the Government Employee Rights
    Act (GERA), which allowed Senate employees to file claims of employment
    discrimination against Senate offices. With the enactment of the
    Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (CAA), Senate offices became
    subject to the requirements, responsibilities and obligations of 11
    employment laws. The SCCE is charged with the legal defense of Senate
    offices in employment law cases at both the administrative and court
    levels. Also, on a day-to-day basis, the SCCE 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;
      --Mediations to Resolve Lawsuits;
      --Court-Ordered Alternative Dispute Resolutions;
      --Union Drives, Negotiations, and Unfair Labor Practice Charges;
      --Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA)/Americans With Disability
            Act (ADA) Compliance;
      --Layoffs and Office Closings In Compliance With the Law;
      --Management Training Regarding Legal Responsibilities; and
      --Preventive Legal Advice.
    Litigation; Mediations; Alternative Dispute Resolutions
        The SCCE defends each of the 180 employing offices of the Senate in
    all court actions, 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.
    OSHA/ADA Compliance
        The SCCE provides advice and assistance to Senate offices by
    assisting them with complying with the applicable OSHA and ADA
    regulations; representing them during Office of Compliance inspections;
    advising State offices on the preparation of the Office of Compliance's
    Home State OSHA/ADA Inspection Questionnaires; assisting offices in the
    preparation of Emergency Action Plans; and advising and representing
    Senate offices when a complaint of an OSHA violation has been filed
    with the Office of Compliance or when a citation has been issued.
        In 2006, the SCCE inspected 184 Senate offices to ensure compliance
    with the ADA and OSHA.
    Management Training Regarding Legal Responsibilities
        The SCCE conducts legal seminars for the managers of Senate offices
    to assist them in complying with employment laws, thereby reducing
    their liability.
        In 2006, the SCCE gave 71 legal seminars to Senate offices. Among
    the topics covered were:
      --The Congressional Accountability Act of 1995: Management's Rights
            and Obligations;
      --Employment Laws You Must Know When Managing a Senate Office;
      --Avoiding Legal Landmines in Your Office;
      --Understanding Sexual Harassment in the Workplace;
      --A Manager's Guide to Preventing and Addressing Sexual Harassment in
            the Workplace;
      --Keys to Hiring: Reference Checks, Background Checks, and Testing
            for Illegal Drug Use;
      --Hiring the Right Employee: Advertising and Interviewing;
      --Your Office's Obligation to Give Military Leave;
      --Administering the Student Loan Repayment Program;
      --The Basic Pilot Program for Employment Eligibility Confirmation;
      --Diversity Awareness: The Legal Perspective;
      --Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990;
      --Legal Pitfalls in Evaluating, Disciplining and Terminating
            Employees;
      --A Manager's Guide to Complying with the Family and Medical Leave
            Act (FMLA).
        In addition, at the request of several Member offices, the SCCE
    developed and gave two new seminars: (1) How to Interview Academy
    Candidates: Appropriate and Inappropriate Questions, and (2) How to
    Interview Applicants for the Page Program: Appropriate and
    Inappropriate Questions.
    Preventive Legal Advice
        The SCCE meets with Members, chiefs of staff, administrative
    directors, administrative managers, staff directors, chief clerks and
    counsels at their request to provide legal advice. The purposes are to
    ensure compliance with the law, prevent litigation and minimize
    liability in the event of litigation. For example, on a daily basis,
    the SCCE advises Senate offices on matters such as disciplining or
    terminating employees in compliance with the law, handling and
    investigating sexual harassment complaints, accommodating the disabled,
    determining wage law requirements, meeting FMLA requirements, and
    management's rights and obligations under union laws and OSHA.
    Administrative/Miscellaneous Matters
        The SCCE provides legal assistance to employing offices to ensure
    that their employee handbooks and office policies, supervisors'
    manuals, job descriptions, interviewing guidelines, and performance
    evaluation forms comply with the law.
    Union Drives, Negotiations and Unfair Labor Practice Charges
        In 2006, the SCCE handled one union drive and assisted in
    negotiations with another union.
                              5. senate gift shop
        The U.S. Senate Gift Shop was established under the administrative
    direction and supervision of the Secretary of the Senate in October,
    1992, (United States Code, Title 2, Chapter 4). Since its
    establishment, the Senate Gift Shop has continued to provide service
    and products that maintain the integrity of the Senate while increasing
    the public's awareness of its history. The Gift Shop serves Senators,
    their spouses, staffs, constituents, and the many visitors to the U.S.
    Capitol complex.
        The products available include a wide range of fine gift items,
    collectables, and souvenirs created exclusively for the U.S. Senate.
    The services available include special ordering of personalized
    products and hard-to-find items, custom framing including red-lines and
    shadow boxes, gold embossing on leather, etching on glass and crystal,
    engraving on a variety of materials, and shipping.
        Additionally, the Gift Shop produces and distributes educational
    materials to tourists and constituents visiting the Capitol and Senate
    Office Buildings.
    Facilities
        In addition to the three physical locations, the Gift Shop has
    developed an online presence on Webster. The site currently offers a
    limited selection of products that can be purchased by phone, e-mail,
    or by printing and faxing the order form provided online. Long-term
    plans are to further develop the Web site to include a greater
    selection of merchandise, eventually adding an e-commerce component to
    facilitate online transactions. Along with offering over-the-counter,
    walk-in sales and limited intranet services, the Gift Shop
    Administrative Office provides mail order service via the phone or fax,
    and special order and catalogue sales.
        The Gift Shop also maintains two warehouse facilities. While the
    bulk of the Gift Shop's stock is held in the SSF, a portion of the Gift
    Shop's overstock is maintained in the Hart Building. This space also
    accommodates the Gift Shop's receiving, shipping and engraving
    sections.
        Operational procedures for the SSF include having most, if not all,
    Gift Shop product delivered, received, and stored at this location
    until the need for transfer to the Hart, Dirksen, and/or Capitol
    Building locations. Although the overall management of the SSF is
    through the SAA, the Director of the Gift Shop has responsibility for
    the operation and oversight of the interior spaces assigned for Gift
    Shop use. Storing inventory in this centralized, climate-controlled
    facility provides protection for the Gift Shop's valuable inventory in
    terms of physical security as well as improved shelf life for
    perishable and non-perishable items alike.
    Sales Activity
        Sales recorded for fiscal year 2006 were $1,619,739.94. Cost of
    goods sold during this same period were $1,101,734.48, accounting for a
    gross sales profit of $518,005.46.
        In addition to tracking gross profit from sales, the Senate Gift
    Shop maintains a revolving fund and a record of inventory purchased for
    resale. As of October 1, 2006, the balance in the revolving fund was
    $2,105,118.02. The inventory purchased for resale was valued at
    $2,551,847.08.
    Accomplishments in Fiscal Year 2006
                Official Congressional Holiday Ornaments
        The year 2006 marked the beginning of the Gift Shop's fourth
    consecutive four-year ornament series. Each ornament in the 2006-2009
    series of unique collectables will be an image celebrating the day-to-
    day activities taking place on the Capitol grounds. The four images are
    based on original oil paintings commissioned by the Gift Shop.
        Sales of the 2006 holiday ornament exceeded 30,000 ornaments, of
    which more than 7,000 were personalized with engravings designed,
    proofed, and etched by Gift Shop staff.
                Constantino Brumidi Product
        There were several new products developed this past year depicting
    Brumidi's art in the Capitol. These include two different sets of
    placemats, one of game birds and the other of song birds, and coasters
    depicting Brumidi floral designs. Three glass vases of different sizes
    and shapes were created. Each contain distinctly different bird images
    deeply etched into the glass, and each can be personalized. A gift set
    of gourmet candy and high quality paper cocktail napkins was created.
    The napkins feature four different images of Constantino Brumidi's
    ``Birds of the Capitol'' which are located in the Capitol's Senate side
    corridors.
                Christopher Radko ornament
        The Gift Shop designed and created a new and exclusive Holiday
    Ornament with the Christopher Radko Company depicting a full three
    dimensional likeness of the Capitol building. The ornament shows the
    Capitol as it might look in early evening after a light snow has
    covered the building and its surrounding landscape features.
    Projects and New Initiatives for 2007
                History of the Capitol
        The Gift Shop will purchase for resale the book History of the
    Capitol, (H. Doc. 108-240) by Glenn Brown. GPO expects to release
    History of the Capitol later this year, and the Gift Shop plans to
    purchase a large quantity to ensure availability to its customers for
    an extended period of time. The book will be sold in both Gift Shop
    locations and on the intranet Web site. The book will also be available
    via phone and mail order.
                Congressional Plates
        The Official Congressional Plates for the 108th, 109th, and 110th
    Congresses continue to be sold. The 111th plate, the final of the
    series, has been approved for production.
                Pickard China
        The Gift Shop is working with the Pickard Corporation to recreate a
    round porcelain box originally developed by Tiffany and Company more
    than twelve years ago and subsequently discontinued by Tiffany. The
    round box contains a series of four images on its perimeter depicting
    the early meeting places of Congress. The lid depicts a more recent
    image of the Capitol similar to how it appears today. With Tiffany's
    permission, the original designs and colors will be replicated on a
    white porcelain box.
                Intranet/Webster
        The Gift Shop anticipates a very exciting yet busy and challenging
    year for the Gift Shop as it continues to develops its presence on
    Webster. Primary considerations include Web site policy, design, and
    layout, content and additional products to be featured. It is the Gift
    Shop's intention to eventually incorporate links to the offices of the
    Historical Office, Curator, and Senate Library so that visitors to the
    Web site will have ready access to additional educational information.
                              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 1,895 former and current
    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 Senate committees and
    most former Senators. The office develops and maintains all historical
    material on the Senate Web site.
    Editorial Projects
                200 Notable Days: Senate Stories, 1787-2002
        GPO issued 200 Notable Days: Senate Stories, 1787-2002 in October
    2006. This 225-page clothbound volume presents 200 brief stories, which
    provide a colorful and textured outline of the Senate's historical
    development through more than two centuries. Historian David McCullough
    pronounced the work to be ``deftly and engagingly done'' and noted that
    as the author clearly enjoyed himself ``in this wonderful chronicle, so
    consequently does the reader.''
                The New Members' Guide to Traditions of the United States
                        Senate
        In support of the November 2006 new members' orientation program,
    the Historical Office prepared a 32-page booklet designed to serve as a
    guide to the Senate's distinguishing customs and rituals. Following a
    ``cradle-to-grave'' theme, the document begins with ``orientation
    programs'' and ``oath taking,'' and concludes with ``end-of-session
    valedictories'' and ``funerals and memorial services.'' Among the 29
    topics included are ``Maiden Speeches,'' ``Seersucker Thursday,'' ``the
    Candy Desk,'' ``the Golden Gavel Award,'' and ``Washington's Farewell
    Address.'' Copies are available through the Senate Office of Printing
    and Document Services.
                Administrative History of the Senate
        Throughout 2006, the assistant historian continued the research and
    writing for this historical account of the Senate's administrative
    evolution. This study traces the development of the Offices of the
    Secretary of the Senate and Sergeant at Arms, considers 19th and 20th
    century reform efforts that resulted in the reorganization and
    professionalization of Senate staff, and looks at how the Senate's
    administrative structure has grown and diversified. Specifically,
    during the past year the assistant historian completed drafts of the
    first (1789-1814) and third (1836-1861) chapters, as well as portions
    of chapters two (1814-1836) and four (1861-1877).
                ``The Idea of the Senate''
        For more than two centuries, Senators, journalists, scholars, and
    other first-hand observers have attempted to describe the uniqueness of
    the Senate, emphasizing the body's fundamental strengths, as well as
    areas for possible reform. From James Madison in 1787 to Lyndon Johnson
    biographer Robert Caro in 2002, sharp-eyed analysts have left memorable
    accounts that can help modern Senators better understand the Senate in
    its historical context. Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Allen Drury's
    1943 comment about the Senate of his day--``There is a vast area of
    casual ignorance concerning this lively and appealing body''--retains a
    ring of truth for modern times. The ``Idea of the Senate'' project,
    completed during this year, identifies 30 major statements by
    knowledgeable observers. Each of the brief chapters includes an
    extended quotation and an essay that places the quotation in historical
    context. This work will be published during 2007.
                Rules of the United States Senate, Since 1789
        In 1980, Senate Parliamentarian Emeritus Floyd M. Riddick, at the
    direction of the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, prepared
    a publication containing the eight codes of rules that the Senate
    adopted between 1789 and 1979. In the 1990s, the Senate Historical
    Office, in consultation with Dr. Riddick, developed a project to
    incorporate an important feature not contained in the 1980 publication.
    Beyond simply listing the eight codes of rules, our goal is to show
    how--and why--the Senate's current rules have evolved from earlier
    versions. This work, to be completed during 2007, will contain eight
    narrative chapters outlining key debates and reasons for significant
    changes. Appendices will include the original text of all standing
    rules and all changes adopted between each codification.
                Biographical Directory of the U.S. Congress, 1774-2007
        Since 1989, the assistant historian has added many new biographical
    sketches, expanded bibliography entries, and revised and updated most
    of the online database's nearly 2,000 Senate and vice-presidential
    entries. An updated print edition, covering the years 1774-2005, was
    published early in 2006. The assistant historian continues to oversee
    all editing and updating of existing information for the online version
    of the Biographical Directory (http://bioguide.congress.gov) to allow
    for expanded search capabilities, maintain accuracy, and incorporate
    new information and scholarship.
    Oral History Program
        The Historical Office conducts a series of oral history interviews,
    which provide personal recollections of various Senate careers. This
    year, roundtable interviews were conducted with veteran Capitol
    telephone operators, Joan Sartori, Ellen Kramer, Martha Fletcher, and
    Barbara Loughery. Interviews were also completed with John D. Lane, who
    served in the early 1950s as administrative assistant to Senator Brien
    McMahon (D-CT). Several other interviews with Senate staff are in
    progress. The complete transcripts of 22 interviews have also been
    posted on the Senate's Web site.
    Member Services
                Members' Records Management and Disposition Assistance
        The Senate archivist assisted Members' offices with planning for
    the preservation of their permanently valuable records, emphasizing the
    importance of managing electronic records and transferring valuable
    records to a home-state repository. In addition, the office provided
    special assistance to offices closing at the end of the 109th Congress.
    This included identifying appropriate repositories for those members
    who had not already selected one, working with staff to ensure
    appropriate selection and preservation of historical documentation
    including electronic records, and advising members on access
    restrictions.
        The archivist revised and published the Records Management Handbook
    for United States Senators and Their Archival Repositories and the
    Checklist for Closing a Senator's Office. The archivist continued to
    work with staff from all repositories receiving senatorial collections
    to ensure adequacy of documentation and the transfer of appropriate
    records with adequate finding aids. The archivist provided briefing
    materials to transition offices and met with staff. The archivist
    conducted a seminar on records management for Senate offices and
    participated in the Senate Services Fair sponsored by the Office of
    Education and Training. The archivist organized a day-long meeting in
    conjunction with the Society of American Archivists' annual meeting for
    Congressional Papers Roundtable members that covered selection,
    arrangement, and description of congressional papers; new web-based
    sources for political historical research; and contemporary Senate
    electronic record-keeping systems and related preservation issues.
                Committee Records Management and Disposition Assistance
        The Senate archivist provided each committee with staff briefings,
    record surveys, guidance on preservation of information in electronic
    systems, and instructions for the transfer of permanently valuable
    records to the National Archives' Center for Legislative Archives. The
    office oversaw the transfer to the Archives of 350 accessions of Senate
    records. The archivist revised and published the U.S. Senate Records:
    Guidelines for Committee Staff. The archivist and assistant archivist
    responded to approximately 400 requests for loans of records back to
    committees. The archival assistant continued to provide processing aid
    to committees and administrative offices in need of basic help with
    noncurrent files. The archival assistant produced committee archiving
    reports in Access database format covering records' transfers for the
    past Congress. The archivist will use these reports in 2007 to provide
    committees with suggestions to promote timely transfers.
    Photographic Collections
        The photo historian supported publication of 200 Notable Days:
    Senate Stories, 1787-2002 by obtaining uniquely engaging illustrations
    from her collections and from photo archives throughout the nation. The
    office continued to provide timely photographic reference service,
    while cataloging, digitizing, rehousing, and expanding the office's
    40,000-item image collection. The photo historian also maintained the
    Office's COOP and vital electronic records. As a contribution to the
    office's educational outreach efforts, the photo historian added to the
    online photographic exhibits for the Senate Web site a feature entitled
    The Senate Through the Ages.
    Educational Outreach
                ``Senate Historical Minutes''
        The Senate historian continued a 10-year series of ``Senate
    Historical Minutes,'' begun in 1997 at the request of the Senate
    Democratic Leader. In 2006, the historian prepared and delivered a
    ``Senate Historical Minute'' at 17 Senate Democratic Conference weekly
    meetings. These 400-word Minutes were designed to enlighten members
    about significant events and personalities associated with the Senate's
    institutional development. More than 200 Minutes are available as a
    feature on the Senate Web site. An illustrated compilation was recently
    published as 200 Notable Days: Senate Stories, 1787-2002.
                Public Inquiries
        Much of the Historical Office's correspondence with the general
    public takes place through the Senate's Web site, which has become an
    indispensable source for information about the institution. Historical
    Office staff maintain and frequently update the Web site with timely
    reference and historical information. In 2006, the office responded to
    an estimated 1,500 inquiries from the general public, the press,
    students, family genealogists, congressional staffers, and academics,
    through the public e-mail address provided on the Senate Web site. The
    diverse nature of their questions reflects varying levels of interest
    in Senate operations, institutional history, and former members. In
    coordination with the Senate Office of Education and Training,
    Historical Office staff provided seminars on the general history of the
    Senate, Senate committees, women Senators, Senate floor leadership, and
    the U.S. Constitution. Office staff also participated in seminars and
    briefings for specially scheduled groups.
                C-SPAN Documentary on the Capitol
        Over the past two years, the Historical Office, in conjunction with
    the Office of the Curator, assisted C-SPAN with source material and on-
    camera interviews for its nine-hour television documentary ``The
    Capitol''. C-SPAN launched this series in late May and repeated it
    throughout the year.
                Advisory Committee on the Records of Congress
        This 11-member permanent committee, established in 1990 by Public
    Law 101-509, meets twice a year to advise the Senate, the House of
    Representatives, and the Archivist of the United States on the
    management and preservation of the records of Congress. Its Senate-
    related membership includes appointees of the majority and minority
    leaders; the Secretary of the Senate, who served as committee vice
    chair during the 109th Congress; and the Senate historian. The
    Historical office provided support services for the Committee's June
    and December meetings.
                Capitol Visitor Center Exhibition Content Committee
        Staff historians completed their assignments in drafting text for
    displays in the 17,000-square-foot exhibition gallery of the CVC.
    During 2006, the office continued to assist Donna Lawrence Productions
    and Cortina Productions with background material for visitor
    orientation films and interactive visual displays.
                               7. human resources
        The Office of Human Resources 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 and staff; training; performance management; job
    analysis; compensation planning, design, and administration; leave
    administration; records management; maintaining the employee handbooks
    and manuals; internal grievance procedures; employee relations and
    services; and organizational planning and development.
        The Human Resources office administers the following programs for
    the Secretary's employees: the Public Transportation Subsidy program,
    Student Loan Repayment Program, parking allocations, and the Summer
    Intern Program that offers college students the opportunity to gain
    valuable skills and experience in a variety of Senate support offices.
    Recruitment and Retention of Staff
        Human Resources has the ongoing task of advertising new vacancies
    or positions, screening applicants, interviewing candidates and
    assisting with all phases of the hiring process. Human Resources is now
    coordinating with the SAA Human Resources Department to post all SAA
    and Secretary vacancies on the Senate intranet so that the larger
    Senate community may access the posting from their own offices.
    Additionally, an ``Employment'' link on Webster will be fully activated
    in the next few months, highlighting SAA, Secretary and Employment
    Bulletin vacancies and application processes.
    Outreach
        Comprehensive resource manuals for the Senate's Elder Care Fair
    have been created and are being distributed throughout the Senate and
    have been requested by specific offices, committees, and/or
    departments. It was originally intended that the Elder Care Fair would
    be beneficial to Senate staff every two years, starting with the first
    one in 2005. Since the groundwork has been laid, the fair can be held
    more frequently, and hosting the event will rotate among the human
    resource offices of the Secretary, the SAA, the AOC, and the House. The
    next fair will be held later this year.
    Training
        In conjunction with the SCCE, Human Resources continues to develop
    and provide training for department heads and staff. Training topics
    include Sexual Harassment, Interviewing Skills, Conducting Background
    Checks, and Providing Feedback to Employees and Goal Setting.
    Interns and Fellows
        Human Resources manages the Secretary's internship program and the
    coordination of the Heinz Fellowship program. From advertising,
    conducting needs analyses, communicating, screening, placing and
    following up with all interns, HR keeps a close connection with these
    program participants in an effort to make the internship most
    beneficial to them and the organization.
    Combined Federal Campaign
        Human Resources has taken an active role in the Combined Federal
    Campaign (CFC) for the Senate community at-large. The office serves as
    co-director of the program for the Senate, participating in kick off
    meetings, identifying key workers in each office, and disseminating and
    collecting necessary information and paperwork.
                             8. information systems
        The staff of the Department of Information Systems provides
    technical hardware and software support for the Office of the Secretary
    of the Senate. Information Systems staff also interface closely with
    the application and network development groups within the SAA, GPO, and
    outside vendors on technical issues and joint projects. The department
    provides computer-related support for all local area network (LAN)
    servers within the Office of the Secretary. Information Systems staff
    provide direct application support for all software installed on
    workstations, initiate and guide new technologies, and implement next
    generation hardware and software solutions.
    Mission Evaluation
        The primary mission of the Information Systems Department is to
    continue to provide the highest level of customer satisfaction and
    computer support for all departments within the Secretary's office.
    Emphasis is placed on the creation and transfer of electronic
    legislative files to outside departments and agencies, meeting
    Disbursing Office financial responsibilities to the member offices, and
    office mandated and statutory obligations.
    Staffing and Functionality
        Information Systems staff functionality was expanded by moving the
    IT structure from a local LAN support structure to an enterprise IT
    support process. Improved diagnostic practices were adopted to expand
    support across all departments. Several departments, namely Disbursing,
    Chief Counsel for Employment, Office of Public Records, Page School,
    Senate Security, Stationery and Gift Shop previously employed dedicated
    information technology (IT) staff resident within the offices.
    Information Systems personnel continue to provide multi-tiered
    escalated hardware and software support for these offices.
        For information security reasons, departments have implemented
    isolated computer systems, unique applications, and isolated local area
    networks. The Secretary of the Senate network is a closed local area
    network to all offices within the Senate. Information Systems staff
    continue to provide a common level of hardware and software integration
    for these networks, and for the shared resources of interdepartmental
    networking. Information System staff actively participate in all new
    project design and implementation within the Secretary of the Senate
    operations.
    Fiscal Year 2006 Summary of Improvements to the Secretary's Local Area
            Networks
        Adopted improved network monitoring standards and implemented
    active e-mail spam controls for the Secretary of the Senate staff.
        Established an automated server to schedule and deploy software
    updates on all staff workstations during non-business hours of
    operation.
        Replaced 237 staff workstations (95 percent) and upgraded software
    applications across all departments.
        Installed Video Teleconferencing (VTC) hardware and incorporated
    VTC as an alternative COOP communications tool.
        Upgraded and replaced all handheld mobile devices (Blackberry) for
    essential staff.
        Provided network support for the Webster Hall and Alternate Chamber
    COOP Exercise.
        Finalized implementation of new point of sale and accounting system
    for the Stationery Room.
        Completed Senate Wireless network access verification testing for
    staff access in Hart, Russell, and Dirksen locations.
        Completed office staff occupancy, network access, and provided
    environmental tools at the SSF.
    Active Directory and Message Infrastructure Project (ADMA)
        All SecurID and Passfaces users have remote Web portal to Senate
    Web services.
        Access to Web-based services is available from all public and
    private internet locations
        Staff members can now retrieve Web mail from any home or state
    office workstation.
        Leveraged technologies included continuation of Groove
    Collaboration Project, and integrated Voice Over IP (VoIP) solution
    during COOP events.
        Clearly, the implementation of ADMA for the Secretary involved
    numerous resources on the part of both the SAA and the Secretary's
    offices. The importance of this single project provides the ``base''
    for all future IT related projects in the coming years.
    Legislative Operation Upgrades
        Upgraded Daily Digest LIS software application.
        Installed and updated a third off-site legislative COOP laptop kit.
                         9. interparliamentary services
        The Office of Interparliamentary Services (IPS) has completed its
    25th year of operation as a department of the Secretary of the Senate.
    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 include the following:
    NATO Parliamentary Assembly, Mexico-United States Interparliamentary
    Group, Canada-United States Interparliamentary Group, British-American
    Interparliamentary Group, United States-Russia Interparliamentary
    Group, and United States-China Interparliamentary Group.
        In May, the 46th Annual Meeting of the Canada-U.S.
    Interparliamentary Group was held in South Carolina. Arrangements for
    this successful event were handled by the IPS staff.
        All foreign travel authorized by the Majority and Minority Leaders
    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 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 Tem, IPS staff assist staff
    members of Senators and committees in completing the required reports.
        Interparliamentary Services maintains regular contact with the
    Department of State and 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 SAA 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 Majority and Minority Leaders, 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 46th Annual Meeting of the Mexico-U.S.
    Interparliamentary Group and the British American Parliamentary Group
    meetings which will be held in the United States in 2007. Advance work,
    including site inspection, will be undertaken for the Canada-U.S.
    Interparliamentary Group to be held in the United States in 2008.
    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's
    collection encompasses legislative documents that date from the
    Continental Congress in 1774; current and historic executive and
    judicial branch materials; an extensive book collection on American
    politics, history, and biography; and a wide array of online systems.
    The library also authors content for three Web sites--LIS.gov,
    Senate.gov, and Webster.
    Notable Achievements
        Information inquiries increased 90 percent.
        LIS training provided to 343 Senate staff.
        Acquired digital databases containing 313,730 congressional
    documents.
        Published first bibliography on Senate.gov using XML.
        Committee hearing (from 1889) cataloging project completed.
        Treaty and executive report (from 1857) cataloging project
    completed.
        Shelved 26,000 volumes at the Senate Support Facility.
        Acquired catalog and Web servers to support library system upgrade.
        Environmental control systems installed to safeguard document
    collections.
    Information Services
        The foundations of Senate Library services are authoritative
    legislative record keeping, prompt resolution of traditional requests,
    and customized research instruction. The library is significantly
    expanding the use of Web technology to meet the Senate's ever-
    increasing demand for current, accurate, and relevant information. The
    Library's efforts include establishing workflow and publication
    policies, and leading the Senate.gov Content Team toward improving site
    structure and meta data standards. The library's commitment to improve
    services resulted in a 90 percent inquiry increase, the third
    consecutive year of double-digit increases.

                                             INFORMATION SERVICES INQUIRIES
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                           Increase
                                                                                                          from Prior
                                  Year                               Traditional      Web        Total       Year
                                                                                                           (percent)
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    2006...........................................................       31,032   1,596,772   1,627,804          90
    2005...........................................................       33,080     823,076     856,156          35
    2004...........................................................       33,750     602,236     635,986          61
    2003...........................................................       46,234     348,198     394,432     ( \1\ )
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Baseline.

                Legislative Record Keeping
        The library guarantees daily accuracy of more than 100 Senate
    business-related lists on three Web sites--Senate.gov, LIS.gov, and
    Webster. Legislative records published by the Library are in high
    demand because of their usability and quick access. Almost 1.6 million
    visitors to Library-produced Web resources underscore the need for
    these materials. The three most popular legislative publications--Hot
    Bills List, Appropriations Legislation, and Action on Cloture--garnered
    456,151 Web visitors in 2006.

                                  HOT BILLS, APPROPRIATIONS, AND CLOTURE WEB INQUIRIES
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               Publication                            Senate.gov      LIS       Webster      Total
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Hot Bills (Active Legislation)..................................     372,857      17,096       8,796     398,749
    Appropriations Legislation (fiscal year 1987-present)...........      43,795       6,293       3,545      53,633
    Cloture Motion Activity (1985-present)..........................       1,299       1,256       1,214       3,769
                                                                     -----------------------------------------------
        Total Web Inquiries.........................................  ..........  ..........  ..........     456,151
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Since accepting responsibility to author Senate.gov content in
    2002, library staff have dedicated themselves to mastering Web
    technology best practices. Efforts have resulted in the conversion of
    many existing print and Web publications into XML format. This
    versatile format is a universal standard for efficiently storing and
    retrieving data. The great advantage of XML is that both print and Web
    products can be easily generated from a single data source.
                Senator Biography Database
        Several offices under the Secretary of the Senate share publishing
    responsibility for up-to-the-day information on Senate.gov. When new
    Senate records are set, such as for the longest-serving Senator or when
    a Senator has cast more than 10,000 votes, those accomplishments are
    immediately published on the site. To support these requirements, the
    library conducted a review of software products to construct a
    biographical database.
        As part of this effort, the library has created a prototype
    database designed to eliminate redundant data entry, improve workflow,
    and reduce the potential for error. Key elements about the 1,895
    individuals who have served as Senators since 1789--member name, state,
    party, and dates of service, for example--can be stored and managed in
    the database. These standardized elements are retrievable as needed.
                Committee Hearings
        The library's retrospective Senate hearing project was completed on
    December 28--an achievement that took 13 years of effort. This
    significant accomplishment provides Senate staff with bibliographic
    access to the library's collection of 36,300 hearings dating from 1889.
    The library collection is regarded as the most complete in existence,
    surpassing those of the Library of Congress and National Archives.
        A second hearing project involves creating catalog records for
    Senate hearings announced in the Congressional Record Daily Digest.
    This project bridges the three- to six-month period between the hearing
    announcement and the official publication of the hearing. For the first
    time, Senate staff have a reliable source--the library catalog--to
    locate hearing information for all hearings, including unpublished
    hearings. Since the project began in May 2005, 1,098 unpublished
    hearing records have been created.
                Floor Schedule
        The library is responsible for posting the Floor Schedule on
    Senate.gov after each Senate meeting adjourns. The schedule provides
    convene and adjourn times, program highlights, and links to roll call
    votes and daily calendars. Floor Schedule production was improved this
    year by establishing an XML template that standardizes the format.
                Digital Congressional Document Collection
        The library acquired two congressional document databases and the
    full-text searchable collections provide Senate-wide access to 313,730
    reports and documents. The databases contain the U.S. Congressional
    Serial Set, Senate Journal, House Journal, Senate Executive Journal,
    and American State Papers. An added benefit of these databases is that
    customized research collections can be created by Senate staff from
    their desktop. For example, one customized collection groups early
    editions of the Secretary of the Senate Report (1823-1903).

                            DIGITAL COLLECTION USAGE
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           Title (coverage)                         Searches
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    American State Papers (1789-1838)............................        588
    Congressional Research Service Reports (1916-present)........        400
    Senate and House Committee Prints (1830-present).............        400
    U.S. Congressional Serial Set (1817-1906)....................      1,729
                                                                  ----------
        Total Digital Collection Searches........................      3,117
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

                Treaty Documents and Executive Reports
        More than 1,565 treaties and 1,016 executive reports, from 1857 to
    the present, were cataloged during a 5-year project. This project
    provides bibliographic access to the entire Senate executive document
    collection through the library's catalog. The international scholarly
    community will also benefit from these unique bibliographic records
    because in many instances the only known copies are in the Senate
    collection.
                Traditional Information Requests
        Traditional requests--by telephone, e-mail, or in-person--are fewer
    than Web-based inquiries; however they dominate daily library activity.
    Often working under strict deadlines, the eight-person team personally
    responds to a monthly average of 2,586 staff inquiries. Each request is
    handled in a timely, confidential, and nonpartisan manner. Research
    requests vary widely, including legislative, legal, economic, and
    historical topics. The knowledge gained from this frontline experience
    provides the basis from which the librarians create Web products.

                     INFORMATION SERVICE SUPPORT ACTIVITIES
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               Category                              Total
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Document Deliveries..........................................      3,290
    Circulation:
        Item Loans...............................................      2,941
        New Accounts.............................................        333
                                                                  ----------
          Total Accounts.........................................      2,745
                                                                  ==========
    Microform Center:
        Titles Used..............................................        245
        Pages Printed............................................      4,479
    Photocopies..................................................    101,297
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

                Customized Research Instruction and Professional Outreach
        The library conducted 46 LIS Savvy classes for 343 staff. This
    important responsibility utilizes the library's expertise in
    legislative procedure and database research. During this second year of
    the library's LIS training program, additional classes for advanced
    search techniques are in development. The library is also collaborating
    with the Office of Education and Training to design a self-paced,
    online LIS course.
        During 2006, 175 staff attended Services of the Senate Library
    seminars, the Senate Services Fair, Senate Page School tours, state
    staff orientations, and the annual National Library Week reception and
    book talk. Visitors from graduate schools, professional organizations,
    and federal libraries totaled 188.
    Technical Services
                Acquisitions
        As a participant in GPO's Federal Depository Library Program
    (FDLP), the library receives selected categories of legislative,
    executive, and judicial branch publications. The library received
    10,655 government publications in 2006, 9,907 of those through the
    FDLP. In response to the trend of issuing government documents in
    electronic format, 20,400 links were added to the library catalog. The
    links provide Senate staff desktop access to the full-text of each
    document.

                                  ACQUISITIONS
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               Category                              Total
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Congressional Documents......................................      7,322
    Executive Branch Publications................................      3,333
    Books........................................................        889
                                                                  ----------
        Total Acquisitions.......................................     11,544
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

        A major project is the ongoing title-by-title evaluation of
    executive branch publications. During the project's sixth year, 1,219
    items were withdrawn from the collection, 642 of which were donated to
    requesting federal libraries. The project's final phase will improve
    organization and access by integrating the retained documents into the
    book collection. Toward this end, 602 documents were reclassified and
    merged into the larger primary collection.
        The library significantly expanded its microform periodical
    coverage through the acquisition of surplus materials from Washington-
    area libraries. New titles include: Los Angeles Times, 1978-2005; New
    England Journal of Medicine, 1984-1998; The New York Times, 1926-1961;
    The Progressive, 1984-2004; and USA Today, 1993-2005.
                Catalog
        The library's productive cataloging staff draws on years of
    experience to produce and maintain a catalog of more than 177,940
    bibliographic items. During 2006, 13,303 items were added to the
    catalog, including 8,132 new titles--a 57 percent increase over 2005--
    and 6,154 items were withdrawn. A total of 32,592 maintenance
    transactions contributed to the catalog's content, currency, and record
    integrity.
        Senate staff searched the library catalog on 4,742 occasions (+21
    percent), viewing 6,514 catalog pages (+12 percent). The catalog is
    updated nightly to ensure that Senate staff will retrieve accurate and
    current information on library holdings. Visual appeal and utility were
    enhanced with the addition of 280 book jacket images for new titles.
        A related, ongoing project involves cataloging the Senate
    Historical Office's 3,000-volume book collection. Records for 820
    titles were added to the library catalog, bringing the total number of
    Historical Office titles to 1,426. They will be able to efficiently
    identify and locate volumes in their collection through the library
    catalog.
                Name Authorities Cooperative Program (NACO)
        NACO, an international cataloging authority located at the Library
    of Congress, manages personal name and subject control for the library
    community. As one of 457 participants, the library contributed 616
    personal names and congressional terms. That exceptional number
    underscores the very special nature of the Senate's collections and
    skills of the library's catalogers.
                Library System Servers
        The library acquired three servers that will provide a platform for
    the fiscal year 2007 catalog upgrade. New capabilities will shorten
    data transfer time and increase catalog availability, enhance record
    processing, and provide for dynamic delivery of catalog content to the
    Web.
    Collection Maintenance
                Senate Support Facility
        The library's off-site collection includes legislative publications
    dating from the early 1800s. These 26,000 volumes are an archive of the
    Senate's primary source documents. In early 2006 the collection was
    transferred to the new SSF; organization and shelving were completed by
    August.
                Environmental Controls
        Air handling and water detection systems were installed in the
    Russell Building book stacks. These environmental controls improve
    storage conditions for the Senate's historic collections. With the new
    equipment, the site meets strict archival standards for both
    temperature and humidity levels. Newly installed detection devices will
    alert staff to any water-related issues.
        Sensors to remotely monitor environmental conditions were installed
    in the library's book stacks within the SSF. If relative humidity and
    temperature levels exceed preset thresholds, staff will receive an e-
    mail alert. These improvements mark the first time in the library's
    history that all collections are housed in controlled environments.
                Preservation and Binding
        A collection survey to examine the physical condition of the
    38,815-volume book collection was completed in August 2006. The survey
    concluded that the collection is in excellent condition. However, 580
    volumes (1.5 percent) will require minor repair and 32 volumes will be
    evaluated for major repair or replacement.
        Library collections include every printed legislative document
    since the First Congress. In order to ensure that this collection
    remains comprehensive, materials are prepared for binding at GPO.
    During the year, 608 volumes containing hearings, committee prints,
    bills and resolutions, Congressional Records, and other materials were
    bound.
    Administrative
                Budget
        Budget savings in 2006 totaled $1,575; and, after a decade of
    budget monitoring, savings total $75,813.86. This continual review of
    purchases eliminates materials not meeting the Senate's current
    information needs. This oversight is also critical in offsetting cost
    increases for core materials and for acquiring new materials. The goal
    is to provide the highest level using the latest technologies and best
    resources in the most cost-effective manner.
                Continuity of Operations Plan (COOP)
        Several Library initiatives this year will further enable the
    Office of the Secretary to provide information services to the Senate
    from off-site. Projects include housing core documents at the SSF and
    training staff to remotely access the Senate network from a Senate-
    issued laptop. Additionally, the library established a Digital
    Congressional Research Collection containing fully searchable
    congressional documents dating from the First Congress. These databases
    can be remotely accessed, and support immediate digital delivery of
    information.
                Unum, Newsletter of the Office of the Secretary of the
                        Senate
        Unum, the Secretary's quarterly newsletter has been produced by
    Senate Library staff since October 1997. It serves as an historical
    record of accomplishments, events, and personnel in the Offices of the
    Secretary of the Senate. The newsletter is distributed throughout the
    Senate, and to former staff and Senators.
        The four 2006 issues highlighted several significant events
    including three major publications issued through Secretary's office,
    200 Notable Days: Senate Stories, 1787-2002, United States Senate
    Graphic Arts Catalog, and Biographical Directory of the United States
    Senate, 1789-2005.
    Major Library Goals for 2007
        Redesign the library's Webster site.
        Create a Web-based Senate index for Senate.gov and the library's
    Webster site.
        Acquire software for a senator's biographical database.
        Develop online LIS training resources for Senate staff.
        Upgrade the integrated library system.
        Install new OCLC cataloging software.
        Survey U.S. Congressional Serial Set volumes in the Senate Support
    Facility.
        Survey book, House hearing, and microform collections in the
    Russell Building.

                                                 SENATE LIBRARY STATISTICS FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2006--ACQUISITIONS
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Books         Government Documents          Congressional Publications
                                                          ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                         Reports/    Total
                                                            Ordered    Received    Paper      Fiche     Hearings    Prints     Bylaw       Docs
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    January..............................................         42         87        142         24        293         18         46        375        985
    February.............................................         25         27        165        112        241         25         63        113        746
    March................................................         20         65        269        386        307         21        134        226      1,408
                                                          --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          1st Quarter....................................         87        179        576        522        841         64        243        714      3,139
                                                          ==================================================================================================
    April................................................         21         55        208        270        311         17         62        239      1,162
    May..................................................         25         86        184  .........        310         20         86        334      1,020
    June.................................................         13         87        161         43        220         23         56         72        662
                                                          --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          2nd Quarter....................................         59        228        553        313        841         60        204        645      2,844
                                                          ==================================================================================================
    July.................................................         20        119        174         42        276         19         52        173        855
    August...............................................         27         75         67        171        272         14         54        196        849
    September............................................         41         70         61  .........        273         15         68        212        699
                                                          --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          3rd Quarter....................................         88        264        302        213        821         48        174        581      2,403
                                                          ==================================================================================================
    October..............................................         38         92        300         13        352         14         58        705      1,534
    November.............................................         60         52        214         41        262         16         36        195        816
    December.............................................         15         74        117        169        233         19         33        163        808
                                                          --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          4th Quarter....................................        113        218        631        223        847         49        127      1,063      3,158
                                                          --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          2006 Total.....................................        347        889      2,062      1,271      3,350        221        748      3,003     11,544
          2005 Total.....................................        346        880      2,337      1,251      2,926        252        884      3,458     11,988
                                                          ==================================================================================================
    Percent Change.......................................       0.29       1.02     -11.77       1.60      14.49     -12.30     -15.38     -13.16      -3.70
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  SENATE LIBRARY STATISTICS FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2006--CATALOGING
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                            Bibliographic Records Cataloged
                                                              S.    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Hearing                    Government Documents           Congressional Publications      Total
                                                           Numbers             -------------------------------------------------------------------  Records
                                                           Added to    Books                                                              Docs./   Cataloged
                                                             LIS                  Paper      Fiche    Electronic   Hearings    Prints     Pubs./
                                                                                                                                         Reports
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    January.............................................         20         70         10          1          16        349         10        117        573
    February............................................         26         50          1          2           9        312          5        100        479
    March...............................................         32        249          4         15          49        561         14        284      1,176
                                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          1st Quarter...................................         78        369         15         18          74      1,222         29        501      2,228
                                                         ===================================================================================================
    April...............................................         30         38         11          4          21        418          1         83        576
    May.................................................         19        246          5         51           5        461         36          5        809
    June................................................          7        116          3          1  ..........        391          7         46        564
                                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          2nd Quarter...................................         56        400         19         56          26      1,270         44        134      1,949
                                                         ===================================================================================================
    July................................................         45        168          4  .........          12        618          5         11        818
    August..............................................         53        116          3          1          11        333          5  .........        469
    September...........................................          8        225         14          6          24        558          7         21        855
                                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          3rd Quarter...................................        106        509         21          7          47      1,509         17         32      2,142
                                                         ===================================================================================================
    October.............................................         33         59  .........  .........  ..........        485          4         18        566
    November............................................         21         92         10  .........          11        578          1          5        697
    December............................................         24         70          5         15          13        442          3          2        550
                                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          4th Quarter...................................         78        221         15         15          24      1,505          8         25      1,813
                                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          2006 Total....................................        318      1,499         70         96         171      5,506         98        692      8,132
          2005 Total....................................      1,088        500         85         57         131      3,379         39        988      5,179
                                                         ===================================================================================================
    Percent Change......................................     -70.77     199.80     -17.65      68.42       30.53      62.95     151.28     -29.96      57.02
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           SENATE LIBRARY STATISTICS FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2006--DOCUMENT DELIVERY
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                         Micrographics  Photocopiers
                                                         Volumes  Materials  Facsimiles   Center Pages      Pages
                                                         Loaned   Delivered                 Printed        Printed
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    January...........................................       240        354        100           184         7,079
    February..........................................       223        312         79           224        13,615
    March.............................................       195        409        109            67         9,304
                                                       -------------------------------------------------------------
          1st Quarter.................................       658      1,075        288           475        29,998
                                                       =============================================================
    April.............................................       247        256         70           471        11,194
    May...............................................       279        319         71           436        12,232
    June..............................................       313        340        100           778        12,804
                                                       -------------------------------------------------------------
          2nd Quarter.................................       839        915        241         1,685        36,230
                                                       =============================================================
    July..............................................       249        211         69         1,312         6,315
    August............................................       185        203         65           162         6,488
    September.........................................       398        283         71           190         9,178
                                                       -------------------------------------------------------------
          3rd Quarter.................................       832        697        205         1,664        21,981
                                                       =============================================================
    October...........................................       235        203         76           320         6,213
    November..........................................       260        208         34           268         3,014
    December..........................................       117        192         34            67         3,861
                                                       -------------------------------------------------------------
          4th Quarter.................................       612        603        144           655        13,088
                                                       -------------------------------------------------------------
          2006 Total..................................     2,941      3,290        878         4,479       101,297
          2005 Total..................................     2,752      4,015      1,001         4,406       113,335
                                                       =============================================================
    Percent Change....................................      6.87     -18.06     -12.29          1.66        -10.62
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             11. senate page school
        The United States Senate Page School exists to provide a smooth
    transition from and to the students' home schools, providing those
    students with as sound a program, both academically and experientially,
    as possible during their stay in the nation's capital, within the
    limits of the constraints imposed by the work situation.
    Summary of Accomplishments
        Continue to work toward accreditation by the Middle States
    Commission on Secondary Schools. The process will be ongoing until
    December 31, 2008.
        Conducted closing ceremonies for two page classes on June 9, 2006,
    and January 26, 2007, the last day of school for each semester.
        Completed orientation and course scheduling for the Spring 2006 and
    Fall 2006 pages. Needs of incoming students determined the semester
    schedules.
        Provided extended educational experiences including twenty-three
    field trips, six guest speakers, writing and speaking contests, musical
    instruments and vocal opportunities, and foreign language study with
    the aid of tutors of five languages. Summer pages participated in eight
    field trips to educational sites and listened to two guest speakers as
    an extension of the page experience. National tests were administered
    for qualification in scholarship programs.
        Collected items for gift packages and then assembled and shipped to
    military personnel in Afghanistan and Iraq as part of the community
    service project embraced by pages and staff since 2002. Pages included
    letters of support to the troops. Several recipients of gift packages
    wrote letters to Pages expressing appreciation.
        Purchased updated materials and equipment. These included eighteen
    new workstations for students and staff. Math, science, and U.S.
    history texts were purchased as well as academic support software. The
    science lab was modified, updated, and safety compliant storage units
    for chemicals were purchased.
        Reviewed and updated the evacuation plan and COOP. Pages and staff
    continue to practice evacuating to primary and secondary sites.
        Participated in escape hood training (pages and staff). Staff was
    recertified in CPR/AED procedures.
        Trained tutors and substitute teachers in evacuation procedures.
    Summary of Plans
        Our goals 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, Latin, Japanese, Chinese, and Russian.
      --The focus of field trips will be sites of historic, political, and
            scientific importance which complement the curriculum.
      --Staff development options include attendance at seminars conducted
            by Education and Training and subject matter and/or educational
            issue conferences conducted by national organizations.
      --The community service project will continue.
      --Preparation for the accreditation visit will be made and all
            necessary reports completed.
                       12. printing and document services
        The Office of Printing and Document Services (OPDS) serves as the
    liaison to 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.
                Printing Services
        During fiscal year 2006, the OPDS prepared 4,320 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 proof handling, job scheduling and 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 such as
    the Curator, Historian, Disbursing Office, Legislative Clerk, Senate
    Library as well as the U.S. Botanic Garden, USCP and the AOC. These
    tasks include providing guidance for design, paper selection, print
    specifications, monitoring print quality and distribution. Last year's
    major printing projects included the Report of the Secretary of the
    Senate; and numerous publications prepared by the Senate Historian's
    office including 200 Notable Days in Senate History, and the New Member
    Guide to Traditions of the U.S. Senate. Current major projects for the
    office include A Botanic Garden for the Nation, the Annual Report of
    the Architect of the Capitol, and A History of the U.S. Senate Budget
    Committee.
                Hearing Billing Verification
        Senate committees often use outside reporting companies to
    transcribe their hearings, both in-house and in the field. The OPDS
    processes billing verifications for these transcription services
    ensuring that costs billed to the Senate are accurate. The OPDS
    utilizes a program developed in conjunction with the SAA Computer
    Division that provides more billing accuracy and greater information
    gathering capacity; and 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 2006,
    OPDS provided commercial reporting companies and corresponding Senate
    committees a total of 934 billing verifications of Senate hearings and
    business meetings. Over 66,000 transcribed pages were processed at a
    total billing cost of over $433,000.
        The office continued processing all file transfers between
    committees and reporting companies electronically, ensuring efficiency
    and accuracy. Department staff continues training to apply today's
    expanding digital technology to improve performance and services.

                                      HEARING TRANSCRIPT AND BILLING VERIFICATIONS
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           2004            2005            2006       Percent change
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Billing Verifications...........................             787             949             934         -01.6
    Average per Committee...........................            41.4            49.9            49.2         -01.6
    Total Transcribed Pages.........................          56,262          66,597          66,158          -0.007
    Average Pages/Committee.........................           2,961           3,505           3,482          -0.007
    Transcribed Pages Cost..........................        $366,904        $426,815        $433,742          +1.016
    Average Cost/Committee..........................         $19,311         $22,463         $22,829          +1.016
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Additionally, the Service Center within the OPDS is staffed by
    experienced GPO detailees that provide Senate committees and the
    Secretary of the Senate's Office with complete publishing services for
    hearings, committee prints, and the preparation of the Congressional
    Record. These services include keyboarding, proofreading, scanning, and
    composition. The Service Center provides the best management of funds
    available through the Congressional Printing and Binding Appropriation
    because committees have been able to decrease, or eliminate, additional
    overtime costs associated with the preparation of hearings.
    Document Services
        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. The
    Congressional Record, a printed record of Senate and House floor
    proceedings, Extension of Remarks, Daily Digest and miscellaneous
    pages, is one of the many printed documents provided by the office on a
    daily basis. In addition to the Congressional Record, the office
    processed and distributed 14,902 distinct legislative items during the
    109th Congress, including Senate and House bills, resolutions,
    committee and conference reports, executive documents, and public laws.

                                             CONGRESSIONAL RECORD STATISTICS
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           2004            2005            2006
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total Pages Printed.............................................          26,885          34,787          24,881
        For the Senate..............................................          12,642          16,393          12,362
        For the House...............................................          14,243          18,394          12,519
    Total Copies Printed & Distributed..............................         882,314       1,049,463         780,302
        To the Senate...............................................         227,192         295,366         210,084
        To the House................................................         331,165         397,327         326,648
        To the Executive Branch and the Public......................         323,957         356,770         243,570
    Total Production Costs..........................................     $17,543,644     $16,014,706     $13,115,660
        Senate Costs................................................      $7,961,741      $6,640,823      $5,006,708
        House Costs.................................................      $9,026,893      $8,933,244      $7,784,653
        Other Costs.................................................        $555,010        $440,639        $324,299
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Accessing legislative documents through the Web has become
    increasingly popular. Before Senate legislation can be posted online,
    it must be received in the Senate through the OPDS. Improved database
    reports allow the office to report receipt of all legislative bills and
    resolutions received in the Senate which can then be made available
    online and accessed by other Web sites, such as LIS and Thomas, used by
    Congressional staff and the public.
                Customer Service
        The primary responsibility of the OPDS is to provide services to
    the Senate. However, the office also has a responsibility to the
    general public, the press, and other government agencies. Requests for
    legislative material are received at the walk-in counter, through the
    mail, by fax, and electronically. During 2006, online ordering of
    legislative documents increased 20 percent over the previous year. The
    Legislative Hot List Link, where Members and staff can confirm arrival
    of printed copies of the most sought after legislative documents
    continued to be popular. The site is updated several times daily each
    time new documents arrive from GPO to the Document Room. In addition,
    the office handled thousands of phone calls pertaining to the Senate's
    official printing, document requests and legislative questions.
    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 customer service while providing accurate
    answers to Senate and public requests.

                                      SUMMARY OF ANNUAL CUSTOMER SERVICE STATISTICS
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Congress/    Public      FAX      On-line    Counter
                               Year                             session      mail     request    request    request
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    2003.....................................................    108/1st      1,469      2,596        735     53,040
    2004.....................................................    108/2nd      1,137      2,229        564     36,780
    2005.....................................................    109/1st      1,369      2,326      1,464     40,105
    2006.....................................................    109/2nd      1,048      1,633      1,751     26,640
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                On-Demand Publication
        The office produces additional copies of legislation as needed by
    producing additional copies in the DocuTech Service Center, staffed by
    experienced GPO detailees, that provide Member offices and Senate
    committees with on-demand printing and binding of bills and reports.
    On-demand publication allows the department to cut the quantities of
    documents printed directly from GPO and reduces waste. The DocuTech is
    networked with GPO, allowing print files to be sent back and forth
    electronically. This allows the OPDS to print necessary legislation for
    the Senate floor, and other offices, in the event of a GPO COOP
    situation. During 2006, the DocuTech Center produced 683 tasks for a
    total of 752,174 printed pages; this represents a 29 percent increase
    in the number of jobs over the previous year.
                Accomplishments & Future Goals
        OPDS developed new database reports on serial set publications for
    the Senate Library and inventory tracking of materials housed in the
    SSF were developed. Electronic proofing procedures, implemented in
    early 2006, were very well received by Senate offices. Proofs of over
    three hundred new and revised print jobs were routed electronically for
    customer approval improving turn around time and efficiency.
        The office's goals include working with GPO on their Future Digital
    and Microcomp Replacement Systems to improve efficiency and help answer
    the evolving needs of the Senate, as well as developing online ordering
    of stationery products for Senate offices. The Office of Printing and
    Document Services continues to seek new ways to use technology to
    assist Members and staff with added services and improved access to
    information.
                          13. office of public records
        The Office of Public Records receives, processes, and maintains
    records, reports, and other documents filed with the Secretary of the
    Senate involving the Federal Election Campaign Act, as amended; the
    Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995; the Senate Code of Official Conduct:
    Rule 34, Public Financial Disclosure; Rule 35, Senate Gift Rule
    filings; Rule 40, Registration of Mass Mailing; Rule 41, Political Fund
    Designees; and Rule 41(6), Supervisor's Reports on Individuals
    Performing Senate Services; and Foreign Travel Reports.
        The office provides for the inspection, review, and reproduction of
    these documents. From October, 2005, through September, 2006, the
    Public Records office staff assisted more than 2,400 individuals
    seeking information from reports filed with the office. This figure
    does not include assistance provided by telephone, nor help given to
    lobbyists attempting to comply with the provisions of the Lobbying
    Disclosure Act of 1995 (LDA). A total of 140,000 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 2006 Accomplishments
        The office modified its lobbying e-filing program to allow Adobe
    electronic forms generated by the Clerk of the House to be filed with
    the Secretary.
    Plans for Fiscal Year 2006
        The Public Records office intends to upgrade its lobbying e-filing
    program to conform with the change to IBM forms made by the Clerk of
    the House so that both systems are complementary.
    Automation Activities
        During fiscal year 2006, the Senate Office of Public Records
    developed the capacity to be able to accept Clerk-generated electronic
    LDA forms. The office also upgraded its automation of the public
    financial disclosure system.
    Federal Election Campaign Act, as Amended
        The Act requires Senate candidates to file quarterly reports.
    Filings totaled 4,364 documents containing 298,639 pages.
    Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995
        The Act requires semi-annual financial and lobbying activity
    reports. As of September 30, 2006, 6,554 registrants represented 21,468
    clients and employed 35,844 individuals who met the statutory
    definition of ``lobbyist.'' The total number of individual lobbyists
    disclosed on 2006 registrations and reports was 13,595. The total
    number of lobbying registrations and reports processed was 46,835.
    Public Financial Disclosure
        The filing date for Public Financial Disclosure Reports was May 15,
    2006. The reports were available to the public and press by Wednesday,
    June 14th. Copies were provided to the Select Committee on Ethics and
    appropriate State officials. A total of 3,029 reports and amendments
    was filed containing 19,419 pages. There were 424 requests to review or
    receive copies of the documents.
    Senate Rule 35 (Gift Rule)
        The Senate Office of Public Records has received 803 reports during
    fiscal year 2006.
    Registration of Mass Mailing
        Senators are required to file mass mailings on a quarterly basis.
    The number of pages was 623.
                              14. senate security
        The Office of Senate Security (OSS) was established under the
    Secretary of the Senate by Senate Resolution 243 (100th Congress, 1st
    Session). The office 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. This report covers the period from January 1, 2006 through
    December 31, 2006.
    Personnel Security
        Five hundred sixty-two Senate employees held one or more security
    clearances at the end of 2006. This number does not include clearances
    for employees of the Architect of the Capitol nor does it include
    clearances for Congressional Fellows assigned to Senate offices. OSS
    also processes these clearances.
        OSS processed 2,273 personnel security actions, a 3.7 percent
    decrease from 2005. One hundred-seven investigations for new security
    clearances were initiated last year, and 39 security clearances were
    transferred from other agencies. Senate regulations, as well as some
    Executive Branch regulations, require that individuals granted Top
    Secret security clearances be reinvestigated at least every five years.
    Staff holding Secret security clearances are reinvestigated every ten
    years. During the past 12 months, reinvestigations were initiated on 81
    Senate employees. OSS processed 152 routine terminations of security
    clearances during the reporting period and transmitted 364 outgoing
    visit requests. The remainder of the personnel security actions
    consisted of updating access authorizations and compartments.
        Overall, the average time required to process a Senate employee for
    a security clearance has decreased from 332 days to 309 days. The
    average time for investigations has decreased by 7.4 percent relative
    to 2005. This is the first decrease since 2002 when the average time
    was 167 days. The increase for 2002 to 2003 was 66.7 percent, 2003 to
    2004 was 25.6 percent, and 2004 to 2005 was 27.7 percent. The overall
    increase from 2002 to 2006 was 85 percent. The average time for an
    initial investigation conducted and adjudicated by DOD is 277 days from
    the date that OSS requests the investigation until the letter from DOD
    granting the clearance is received in Senate Security. The average time
    for DOD initial investigations decreased 9.2 percent. The periodic re-
    investigation process averages 335 days, a decrease of 13 percent
    relative to 2005. The average time for an initial investigation
    conducted by the FBI and adjudicated by DOD is 289 days while the
    periodic re-investigation process averages 387 days. The FBI
    investigation with DOD adjudication times represents an increase of
    12.9 percent and a decrease of 13.4 percent respectively.
        One hundred ninety-nine records checks were conducted at the
    request of the FBI and Customs and Immigration. One record check was
    performed on behalf of Customs and Immigration. The remaining checks
    were performed for the FBI. This represents a 16.7 percent decrease in
    records checks completed by OSS.
    Security Awareness
        OSS conducted or hosted 63 security briefings for Senate staff.
    Topics included: information security, counterintelligence, foreign
    travel, security managers' responsibilities, office security
    management, and introductory security briefings. This represents a 5
    percent increase from 2005.
    Document Control
        OSS received or generated 2,488 classified documents consisting of
    76,409 pages during calendar year 2006. This is a 10.9 percent decrease
    in the number of documents received or generated in 2005. Additionally,
    48,276 pages from 2,233 classified documents no longer required for the
    conduct of official Senate business were destroyed. This represents a
    45.3 percent decrease in destruction from 2005. OSS transferred 906
    documents consisting of 23,742 pages to Senate offices or external
    agencies, up 29.4 percent from 2005. 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 5,627 document
    transactions and handled over 148,427 pages of classified material in
    2006, a decrease of 25.7 percent.
        Secure storage of classified material in the OSS vault was provided
    for 107 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 1,173 occasions
    by a total of 7,854 people during 2006. Use of OSS conference
    facilities increased 27.6 percent over 2005 levels. Eight hundred
    thirty-six meetings, briefings, or hearings were conducted in OSS'
    three conference rooms. Of those, seven were ``All Senators'' briefings
    and five were hearings. OSS also provided to Senators and staff secure
    telephones, secure computers, secure facsimile machine, and secure
    areas for reading and production of classified material on 337
    occasions in 2006.
    Projects and Accomplishments
        The Office of Senate Security hosted the first annual Technical
    Exposition for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence in
    April 2006. Classified and unclassified exhibits representing the
    technical and scientific accomplishments of the U.S. Intelligence
    Community were shown to members of the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House
    of Representatives, as well as cleared staff from throughout the
    Legislative Branch. OSS personnel provided assistance with security,
    site preparation, and escorting during the three months leading up to
    the Expo. The office and DNI are planning another Expo in April 2007.
        The Office of Senate Security is preparing to move to the Capitol
    Visitors Center expansion space when it is ready for occupancy. OSS has
    been coordinating with internal offices and other U.S. Government
    agencies to ensure the space will be appropriate for the storage,
    processing and discussion of classified material. OSS is developing
    plans and procedures for use of the new space and for moving the
    Senate's classified holdings to the new space in a secure and efficient
    manner.
                              15. stationery room
        The mission of the Keeper of the Stationery is to:
      --Sell stationery items for use by Senate offices and other
            authorized legislative organizations.
      --Select a variety of stationery items to meet the needs of the
            Senate environment on a day-to-day basis and maintain a
            sufficient inventory of these items.
      --Purchase supplies utilizing open market procurement, competitive
            bid and/or GSA Federal Supply Schedules.
      --Maintain individual official stationery expense accounts for
            Senators, Committees, and Officers of the Senate.
      --Render monthly expense statements.
      --Ensure receipt of reimbursements for all purchases by the client
            base via direct payments or through the certification process.
      --Make payments to all vendors of record for supplies and services in
            a timely manner and certify receipt of all supplies and
            services.
      --Provide delivery of all purchased supplies to the requesting
            offices.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Fiscal Year     Fiscal Year
                                                   2006            2005
                                                Statistics      Statistics
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Gross Sales.............................      $4,945,381      $5,247,163
    Sales Transactions......................          45,471          60,247
    Purchase Orders Issued..................           6,795           8,611
    Vouchers Processed......................           8,313           9,206
    Office Deliveries.......................           6,085              NA
    Number of Items Delivered...............         156,172              NA
    Number of Items Sold....................         608,104              NA
                                             ===============================
    Mass Transit Media Sold.................          86,483          75,607
        $20.00..............................          72,388          64,527
        $10.00..............................           4,510           3,923
        $5.00...............................           9,585           7,157
                                             ===============================
    Full Time Employees (FTE)...............              13              13
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Fiscal Year 2006 Highlights and Projects
                Flag Purchase Modernization Project
        During fiscal year 2005, with the assistance of the Office of the
    AOC and the SAA, the Stationery Room began to offer Member offices the
    option of purchasing flags which had been flown over the Capitol, but
    were not date or occasion specific. Approximately thirty-seven percent
    of all flag requests by constituents were only to obtain a flag flown
    over the Capitol. If flags could be flown in advance, significant wait
    times could be reduced. In addition, the SAA's Printing, Graphics and
    Direct Mail Division created artwork for a generic customizable flag
    certificate, along with a CD template that could be used in the
    customization process should a Member office choose. All flags which
    have been pre-flown come with a Certificate of Authenticity signed by
    the Architect, certifying each flag has been flown over the United
    States Capitol. Over the course of fiscal year 2006, interested Member
    offices were incorporated into the pre-flown Flag program. Eighty-six
    Member offices participate in the program. This program has been well
    received by the Senate community, with positive feedback from all
    levels.
                Senate Support Facility
        Fiscal year 2006 saw the migration and consolidation of the
    Stationery Room's multiple storage locations into one central site.
    With the transfer of materials from the old facilities in February 2006
    to the new SSF, product chain of custody is now maintained. The
    Stationery Room is looking at ways to use the facility to its maximum
    advantage and envision this as a major distribution outlet for all
    products by building a stock replenishment process and improving upon
    distributed services.
                Product Review Committee
        During fiscal year 2006, the Stationery Room developed a means to
    garner a better understanding of the needs of the Senate community. The
    Stationery Room created a Product Review Committee representing Member
    and committee offices to provide opinion, assessment, evaluation and
    feedback on products needed by the end users. While the committee is
    just underway, it has become an invaluable communication tool.
                Computer Modernization
        The Stationery Room completed acceptance testing on its new
    Microsoft Retail Point of Sale base applications along with the Great
    Plains/Business Dynamics accounting system in August 2006. This project
    was completed on time and under budget. The initial phase of the
    applications being completed, the Stationery Room staff will look to
    enhance the base system and take advantage of the various reporting
    capabilities. Part of the additional enhancements will include the
    feasibility of providing an e-commerce solution to the Senate community
    for order processing and fulfillment.
                Store Merchandising and Relocation Project
        During the last quarter of fiscal year 2006, the Stationery Room
    staff initiated a project for the sales area of the store. After
    completing a space utilization review of the store facilities, the
    Stationery Room concluded that it needed to reduce shelf quantities on
    some products, while increasing quantities on others. Shelving was re-
    aligned to properly display products in a more convenient customer-
    oriented manner with like product groupings given high priority.
                               16. web technology
        The Office of Web Technology is responsible for Web sites that fall
    under the purview of the Secretary of the Senate, including: the Senate
    Web site, www.senate.gov (except individual Senator and Committee
    pages); the Secretary's Web site on Webster; an intranet site currently
    used for file-sharing by Secretary staff only; and a LegBranch Web
    server housing Web sites and project materials which can be accessed by
    staff at other Legislative Branch agencies.
    The Senate Web site--http://www. Senate.gov

        The United States Senate Web site celebrated its eleven year
    anniversary in 2006, as the first U.S. Senate home page on the World
    Wide Web was announced October 20, 1995 on the Senate floor. From the
    Senate homepage members of the public could easily find the homepages
    for their own Senators. As the Web grew, so did the content and mission
    of Senate.gov. The pages of information became catalogs and databases,
    but the mission to provide the public with accurate and timely
    information remained constant. There were more than 70 million visitors
    to the Senate Web site in 2006--twenty million more than in 2005.
        The Senate Web site content is maintained by over 30 contributors
    from 7 departments of the Secretary's Office and 3 departments of the
    Sergeant at Arms. Content Team Leaders meet regularly to share ideas
    and coordinate the posting of new content.
    Major Additions to the Site in 2006
        A redesigned graphical interface--Highlights of the redesign are
    the ``Find Your Senators'' and site-wide search boxes in the top right
    corner of every page. For the first time the Senate Web site has a
    site-wide search that uses the Google search features so familiar to
    our visitors. The new site received favorable reviews from U.S. News
    and Word Report.
        A new interactive exhibit on Isaac Bassett--Isaac Bassett served
    the Senate from his appointment as a page in 1831 until his death in
    1895, when he was assistant doorkeeper. Bassett witnessed some of the
    most turbulent and exciting times in the institution's history and he
    captured his observations in copious notes which have been donated to
    the Senate. An Isaac Bassett interactive exhibit has been created that
    allows the visitor to choose an event, via a timeline or subject
    listing, and to read a transcript of Bassett's notes about the event.
    An image of the handwritten note is also available when viewing the
    transcript.
        A new interactive exhibit on the Senate Chamber Desks--There are
    100 desks on the Senate Floor and each one has a history. The content
    relative to each desk includes a textual description, list of former
    occupants, digitized images of the desk and the carvings (Senators
    carve their names in their desks when they leave the Senate), and notes
    on the desk's condition and restoration. A Web-based interactive
    presentation has been created to display this rich information about
    the Senate desks.
        Cloture and veto tables for the Library.
        The Fine Arts Catalogue on the Web--images and text from the
    Catalogue have been published on the Senate site.
        Senator Bob Dole's portrait unveiling--the video and transcript of
    the portrait unveiling event are posted for viewing.
        Homepage feature articles published on the following topics: the
    10th anniversary of the Senate Web site and the launching of the new
    Web site design; the Congressional Biographical Directory Online; the
    launching of the Senate Chamber Desks site; We the People: Celebrating
    the American Constitution; and the publication of the United States
    Catalogue of Graphic Arts.
        A multimedia exhibit on the drawings of Lily Spandorf--During the
    1962 Washington filming of the movie ``Advise and Consent'', freelance
    artist Lily Spandorf was sent by the Washington Star to make a few pen
    and ink illustrations of the production. Ms. Spandorf created a total
    of 68 pen and ink and two gauche (watercolor) drawings, all of which
    are now in the U.S. Senate Collection. A Flash multimedia presentation
    of Spandorf's work has been created for the Web site, associating her
    drawings with movie clips from the specific scene the drawing depicts.
    Planned Additions to the Site in 2007
        A reorganized Art section--with the addition of the Fine Arts and
    Graphic Arts images the Art section of the site has grown considerably
    and needs to be indexed.
        A project to better organize content on www.senate.gov. The Web
    team is reviewing items for possible reorganization of information on
    the site.
    Accomplishments of the Office of Web Technology in 2006
        Upgraded Documentum CMS to 5.25 from 4.3. Encountered error which
    was determined to be a software bug by Documentum who advised upgrading
    to 5.3. Developed Statement of Work, requested proposals and contracted
    with RWD Technologies to review current upgrade status and assist with
    upgrade to version 5.3.
        Helped develop requirements for a taxonomy being built by Senate
    Librarians to organize information about Senators.
        The Web Content Assistant analyzed Google search terms each month
    and identified the need for additional Virtual Reference Desk (VRD)
    subject terms. New VRD pages were built. The VRD serves as an index to
    the site.
        Created production standards for the VRD. The standards include how
    the index will appear (in this case it is subject oriented) and what
    types of links to include.
        Established a system for assigning Google Keywords by analyzing the
    most common words people type in the search box each month, determining
    the items on the site that are most relevant to their search, and
    providing links to those items on the site.
        Designed the layout for the Spandorf exhibit. Organized all
    pictures, loaded them into CMS, and edited accompanying text.
        The Web Content Assistant audited the Senate.gov Web pages
    regularly, updating and correcting links; verifying content; and
    reviewing individual page designs throughout Senate.gov.
        The Assistant Webmaster worked with the SAA to develop and
    implement a solution for all Senate offices to use the Google search
    feature on their own Websites, based on the same techniques developed
    for Senate.gov, including allowing Senate offices to order their search
    results by date, instead of just relevance.
        Developed and implemented an XML-based solution for the Stationery
    room to export catalog data from their internal system and have it
    displayed on their Web site on Webster. Provided documentation and
    training for the office to continue to update the information
    themselves.
        Established and refined workflow and approval procedures for
    various postings including the feature article postings.
        Created documentation on how to use the CMS to post PDFs, new
    portraits, tables, feature bios, feature articles, and how to update
    current postings. Documented all the changes that need to occur to the
    site at the change of a Congress.
        The Web Content Assistant worked with the all the content providers
    to expand the style guide. This included how footnotes should appear on
    the Web as well as the standards for Senators' names and the creation
    of tables.
        The Assistant Webmaster developed increasingly complex tables that
    are shared across several Web sites (www.senate.gov, the Webster/Senate
    Library site, and www.congress.gov) to deliver the most relevant
    information to the intended audiences. The Xtags application was
    implemented on the new version of Webster to maintain previously
    developed projects.
        Teamed with CRS to organize monthly meetings of the LegBranch
    Webmasters Group. Hosted the meeting on Web 2.0. Recruited speakers
    from Democratic Policy Committee and Republican Policy Committee who
    spoke about the use of Podcasts, RSS, WML, wireless communications, and
    other Web 2.0 features by their respective constituencies.
    Senate.gov Usage Statistics
        In 2006 over 6 million visitors a month accessed the Senate Web
    site. Twenty-eight percent of them entered through the main Senate home
    page while the majority came to the site via a bookmarked page or to a
    specific page from a search engine. Statistics on individual page
    activity show increases in many areas of the main Senate site.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  2005-2006
            Title of Web Page          2005 Visits/ 2006 Visits/   Percent
                                          Month        Month       Increase
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Entire Site......................    4,512,000    6,081,000           35
    Senate Home Page.................    1,388,500    1,685,000           21
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

        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. Visitors are consistently
    drawn to the following content items, listed in order of popularity.

                                               MOST VISITED PAGES IN 2006
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       2005 Visits/    2006 Visits/
                                Top Pages                                  Month           Month      Percent Change
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Roll Call Votes.................................................          38,504          63,099             +64
    Active Legislation..............................................          22,582          30,053             +33
    Senate Leadership...............................................          21,371          19,278             -10
    Bills & Resolutions.............................................          15,513          18,155             +17
    Committee Hearings Scheduled....................................          19,019          15,901             -16
    Calendars & Schedules...........................................          13,077          15,574             +19
    2005 Schedule...................................................          14,477          13,033             -10
    Senate Organization Chart.......................................          13,203          12,438              -6
    Nominations.....................................................          14,241          11,815             -17
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                     PAGES WITH LARGEST PERCENT INCREASES IN VIEWERS
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       2005 Visits/    2006 Visits/
                             2005 Top Pages                                Month           Month      Percent Change
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Statistics & Lists..............................................           9,334          15,981             +71
    Virtual Reference Desk..........................................           8,285          13,568             +64
    Roll Call Votes.................................................          38,504          63,099             +64
    State Information...............................................          11,414          15,988             +40
    Active Legislation..............................................          22,582          30,053             +33
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Visitors are interested in legislative matters with Roll Call Vote
    Tallies, the Active Legislation table, and the Bill and Resolutions
    section being particularly popular.
        Based on their popularity in 2005, links to Statistics and Lists
    and the VRD were added to the home page when the site was redesigned in
    2006, further increasing their popularity by 71 percent and 64 percent
    respectively.
    Webster--http://webster/secretary
        About 2,300 visitors a month access the Secretary's Web site on
    Webster, the Senate Intranet, and statistics continue to show that the
    vast majority of visitors (87 percent) go directly to the Disbursing
    office section. This section contains information on Employee Benefits
    (insurance, retirement, payroll, etc.) and provides access to the many
    forms employees need to obtain or modify these benefits. Other popular
    items include the Senate Library Web site, the Stationery Room
    Catalogue, Office of Printing and Document Services Document Order and
    Print Order Forms, and the Web page that lists all Secretary of the
    Senate services.
                  legislative information system (lis) project
        The 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: LISAP
        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 LIS in January 2000, the LIS
    Project Office shifted its focus to the data standards program and
    established the LIS Augmentation Project (LISAP). The over-arching goal
    of the LISAP is to provide a Senate-wide implementation and transition
    to XML for the authoring and exchange of legislative documents.
        The current focus for the LISAP is the development and
    implementation of an XML authoring system for legislative documents
    produced by the Office of the Senate Legislative Counsel (SLC) and the
    Office of the Enrolling Clerk. The XML authoring application is called
    LEXA, an acronym for the Legislative Editing in XML Application. LEXA
    replaces the DOS-based XyWrite software used by drafters to embed
    locator codes into legislative documents for printing. The XML codes
    inserted by LEXA provide more information about the document and can be
    used for printing, searching and displaying a document. LEXA features
    many automated functions that provide a more efficient and consistent
    document authoring process. The LIS Project Office has worked very
    closely with the SLC and the Enrolling Clerk to create an application
    that meets the needs for legislative drafting.
    LISAP: 2006
        Throughout 2006 additional features and fixes were added to LEXA,
    enabling the SLC to use the application for more and more of their
    drafting requests. Ninety-five percent of introduced bills produced in
    the SLC were drafted in XML. Some of the new functionality added to
    LEXA in the last year included the following:
      --Ability to create and print several additional styles.
      --A one-click feature to reintroduce one type of document as another
            type of document, for example, taking the language from a bill
            and creating an amendment.
      --Ability to specify and print all document stages.
      --A feature to enter a prescribed 3- or 4-letter abbreviation into a
            document and have it resolve to a long name or phrase.
      --Ability to create amendments to appropriations bills.
      --Ability to create motions.
        LEXA developers also worked with the Office of the Enrolling Clerk
    to add engrossing and enrolling features and to provide for the exact
    formatting and printing requirements for documents created by that
    office. Several hours of training were provided to the staff, and the
    Enrolling Clerks began working in LEXA at the beginning of the 110th
    Congress. With the addition of the documents produced by the Office of
    the Enrolling Clerk, all stages of a measure can be produced in XML.
        Support for LEXA users remains an important priority. The LIS
    Project office provides support for LEXA via the LEXA HelpLine and LEXA
    Web site. The HelpLine is provided through a single phone number that
    rings on all the phones in the office, and the Web site is located on a
    server accessible by the legislative branch. The Web site, http://
    legbranch.senate.gov/lis/lexa, is used to distribute updates of the
    application to GPO and provides access to release notes, the reference
    manual, and other user aids. The 2004 Legislative Branch Appropriations
    Act directed GPO to provide support for LEXA much as the office has for
    XyWrite. GPO continues to work toward augmenting the support provided
    by the LIS Project Office. Senate staff members in the LIS Project
    Office do development and provide support for LEXA.
        GPO maintains the software module that converts a Senate XML
    document to locator for printing through Microcomp, and in 2006, the
    module was expanded to also print House XML documents. GPO is also
    nearing completion of a tool to create and print tables. This software
    will be used by both the House and Senate, providing another module
    that is common to both applications. The House and Senate software
    development groups continue to work closely with GPO and the Library of
    Congress to reach agreement on technical authoring issues and
    standards, thereby eliminating the need for additional processing when
    documents are exchanged.
        The LEXA Reference Manual was updated by the LIS office in early
    2006, and a 2007 update is underway. The manual provides screen shots
    and step-by-step instructions for all LEXA features. The Office also
    trained new SLC staff and the Enrolling Clerks on LEXA and provided
    several demonstrations on new LEXA features throughout the year.
        The LIS Project Office, the SLC, and the SAA's Systems Development
    Services group have worked together for the past several years to
    implement a document management system (DMS) in the SLC. One obstacle
    has been the need for the SLC to continue to use XyWrite for certain
    documents. XyWrite is DOS-based software that does not work well in a
    Windows or database environment. In 2006, the team identified and
    purchased DMS software that will work with both LEXA and XyWrite
    documents. The Systems Development Services group is working with the
    SLC systems integrator to implement the software, and the LIS Project
    office will assist in the integration with LEXA. The DMS will provide a
    powerful tracking, management, and delivery tool for the SLC.
    LISAP: 2007
        The LIS Project office will continue to work with the House, GPO,
    and the Library of Congress on projects and issues that impact the
    legislative process and data standards for exchange. These groups are
    currently participating in two projects with GPO--one to define
    requirements for replacing the Microcomp composition software and
    another to improve the content submission and exchange processes.
        The Office of the Enrolling Clerk will use LEXA to produce
    engrossed and enrolled bills in XML. The LIS Project office will
    continue to work with the SLC and the Office of the Enrolling Clerk to
    refine and enhance LEXA so that more and more of the documents produced
    by those offices will be done in XML. Once all of the documents can be
    produced in XML using LEXA, those offices will be able to stop using
    XyWrite. Since XyWrite is not compatible with other Windows software,
    moving away from it will allow the offices to use more modern
    technologies for all functions. Other Senate offices that do drafting
    with XyWrite may begin using LEXA, including the Committee on
    Appropriations.
        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.

        Senator Landrieu. Thank you very much. And, I do have a few
    questions. And, what we're going to try to do is to finish this
    portion of the hearing in about 10 or 15 minutes, and then go
    on to the Library of Congress. We may have votes called, but
    we're going to try to complete the hearing before 11 o'clock,
    if we can.

                                 PRIMARY GOALS

        Let me ask you, Madam Secretary, what are your three
    primary goals in your tenure? I'm sure you've had some time now
    to think about the three things that you would like to
    accomplish as your personal goals, on what you can leave, or
    contribute during your time. Just list them for the
    subcommittee if you would.
        Ms. Erickson. First of all, I'd like to build on the strong
    leadership of my predecessor, Emily Reynolds. But three things
    that immediately come to mind, I want to continue to push more
    information to the web, as I mentioned in my statement. I'd
    like our Stationery Room to offer e-commerce options to Senate
    offices. I think that Senate office administrators could find
    that it would be beneficial to them to be able to purchase
    office supplies online from our Stationery Room.
        In addition, I'd like to revamp our Secretary's website to
    push more information onto Webster to make it easier for the
    Senate community to access and understand the services that we
    provide.
        Second of all, my predecessor spent a great deal of time
    working on continuity of operations planning. And, that's
    something that I want to build on, not only continuity of
    operations planning, but continuity of Government planning. I
    hope we never become complacent in our preparations, and that
    we will always be ready in a minute's notice to support the
    Chamber under any circumstance.
        It also relates to our Senate Disbursing Office. We
    practice at least once a year with the Sergeant at Arms from a
    remote location, making sure that we can process our payroll
    and vouchers for Senate offices. And, that's something that I'd
    really like to step up, to do more than once a year.
        And my third goal is to implement the paperless voucher
    system, another program that I think would be extremely popular
    for office administrators. My understanding is that the project
    is at a critical stage. We're working with our oversight
    committee, the Rules and Administration Committee, to work out
    issues related to electronic signatures.
        Those are my three goals.
        Senator Landrieu. Well, let me encourage you along all
    three goals that you've outlined, and particularly the second
    one. Having gone through, of course the recent and still very
    harsh experience of Hurricane Katrina, having to watch
    governments, to maintain their integrity in very desperate
    circumstances, and having had the experience of 9/11. It is a
    very, very important aspect of your work, to be able to
    maintain the functions of this Senate under any and all
    circumstances. And, I would imagine that the bulk of that work
    falls on your shoulders, the responsibility along with, of
    course, whatever, the military and the Capitol Police could
    bring to bear to that situation. So, I want to thank you.

                            SENATE EMPLOYMENT STUDY

        Let me ask just about the Senate employment study. Are you
    in the process of such a study? Our employees are working long
    hours and weekends. Have we completed our pay study, which was
    authorized by this subcommittee? Can you give us some detail
    about the outcome of that study?
        Ms. Erickson. I'd be happy to do so.
        Your subcommittee appropriated, I believe, $80,000 for the
    Office of the Secretary to complete a pay study. We
    competitively bid the project to a contractor who conducted a
    survey. It's my understanding 81 Senate offices participated in
    the payroll survey. They were asked such questions related to
    not only the rate of pay for employees and their benefits, but
    also to the organizational structure of their respective
    office.
        The results were compiled, analyzed, and a report was
    distributed to every Member office, and committee in June of
    last year. This past January, we provided a follow-up report to
    Senate offices that provided a comparison of Senate and House
    salaries. It was warmly received by the Senate community,
    particularly the offices of new Members who were in the process
    of hiring staff. And, I'd be happy to provide you with a
    written copy of the report if you'd like additional details of
    the study.
        [The information follows:]

                                SALARY COMPARISON FOR SIMILAR POSITIONS IN THE U.S. SENATE AND THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Number of                                              25th         50th         75th
                    Position                        Chamber         Positions     Minimum      Average      Maximum     Percentile   Percentile   Percentile
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Chief of Staff.........................  Senate..............           84     $114,000     $151,767     $160,659     $147,000     $157,150     $160,659
    Chief of Staff.........................  House...............          125      $87,000     $129,736     $160,000     $116,000     $130,000     $148,500
    Legislative Director...................  Senate..............           77      $85,000     $116,952     $160,659     $102,186     $120,000     $127,830
    Legislative Director...................  House...............          100      $42,000      $76,490     $120,000      $67,000      $77,750      $85,000
    Counsel................................  Senate..............           61      $42,000      $95,210     $155,000      $75,500      $95,000     $110,865
    Counsel................................  House...............            7      $62,400      $83,771     $130,000      $65,000      $80,000      $89,000
    Director of Special Projects and/or      Senate..............           51      $24,000      $52,995     $103,000      $37,324      $49,825      $65,000
     Grants.
    Grants and Projects Coordinator........  House...............           18      $22,000      $48,949      $67,000      $37,250      $54,500      $60,837
    Legislative Assistant..................  Senate..............          406      $34,000      $66,789     $150,000      $52,000      $65,000      $77,580
    Legislative Aide.......................  House...............          164      $28,000      $43,433      $76,500      $36,000      $41,000      $50,000
    Legislative Correspondent..............  Senate..............          348      $20,000      $32,802      $75,000      $29,000      $32,000      $36,000
    Legislative Correspondent..............  House...............           71      $25,000      $31,807      $43,000      $29,000      $31,000      $34,000
    Communications Director................  Senate..............           69      $52,000      $95,050     $160,659      $82,752      $94,620     $104,500
    Press Secretary/Communications Director  House...............           87      $32,000      $58,756     $125,000      $45,000      $55,000      $68,250
     \1\.
    Press Secretary........................  Senate..............           80      $40,000      $66,027     $110,784      $54,000      $63,000      $76,169
    Press Secretary/Communications Director  House...............           87      $32,000      $58,756     $125,000      $45,000      $55,000      $68,250
     \1\.
    Executive Assistant....................  Senate..............           58      $29,000      $68,060     $121,000      $50,259      $68,750      $81,625
    Executive Assistant....................  House...............           30      $15,000      $51,257     $107,000      $39,000      $48,750      $63,875
    Scheduler (Washington, D.C.)...........  Senate..............           74      $28,500      $63,634     $128,000      $50,000      $59,698      $75,000
    Scheduler (Washington, D.C.)...........  House...............           46      $24,000      $48,394      $99,000      $37,875      $46,350      $55,625
    Systems Administrator..................  Senate..............           77      $24,000      $60,955     $105,000      $50,000      $60,000      $75,420
    Systems Administrator..................  House...............           11      $20,000      $39,898      $62,000      $31,000      $40,000      $45,500
    Administrative Director/Office Manager.  Senate..............           68      $31,500      $78,266     $149,700      $67,006      $78,000      $89,500
    Office Manager.........................  House...............           39      $21,000      $52,922     $107,200      $36,000      $50,000      $64,000
    Receptionist/Staff Assistant \2\.......  Senate..............          325      $10,712      $29,664      $72,000      $25,860      $28,000      $31,027
    Staff Assistant (Washington, D.C.).....  House...............           86      $18,000      $29,872      $71,000      $25,000      $28,000      $30,000
    Staff Assistant (District).............  House...............           77      $16,006      $30,883      $79,966      $25,000      $28,500      $33,000
    Constituent Services Representative/     Senate..............          398      $21,000      $38,631      $84,821      $31,000      $36,204      $44,092
     Caseworker.
    Constituent Services Representative/     House...............          231      $13,500      $40,814     $115,000      $31,000      $40,000      $46,500
     Caseworker.
    State Director.........................  Senate..............           75      $60,000     $104,748     $160,659      $90,000     $103,500     $116,248
    District Director......................  House...............           72      $39,200      $78,526     $150,000      $63,000      $77,841      $91,000
    Field Representative...................  Senate..............          340      $19,000      $50,742     $104,000      $41,000      $49,100      $60,000
    Field Representative...................  House...............          100      $25,000      $46,508      $75,000      $37,125      $45,000      $55,000
    State Scheduler........................  Senate..............           48      $28,500      $49,886      $89,000      $38,000      $46,500      $61,217
    District Scheduler.....................  House...............           34      $28,000      $46,366      $80,000      $33,000      $43,500      $61,065
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ The House study did not distinguish between Communications Director and Press Secretary. House data for these positions reflect the combined Press
      Secretary/Communications Director position.
    \2\ The Senate study did not distinguish between Staff Assistants in Washington, D.C. and State offices, while the House study did make this
      distinction.
    81 offices participated in the Senate study and 141 offices participated in the House study.

    Sources:
    2006 U.S. Senate Employment, Compensation, Hiring and Benefits Study, Office of the Secretary of the Senate (June 28, 2006).
    2006 House Compensation Study: Guide for the 110th Congress, Chief Administrative Office, U.S. House of Representatives (November 13, 2006).

        The 2006 U.S. Senate Employment, Compensation, Hiring and
    Benefits Study--June 28, 2006 is available on the web at:
    http://webster.senate.gov/library/catalogs/PDF/
    senate_compensation_report_FINAL_7-26-06.pdf

        Senator Landrieu. Okay, I would. And we won't go into the
    details now, but I'm going to review it to see what we can do
    to make sure that our workforce remains competitive.

                       STUDENT LOAN REIMBURSEMENT PROGRAM

        And, one other question, then I'll turn it over, the
    student loan reimbursement program is something that's just
    recently come to my attention. I understand that there's a
    program that works in a way that allows staffers--I'm not sure
    if it's just for Members' offices, or for anyone in the
    Senate--to see a reduction in student loans to help some of the
    young, I would imagine, younger employees coming in. Can you
    give me an update about that program and if it's based on need?
    Or is it distributed equally to the States based on population,
    or just request?
        Ms. Erickson. It's a program run through our Senate
    Disbursing Office, and I believe the funding is based on 2
    percent of the administrative and clerical portion of the
    Member's account, 2 percent of the account of all others. I'd
    be happy to have Chris Doby follow-up with you on details of
    that. It's my understanding that 96 percent of our 140 Senate
    accounting locations, which includes Senate offices,
    committees, Secretary of the Senate, and Sergeant at Arms
    offices participate in the program. We have approximately 1,100
    employees that are participating in the program. In
    conversations that I've had with Senate office administrators,
    they tell me that it's been an important tool for not only
    attracting staff, but also retaining staff in their offices.
        Senator Landrieu. Thank you.
        Senator Allard.
        Senator Allard. Again, Nancy, I'd like to congratulate you
    on your position.
        Coming to the office, what do you view, at this point, your
    greatest challenges to be?
        Ms. Erickson. I would say maintaining a high level of
    customer service. And, I would say, speaking from someone who
    worked in a Senate office for 16 years and 2 years in a
    Sergeant at Arms office, I think it's easy to take for granted
    the services that Secretary of the Senate, and for that matter,
    the Sergeant at Arms provides. And the staff, for the most
    part, works quietly behind the scenes, but their work is
    critical, for, in----
        Senator Allard. Is there any particular area you can think
    of that we need to work on?
        Ms. Erickson. Not an area, I don't see any glaring
    problems, Senator. I think our biggest challenge is just
    maintaining and meeting the high demands that the Senate
    community should justifiably expect from us.
        Senator Allard. I think technology changes would be the
    challenge.
        Ms. Erickson. Right. And continuing to move information, as
    I said, that's one of my priorities, to move more and more
    information to the web.

                                    WEBSTER

        Senator Allard. Now, Webster, that's the intranet. Is that
    completely blocked off from the Internet or do people outside
    the Senate have access to Webster?
        Ms. Erickson. Yes, Webster is an internal site.
        Senator Allard. So it's completely walled off?
        Ms. Erickson. Right.
        Senator Allard. Okay.

                                MERIT INCREASES

        You mentioned in your testimony, you wanted some funding
    for merit increases. How do you go about determining whether
    somebody qualifies for a merit increase? Do you have a set
    protocol that you use?
        Ms. Erickson. We do. Our human resource director oversees
    that merit program and works closely with our department
    directors. There are rigorous goals that people have to meet in
    order to be eligible for a merit increase. But, it's something
    that we like to have to reward people who, in our opinion, have
    gone above and beyond what is expected of them to help the
    Senate community.
        Senator Allard. Are you having to use merit increases to
    get qualified people into the job? Do you see what I'm saying?
    The standard base pay may not be quite enough----
        Ms. Erickson. Right.
        Senator Allard [continuing]. So they say, ``Well, you're
    here 6 months, we'll be able to provide some substantial merit-
    based ----''
        Ms. Erickson. Exactly. Well, it is an important recruiting
    tool, and an incentive for people that know that that may be
    available if they exceed expectations. So, it has been an
    important tool to not only attract, but to retain talented
    staff who have many options--particularly, Senator, people in
    the technology field which is very competitive in the private
    sector, and so that's been an important tool for us to keep
    quality people.
        Senator Allard. When you use the merit system, do you use
    more than just longevity as the standard?
        Ms. Erickson. Correct, exactly.
        Senator Allard. Okay, and how often are you having to use
    the merit pay? Do most employees qualify, or 10 percent, or 20
    percent?
        Ms. Erickson. I don't have that data with me, Senator. I'd
    be happy to provide that to you in writing.
        Senator Allard. I think that would be of interest.
        Ms. Erickson. I'd be happy to do that.
        Senator Allard. Okay, very good.
        [The information follows:]
                                  United States Senate,
                                       Office of the Secretary,
                                          Washington, DC, May 23, 2007.
    The Honorable Wayne Allard,
    Ranking Member, Appropriations Subcommittee on the Legislative Branch,
            United States Senate, Washington, D.C. 20510.
        Dear Senator Allard: Thank you for the courtesies you extended to
    me during my testimony before your Subcommittee earlier this month. I
    appreciated the opportunity to discuss the work of the Secretary's
    office and our plans for the upcoming year. You had requested
    additional information regarding the merit program employed by the
    Office of the Secretary, and I hope the information provided below
    adequately addresses any questions you may have.
        In September 1997, the office developed and implemented an Employee
    Feedback and Development Plan (EFDP), which is a formal merit review
    program. Each staff member is provided annually with specific
    performance objectives on which their performance will be evaluated
    throughout the year. Staff members are evaluated on factors such as
    quality of work, initiative, resourcefulness, dependability,
    reliability, and communication skills. In addition, managers are
    evaluated on their leadership skills, decision making, and ability to
    plan, schedule and budget the needs of their departments. To facilitate
    communication between managers and their staff, managers are encouraged
    to meet with each staff member quarterly to discuss progress, specific
    projects and any issues that may impede the employee's progress
    throughout the year.
        Our Human Resources Office administers the program and works
    closely with me and my executive staff to determine our annual merit
    budget, which usually ranges from three to five percent of our overall
    salary budget. All staff are evaluated in September each year with the
    potential for a performance-based merit increase awarded in October.
    Increases range from zero to the maximum percent the Secretary
    approves, and they are based on the employee's performance as
    documented in the EFDP by the employee's manager.
        As is the case with other employee-centered programs offered by the
    Office and the Secretary the goal of the EFDP is to develop, motivate
    and retain the highest caliber professional staff to serve the needs of
    the Senate.
        I will be happy to provide you with any other information you may
    need about this merit review program.
                                                Nancy Erickson,
                                               Secretary of the Senate.

                                 CROSSTRAINING

        Senator Allard. I was pleased to see you worked on
    crosstraining. I think that's efficient--somebody's absent,
    have somebody else step in and carry on their responsibilities.
    So, I want to compliment you on focusing on crosstraining.
        Ms. Erickson. I appreciate that.
        Senator Allard. You obviously want to have your experts in
    various areas, but if for some reason or other they can't make
    it to work, you have people who can fill in.
        Ms. Erickson. Exactly. And, you'll notice that at the
    rostrum in the Senate Chamber, the faces change periodically
    for that very purpose, to make sure that people understand, can
    step in and do someone else's duty.
        Senator Allard. Very good.
        Thank you, Madam Chairman.
        Senator Landrieu. Thank you. That finalizes the questions
    that I have. I just want to state for the record that I'd like
    to focus some of my attention, Madam Secretary, on the quality
    of the Capitol tours, and talk with you about that, and about
    the access to Senate recordings through web-based technologies.
    And, I want to continue to pursue that. To make sure that our
    pay and payroll are adequately supporting a first-class
    professional staff for the Senate. Your plans in terms of
    disaster preparedness and emergency preparedness are extremely,
    extremely important.
        And, then as we open this new Capitol Visitor Center, as I
    said before, despite all the problems that we've had which have
    been well publicized, it really is an extraordinary space, that
    I think is going to be a great gift to the American people.
        And, we want to make sure that the statues and artwork
    reflect the true contributions of all Americans, even those who
    contributed a great deal in the early part of our country,
    women and minority Americans that weren't, by virtue of their
    sex or gender, even able to run for an office here. But, they
    nonetheless, contributed greatly to the work of this Capitol
    and what this Capitol represents. So, I'm looking forward to
    working with you and others.
        And, if that is--Senator Allard, do you have anything else?
        Senator Allard. I don't.
        Senator Landrieu. Okay. Thank you very much.
        Ms. Erickson. Thank you very much.
                              LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

    STATEMENT OF DR. JAMES H. BILLINGTON, LIBRARIAN OF
                CONGRESS
    ACCOMPANIED BY JO ANN JENKINS, CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER

                     STATEMENT OF SENATOR MARY L. LANDRIEU

        Senator Landrieu. Dr. Billington, if you will come forward.
        Thank you Dr. Billington, and welcome. We are very pleased
    to have you here this morning and recognize your 20th year as
    the Librarian of Congress. Your budget request is $652 million,
    which is an increase, roughly, of about $100 million, or 19
    percent, above the current year. Your request includes $45
    million for the construction of a new logistics facility at
    Fort Meade. Of course you know, the Architect of the Capitol
    (AOC) did not include this among his many priorities, so we
    want to hear some testimony from you about why you believe this
    is a high priority.
        There are several other large items in your request, such
    as $21 million to restore funding for the National Digital
    Information Infrastructure Preservation Program and $19 million
    for the first of four installments of the Digital Talking Book
    Program, which I know has support from members of the visually
    impaired community throughout the country. This is a very
    important, significant investment in the future of audio book
    programs. We want to make sure we use our resources wisely, and
    take advantage of the absolute best technology available.
        As I've said in previous hearings, and it bears repeating
    today, I think the subcommittee is going to really struggle
    with reaching some of these requests. And, I don't want to
    mislead you in any way, however, we do want to give you an
    opportunity, obviously, to state your best case and to ask you
    questions about it. And, please don't interpret that these
    comments in any way indicate that this Chair doesn't support
    the great work that you do. But we have budget constraints that
    we're under and we just need to really focus on some of these
    extra requests.
        Senator Allard.
        Senator Allard. I don't have any comment. I'd like to hear
    Dr. Billington's testimony.
        Senator Landrieu. Thank you.
        Dr. Billington.

                       OPENING STATEMENT OF THE LIBRARIAN

        Dr. Billington. We have a fuller submission for the record,
    but I appreciate the opportunity to present briefly the Library
    of Congress' 2008 budget request, and to thank the Congress for
    creating and sustaining the largest and most wide-ranging
    collection of knowledge in human history, a great record of
    American creativity and a distinct world leadership role for
    education on the Internet.
        The Library's request includes four critical priorities.
    The first--and the largest part of our increase, nearly one-
    half--is simply to sustain current services by funding
    mandatory pay raises and unavoidable price level increases.
        We're currently doing a very great deal more work than 15
    years ago, before we began superimposing the digital on the
    analog universe, but with 640 fewer full-time employees. If
    mandated pay raises are not fully funded, we will almost
    certainly have to cut back on some services.

                         LOGISTICS CENTER AT FORT MEADE

        Because of the life, safety, and environmental conditions
    of our present Landover center, we are forced, once again, to
    request funding for a logistics center at Fort Meade--but at a
    reduced level, that is $12.2 million less than was submitted
    through the Architect of the Capitol's budget last year.

                             DIGITAL TALKING BOOKS

        There's a special importance to the next two priorities,
    which are key elements in the digital transformation of the
    Library. After 10 years of planning and research, we must
    launch, this year, our 4-year initiative to modernize access to
    reading for the blind and physically handicapped.
        Blind people read, on average, 35 books a year--many more
    than sighted people. They depend heavily on the Library of
    Congress' unique collection, particularly of talking books,
    which is equivalent in size to a mid-sized public library. And
    it is made available free of charge through local libraries all
    over America. But it needs long-discussed, new digital players
    that can replace cassette-type players which are nearing
    obsolescence, and also a new mechanism for distribution--flash
    memory cartridges.

                                  ACQUISITIONS

        Finally, there is an urgent need to shore up the first and
    most basic need of any library, which is acquisitions. This is
    particularly true for the National Library, which is--in many
    ways--the strategic information reserve of the United States.
    It's a treasure chest of material not preserved anywhere else,
    at a time when more and more of our economic competitiveness,
    our basic security, and our civic health depend on accurate
    information.
        We need a $2 million increase in our basic book budget,
    which has been steadily eroded in purchasing power.

     NATIONAL DIGITAL INFORMATION INFRASTRUCTURE AND PRESERVATION PROGRAM
                                   RESCISSION

        We must have the minimal funds needed to sustain our
    congressionally mandated role of leading a national program by
    forming a network of private and public partners to set
    national standards for preserving the exploding world of
    material available only in highly perishable digital form, and
    begin sorting out and preserving what's most important.
        Congress was farsighted in the year 2000, appropriating
    $100 million in no-year funding to create the National Digital
    Information Infrastructure and Preservation Program, known as
    NDIIPP, and requiring that $75 million of the Federal
    appropriation be matched by partners. The NDIIPP Program is the
    most sweeping strategic change that this Library has undertaken
    in its entire 207-year history. For the first time ever, we are
    transforming the way we collect and preserve content, and
    sharing stewardship responsibility and cost with trusted
    partners. Without significant restoration of the funds that
    were rescinded this year, we will be unable to continue to
    build the network at a time when networks are the way of
    working for the future. If we let this initiative end now, we
    will not be able to resurrect it later.
        Forty-seven million dollars--nearly one-half of the
    original $100 million appropriation--was rescinded, and an
    additional $37 million was lost in matching funds promised from
    more than 50 network partners. Faced with the prospect of the
    $84 million overall loss for this program, we have carefully
    scrubbed our request for restoration down to the bare essential
    of $21.5 million.
        The loss of the NDIIPP funds would have long-term
    consequences for the Library's ability to preserve materials of
    importance for our economy and security, as well as the record
    of our culture, which is increasingly recorded now, only in
    digital form.
        We need this program to serve the growing information needs
    of the Congress, and to keep us from drifting toward a slippery
    slope, in which the Library would become just a museum of the
    book on Capitol Hill, rather than the backbone of a dynamic
    network for preserving and making useful for our Nation, new
    digital as well as traditional analog material.

                             WORKING WITH PARTNERS

        Louisiana has been a major focus of NDIIPP partners who
    have worked with archivists and librarians across the country
    to identify hundreds of websites documenting aspects of the
    Katrina tragedy. These websites, as preserved, will give us all
    information needed to better understand this tragedy, and to
    improve our country's response to future natural disasters.
        In emergencies such as Katrina, we provided information to
    Congress and salvage training in the affected region. This very
    week, when we heard that the Georgetown branch of the D.C.
    Public Library was ablaze, our preservation staff responded
    immediately, helping locate freezers in which to store books
    until they can be treated, providing guidance on next steps to
    save the collections.

                              PREPARED STATEMENTS

        We deeply appreciate, Madam Chairman, the support that
    Congress has given the Library over the years--for preserving
    and making accessible our massive written and printed
    collections, as well as our unequaled audiovisual collections,
    which are now acquiring their permanent preservation center
    with the capacity to store 25 years' more accumulation at
    nearby Culpeper, Virginia, thanks to funding from the Packard
    Humanities Institute, the largest private donation, by far,
    ever made to the Library of Congress. We need to do the same
    for digital material together with our private and public
    network of partners.
        I'm prepared to answer your questions.
        Senator Landrieu. Thank you, Dr. Billington.
        [The statements follow:]
                   Prepared Statement of James H. Billington
        Madam Chairwoman, Senator Allard, and other members of the
    Subcommittee: I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today
    to discuss the past accomplishments and future goals of the Library of
    Congress in the context of our fiscal year 2008 budget request. I ask
    for your continued support to ensure that the Library maintains its
    prestigious place as the world's largest repository of human knowledge
    and the main research arm of the United States Congress.
        With all the distinction that this institution has achieved in the
    print world, it now faces the unprecedented challenge of sustaining its
    leadership amidst the revolutionary changes of the digital world.
    Information-seekers have many ways of finding what they need, but they
    are often overwhelmed or misled by the profusion of unfiltered and
    sometimes inaccurate information on the Internet. The Library of
    Congress is redefining its role in this new environment.
        The budget request we have submitted to you includes the following
    basic assumptions:
      --There is no change in the Library's historic mission of acquiring,
            preserving, and making its materials accessible and useful to
            the Congress and the nation. But the amount of information and
            the explosion in the number of creators are driving the
            greatest revolution in the generation and communication of
            knowledge since the advent of the printing press. The Library
            must seamlessly blend new digital materials into the
            traditional artifactual collections so that knowledge and
            information can be objectively and comprehensively provided by
            a fully integrated library.
      --The Library of Congress must continue to build comprehensive,
            world-wide collections in all formats so that Members of
            Congress, scholars, school students, and the American people
            will have access to valid, high-quality information for their
            work, their research, and their civic participation.
      --The Library must actively seek new and innovative ways to
            recognize, highlight, and celebrate the knowledge and
            creativity that the Congress has charged us to preserve for
            more than 200 years.
      --A comprehensive institutional workforce transformation will be
            required for staff to continue providing the highest levels of
            service to the Congress and to the public. The Library has
            developed an agency-wide framework for program assessment of
            every division and support office. Congressional support has
            already enabled us to reengineer copyright functions and to
            create a state of the art National Audiovisual Conservation
            Center. We are developing new roles for key staff to become
            objective ``knowledge navigators'' who can make knowledge
            useful from both the artifactual and the digital world.
                          the library and its programs
        The Library of Congress is the world's largest repository of human
    knowledge and the main research arm of the United States Congress. It
    directly serves not only the Congress, but the entire nation with the
    most important commodity of our time: information. The Library's
    diverse programs sustain its responsibility to foster a free and
    informed society by building, preserving, and providing resources for
    human creativity, wisdom and achievement. Through these programs, the
    Library strives to place its resources at the fingertips of our elected
    representatives, the American people, and the world for their mutual
    prosperity, enlightenment, and inspiration.
        The Library of Congress collections are made up of approximately
    135 million artifactual items in more than 470 languages including: 32
    million books (among them more than 5,000 printed before the year
    1500); 14 million photographs and other visual items; 5.3 million maps;
    2.8 million audio materials; 981,000 films, television, and video
    items; 5.5 million pieces of music; 59.5 million manuscripts; and
    hundreds of thousands of scientific and government documents.
        Under the Library's four major appropriations, the Library funds
    the following major services:
    Library of Congress, S&E
        Acquisitions.--The Library staff adds more than 13,000 items to the
    collections every day. The Library collects not only regularly
    published materials, but also reports that have limited distribution,
    international ephemera that illuminate other cultures and socio-
    political movements, and special collections that have been carefully
    assessed and selected by our curators. The collections, and the
    information they contain provide important support for the many
    services the Library provides to the Congress and the nation.
        Cataloging.--The Library produces bibliographic records and related
    products and develops policy and standards for libraries and
    bibliographic utilities in all fifty states, the District of Columbia,
    and territories--cataloging more than 345,000 books and serials in
    fiscal year 2006--services that save America's libraries millions of
    dollars annually (the money it would cost them if they had to catalog
    the books and other materials themselves).
        Research and Reference.--The Library responds to, at no cost to
    users, nearly one million information requests a year from across the
    nation, including more than 500,000 in-person requests in the 20
    reading rooms open to the public in Washington, D.C. In addition, the
    Library responds to some 56,000 interlibrary loan requests from across
    the nation and more than 25,000 requests for book loans from the
    Congress each year.
        Online Access Services.--The Library is at the forefront of
    providing comprehensive online digital access services, the conversion
    of analog materials into digital form, Web archiving, the provision of
    the Library's web based digital library services, and education
    outreach services that encourage use of the Library's online primary
    sources. The Library's online presence during 2006 resulted in 5
    billion hits. There are now more than 22 million digital items
    represented on the Library's web sites, including materials digitized
    from the collections and exhibitions, program activities, and
    interpretive information. Over half of these digital items reside in
    the Library's virtual historical collections, American Memory. The
    Library's web site offers electronic versions of many resources of
    historical research and educational value that no other institution
    provides. In addition, the Library already has captured a total of 56
    terabytes of content from the Web, and this volume continues to grow
    significantly. This total represents more than 1 billion documents
    downloaded from the Web, the equivalent of digital text information
    from more than 55 million books (1 megabyte per book of text only).
        American Creativity.--The Library manages the largest, most varied,
    and most important archival collection of American creativity--
    including motion pictures, sound recordings, maps, prints, photographs,
    manuscripts, music, and folklore covering a wide range of ethnic and
    geographic communities. The Library provides reference assistance to
    researchers and the general public, conducts field research, and
    promotes the preservation of American culture throughout the United
    States.
        Preservation.--The Library develops and manages a program to
    preserve the diverse materials and formats in the Library's
    collections. The program provides a full range of prospective and
    retrospective preservation treatment for hundreds of thousands of items
    a year, conducts research into new technologies, emphasizes prevention
    techniques including proper environmental storage and training for
    emergency situations, conserves and preserves materials, and reformats
    materials to more stable media. The Library plays a key role in
    developing national and international standards that support the work
    of federal, state, and local agencies in preserving the nation's
    cultural heritage.
        Reading Promotion and Outreach.--The Library promotes books,
    reading, and literacy through the Library's Center for the Book, its
    affiliated centers in fifty states and the District of Columbia, and
    nearly one hundred national organizational partners. The Library
    encourages knowledge and use of its collections through other outreach
    programs (cable TV, lectures, publications, conferences and symposia,
    exhibitions, poetry readings--all primarily supported by private
    funding) and through the Library's virtual presence on the Web. The
    Library also gives some 90,000 surplus books annually to qualified
    libraries and nonprofit educational institutions through its nationwide
    donation program.
        Digital Initiatives.--The Library oversees and coordinates cross-
    institutional digital initiatives, including the National Digital
    Information Infrastructure and Preservation Program (NDIIPP). The
    vision of NDIIPP is to ensure access over time to a rich body of
    digital content through the establishment of a national network of
    committed partners, collaborating in a digital preservation
    architecture with defined roles and responsibilities.
        Law Library.--The Law Library program provides direct research
    service to the Congress in international and comparative law. It serves
    as the National Law Library. In addition to Members and Committee
    staffs of the Congress and the Congressional Research Service, the Law
    Library provides officers of the legislative branch, Justices of the
    Supreme Court and other judges, members of the Departments of State and
    Justice, and other federal agencies with bibliographic and
    informational services, background papers, comparative legal studies,
    legal interpretations, and translations. In support of this mission,
    the Law Library has amassed the largest collection of authoritative
    legal sources in the world, including more than 2.5 million volumes as
    well as almost 134,000 digital items. As its congressional priorities
    permit, the Law Library makes its collections and services available to
    a diverse community of users--the foreign diplomatic corps,
    international organizations, members of the bench and bar, educational
    institutions, non-governmental libraries, legal service organizations,
    and the general public--directly serving more than 100,000 users
    annually and offering information to the global public through its
    online services, including its Global Legal Information Network (GLIN).
    Copyright Office, S&E
        The Copyright Office (CO) administers the U.S. copyright laws,
    provides copyright policy analysis to the Congress and executive branch
    agencies, actively promotes international protections for intellectual
    property created by U.S. citizens, and provides public information and
    education on copyright. In fiscal year 2006, the CO registered almost
    521,000 claims to copyright, accompanied by more than 825,000 deposit
    copies of work; transferred more than 1.1 million registered and non-
    registered works to the Library, valued at more than $41.2 million;
    recorded 13,016 documents containing more than 350,000 titles; logged
    more than 31 million external electronic transactions to its web site;
    responded to nearly 339,000 in-person, telephone, and email requests
    for information; and collected $227 million in royalty fees and
    distributed more than $191 million in royalties to copyright owners.
    Registration fees and authorized reductions from royalty receipts fund
    almost half of the CO. Copies of works received through the copyright
    system form the core of the Library's immense Americana collections,
    which provide the primary record of American creativity.
        The Copyright Royalty Board (CRB), which is comprised of three
    Copyright Royalty Judges and their staff, administers the copyright
    statutory license and determines the rates and terms for the purpose of
    (a) distributing hundreds of millions of dollars in royalties that are
    collected under various compulsory license provisions of the copyright
    law, and (b) adjusting the royalty rates of these licensing provisions.
    The CO currently provides administrative support to the CRJs in budget
    preparation and human resource management.
    Congressional Research Service, S&E
        The Congressional Research Service (CRS) assists all Members and
    committees of the Congress with its deliberations and legislative
    decisions by providing objective, authoritative, non-partisan, and
    confidential research and analysis. As a shared resource, serving the
    Congress exclusively, CRS experts work alongside the Congress
    throughout all stages of the legislative process and provide integrated
    and interdisciplinary analyses and insights in all areas of legislative
    activity. These services are provided by confidential individual policy
    consultations and memoranda; analytical reports; seminars; and a secure
    CRS web site available to the Congress. In 2006, CRS delivered more
    than 933,000 research responses and services.
    Books for the Blind and Physically Handicapped, S&E
        The National Library for the Blind and Physically Handicapped (NLS/
    BPH), manages a free national reading program for more than 794,000
    blind and physically handicapped people--circulating, at no cost to
    users, approximately 25 million items in fiscal year 2006. A
    cooperating network of 131 regional and sub-regional (local) libraries
    distribute the machines and library materials provided by the Library
    of Congress. The U.S. Postal Service receives an appropriation to
    support postage-free mail for magazines, books, and machines which are
    sent directly to readers. Reading materials (books and magazines) and
    playback machines are sent to a total readership of 794,000 comprising
    more than 500,000 audio and braille readers registered individually, in
    addition to more than 200,000 eligible individuals located in 32,000
    institutions.
                 the library's fiscal year 2008 budget request
        As the Library's budget was submitted prior to the enactment of the
    fiscal year 2007 full-year continuing resolution, the fiscal year 2008
    request is based on the total fiscal year 2006 operating level. As a
    result, the fiscal year 2008 budget request is unique in that it
    includes (1) adjustments for fiscal year 2007 and fiscal year 2008
    mandatory pay and price level increases, (2) the resubmission of most
    fiscal year 2007 program increases, and (3) several new fiscal year
    2008 program increases. This request covers two years of costs needed
    to keep the Library on schedule with its programs.
        In fiscal year 2008, the Library requests a total budget of
    $703.339 million ($661.616 million in net appropriations and $41.723
    million in authority to use receipts), which is an increase of $99.716
    million above the fiscal year 2007 (2006) level. The total includes
    $43.9 million for the construction of the Library of Congress Fort
    Meade Logistics Center, proposed for transfer to the Architect of the
    Capitol. Funding also includes $45.947 million in mandatory pay and
    price level increases and $28.118 million in program increases
    (excluding the $43.9 million for the Logistics Center), offset by
    $18.249 million in non-recurring costs.
        The requested funding supports 4,244 full-time equivalents (FTEs),
    a net decrease of 58 FTEs below the current authorized level of 4,302.
        Fiscal year 2008 funding is allocated as follows:
      --Library of Congress, S&E ($467.452 million/2,888 FTEs), which
            includes:
        --National Library ($324.294 million/2,259 FTEs);
            --National Library--Basic
            --Purchase of Library Materials (GENPAC)
            --Office of Strategic Initiatives
            --Cataloging Distribution Service
      --Law Library ($13.394 million/101 FTEs)
      --Management Support Services ($129.764 million/528 FTEs)
      --Copyright Office, S&E ($51.562 million/523 FTEs)
      --Congressional Research Service, S&E ($108.702 million/705 FTEs)
      --Books for the Blind and Physically Handicapped, S&E ($75.623
            million/128 FTEs)
                        the library's funding priorities
    Mandatory Pay and Price Level increases
        The Library is requesting an additional $45.947 million to maintain
    current services. This is the amount needed to support the
    annualization of the fiscal year 2006 pay raise, the fiscal year 2007
    pay raise and annualization in fiscal year 2008, the fiscal year 2008
    pay raise, within-grade increases, and unavoidable inflation and vendor
    price increases for the period fiscal year 2007-2008. These funds are
    needed simply to sustain current business operations and to prevent a
    reduction in staff that would severely affect the Library's ability to
    manage its programs in support of its mission and strategic objectives.
    Unfunded Mandates
        The Library is requesting $2.005 million for one unfunded mandate:
    the Department of State (DOS) Capital Security Cost-Sharing Program.
        In fiscal year 2005, the DOS, mandated by the executive branch,
    began its 14-year program to finance the construction of approximately
    150 embassy compounds, requiring increasing contributions from all
    agencies with an overseas presence, including the Library. The
    Library's yearly assessment was $1.2 million in fiscal year 2005 and
    $2.4 million in fiscal year 2006-2007. The proposed increase for fiscal
    year 2008 is $2.005 million. If funding is not provided for the next
    phase of the program, the Library will have insufficient resources to
    operate its overseas offices. This would result in the curtailment--and
    in some cases, termination--of international acquisitions programs in
    areas that are of increasing importance to the nation (Brazil, Egypt,
    Kenya, India, Pakistan, and Indonesia).
    Major Ongoing Projects
        The Library is requesting a net total of $1.771 million for three
    ongoing major projects that are either in their last year of
    development or on a time-sensitive schedule that must be maintained if
    the entire project is to succeed.
      --Acquisitions (GENPAC/Electronic Materials).--Advances in technology
            have opened opportunities for the Library to acquire materials
            from parts of the world about which, until recently, there had
            been little access to primary sources. National interest,
            especially with respect to security and trade, dictates that we
            acquire emerging electronic publications and other difficult-
            to-find resources that document other cultures and nations. The
            GENPAC appropriation, which funds the purchase of all-important
            current collections materials, declined precipitously in its
            purchasing power during the 1990s. Consistent with our previous
            budget request for a multi-year, $4.2 million base increase to
            the GENPAC budget, the Library is requesting the next
            incremental adjustment of $2 million, which will bring the
            total base adjustment up to $3.3 million. Funding is needed to
            help keep pace with the greatly increased cost of serial and
            electronic materials, that risks eroding the comprehensiveness
            and value of the Library's collections.
      --National Audio-Visual Conservation Center (NAVCC), Culpeper, VA.--A
            five-year plan for the completion of NAVCC was included in the
            Library's fiscal year 2004 budget. Fiscal year 2008 represents
            the fifth year in the Library's five-year cost model, which is
            adjusted annually to align with shifts in the construction
            schedule of the Packard Humanities Institute and the Library's
            occupancy schedule. In 2007, construction will be completed;
            the entire property transferred to the government; staff
            relocations will begin; and digital preservation equipment and
            systems will be purchased and integrated into the conservation
            facility. Funding is needed in fiscal year 2008 to continue
            purchasing equipment for the facility as well as for operations
            support. The fiscal year 2008 total funding of $13.617 million
            reflects a net decrease of $1.429 million and 5 FTEs from the
            base.
      --Global Legal Information Network (GLIN).--The Law Library's GLIN is
            a multinational, cooperative legal database with members of the
            network representing countries in Africa, Asia, Europe, and the
            Americas. In fiscal year 2003, the Congress provided the
            Library with a five-year appropriation to implement the
            technical upgrade, to digitize and incorporate retrospective
            legal material, and to engage in targeted recruitment to expand
            the diversity and number of nations contributing legal
            materials to the GLIN database. All goals have been met. To
            maintain this world-class legal information resource, the
            Library requests that $1.2 million be added to the Law Library
            base in fiscal year 2008. Funding is required to continue
            operating GLIN and cover ongoing costs associated with software
            licensing and upgrades, system hosting, technology refreshment,
            content expansion, and membership recruitment.
        In addition, the Library's fiscal year 2008 budget did not include
    a request for the National Digital Information Infrastructure and
    Preservation Program (NDIIPP), as the budget was submitted prior to the
    rescission of $47 million as part of the fiscal year 2007 continuing
    resolution. The Library is seeking $21.5 million to partially restore
    funding for NDIIPP. The fiscal year 2007 rescission of $47 million
    endangers another $37 million in matching funds already committed by
    pending partners.
    New Projects
        The Library is requesting $24.342 million for several new critical
    initiatives as follows:
      --Digital Talking Book Program.--A four-year, $76.4 million
            initiative is needed to implement a revolutionary change from
            analog to digital technology that has been projected and
            planned since 1990. In brief, the change consists of replacing
            cassette tape players with Digital Talking Book (DTB) players
            and introducing a new medium (flash cartridges) for
            distributing the DTBs. This request is critical, as the
            technology currently used will be obsolete in a few years'
            time. This change is also being demanded by the users of the
            service. The new technology has been proposed after wide and
            deep consultation with users and technology experts. In fiscal
            year 2008, the Library is requesting $19.1 million, to remain
            available in the NLS base until fiscal year 2011--the last year
            of the implementation schedule. Funding is requested in both
            annual ($14.454 million) and no-year funds ($4.646 million) in
            fiscal year 2008, with the mix changing each succeeding fiscal
            year, as appropriate.
      --Copyright Records Preservation.--A six-year, $6 million initiative
            is needed to image digitally 70 million pages of pre-1978
            public records that are deteriorating, jeopardizing the
            mandatory preservation of, and access to, these unique records
            of American creativity. In fiscal year 2008, the Library is
            requesting the first $1 million--in offsetting collections
            authority, which will permit the scanning of 10 million page
            images.
      --Abraham Lincoln Bicentennial Exhibition.--The Library's Abraham
            Lincoln Bicentennial Exhibition in 2009 will be a centerpiece
            of the nationwide celebration to mark the bicentennial of
            Lincoln's birth. The Library will draw on its unparalleled
            Lincoln materials to focus on Lincoln's rise to national
            prominence and the thinking and writing that underlie his
            career. A total of $1.442 million will be needed for this
            project in fiscal year 2008, and with multi-year (3-year)
            authority. Fiscal year 2008 funding will support the design and
            implementation of the exhibition and travel needed to visit
            other venues and/or other institutions that will be lending
            materials to the Library exhibition.
      --Escape Hoods.--A one-time cost of $1.189 million is needed to
            purchase NIOSH-approved escape hoods for approximately 6,200
            non-Library staff (researchers, contractors, and other visitors
            to the Library) and 110 cabinets to store the hoods throughout
            the Library. Procuring and providing escape hoods for
            contractors and visitors is consistent with the policy set by
            the USCP for the Capitol Hill complex.
      --Custodial Services.--A total of $517,000 in contract funds is
            requested for custodial services support and includes funding
            for six contract custodial quality control inspectors and
            increased costs related to new space at Fort Meade (Modules 2-
            4). The Library's facilities on Capitol Hill comprises four
            million square feet, with no independent inspectors monitoring
            its custodial contract (industry standards reflect at least one
            inspector per 500,000 square feet of facility). Based on
            industry standards, the Library would require a total of eight
            inspectors, though the Library is only requesting six. Library
            space at Fort Meade will increase by 83,000 square feet between
            fiscal year 2006-2008, increasing the base cost of the
            custodial service contract.
      --Legislative Branch-Wide Payroll Formulation Software System.--The
            Library is requesting a total of $500,000 to support a
            legislative branch-wide pilot program to procure and implement
            a payroll budget formulation software system that will allow a
            name-by-name calculation of payroll costs using a standard
            calculation methodology for all legislative branch agencies.
            This request is the result of congressional guidance to the
            Legislative Branch Financial Managers Council (LBFMC) to
            develop a standard methodology for formulating payroll costs
            within and across the legislative branch agencies. Since the
            Library has one of the largest staffs in the legislative
            branch, the LBFMC, with congressional approval, selected the
            Library to pilot the system, with funding for all legislative
            branch agencies to be requested in subsequent years--after
            testing and implementation are finalized at the Library.
            Consistent with guidance, the software and subsequent
            formulation of payroll costs will be managed by each agency's
            central budget office to ensure consistency within each agency.
      --Library-Wide Contracts Management Support.--Currently, the Office
            of Contracts has a total working capacity of 22 FTEs (comprised
            of in-house staff and contractors). Based on a GSA workload
            analysis model that was applied to the Library's fiscal year
            2005 contract actions, a total of 26 FTEs is needed to support
            the Library's contract workload. Since 2001, the volume and
            complexity of the Library's contracting workload have increased
            significantly. The average annual dollar value of contract
            actions administered per contract specialist increased from
            $2.9 million in fiscal year 2001 to more than $13.8 million in
            fiscal year 2005. That trend is expected to become more
            pronounced in fiscal year 2007 and beyond. Funding of $318,000
            is requested to support the salaries and benefits of an
            additional three FTEs in the Office of Contracts for a total
            working capacity of 25 FTEs. The three additional FTEs will be
            absorbed within the Library's FTE base.
      --Workforce Transformation Project.--Renewal and development of the
            Library's workforce are essential to retrain staff with the
            necessary skills for the digital age, and to capture for the
            future the vast knowledge of large numbers of experienced staff
            who are near retirement. In fiscal year 2008, the Library will
            begin a program to enhance digital competencies, leadership
            skills, career development, recruitment, and other workforce
            counseling and services. These activities are particularly
            important for sustaining the Library's commitment to a diverse
            workforce. Funding of $276,000 is requested to support these
            initiatives.
    Other Program Changes or Requests
        Library of Congress Fort Meade Logistics Center.--The Library is
    requesting $43.9 million, to be transferred to the Architect of the
    Capitol, for the construction of the Library of Congress Fort Meade
    Logistics Center. Current deplorable life safety and environmental
    conditions at the Landover Center are unacceptable and present
    extremely high risk to staff and collections. The proposed Logistics
    Center is a 162,000 square foot environmentally controlled facility
    supporting the day-to-day mission critical operating requirements of
    the Library. The new facility will consolidate storage and inventory
    and supply from multiple leased facilities and Library buildings on
    Capitol Hill and will also benefit from the synergy and centralized
    security of the Fort Meade master plan. Alternatives have been
    extensively evaluated, and all are more costly than the proposed
    construction--which will result in immediate savings of approximately
    $3 million per year after consolidation at Fort Meade.
        Digital Collections and Educational Curricula Program--In 2005,
    Congress created and passed the Library of Congress Digital Collections
    and Educational Curricula Act. Beginning in fiscal year 2006, the Act
    moved the administrative and programmatic ownership of the Adventure of
    the American Mind program (AAM) from the Educational and Research
    Consortium to the Library. Of the $6.016 million requested in fiscal
    year 2008 (fiscal year 2006-2007 enacted level adjusted for mandatory
    pay and price level increases), $2.006 million will fund administrative
    support costs, with the balance of $4.010 million supporting grant
    awards. In addition, the Library will begin developing standards-based,
    field-tested curricula, using a train-the-trainer model to create a
    network of partners from all parts of the country.
      architect of the capitol--library of congress 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 is
    requesting a fiscal year 2008 budget of $42.788 million to support life
    safety, deferred maintenance, and upgrades to the Library's buildings
    on Capitol Hill. The deferment of maintenance and upgrades require
    projects to be completed concurrently, often at higher costs.
    Deferments and delays have also created longer lists of projects. The
    cost increase is compounded by inflationary pressures and by the
    steadily growing risks in health, safety, and security to the Library's
    staff and collections. The cost of maintenance and upgrades will
    increase exponentially if the Library cannot stop, or at least slow
    down, the rate of deterioration of its buildings.
                    proposed changes to legislative language
        The Library has proposed language to improve employment options
    elsewhere in the Federal Government for Library staff. The first
    provision confers competitive status to Library employees who have
    successfully completed their probationary period at the Library--the
    basic eligibility to be non-competitively selected to fill vacancies in
    the competitive service of the Federal Government. This will enable
    Library staff to apply for positions in the executive branch on an
    equal footing with ``career'' executive branch employees. A related
    provision would enhance the employability of Library employees
    displaced because of a Reduction-in-Force (RIF) or failure to accept a
    transfer to an alternative work location. This provision would give
    separated staff selection priority for competitive service positions,
    comparable to that enjoyed by separated employees from other federal
    agencies.
        The Library also proposes new appropriation language to address the
    requirement specified in the Cooperative Acquisitions Program Revolving
    Fund legislation (CAP), Public Law 105-55, that the revolving fund
    receive its own audit by March 31 following the end of each fiscal
    year. The Library requests that the March 31 audit requirement be
    rescinded and that the CAP be subject to the same audit requirement as
    the Library's other revolving funds.
                                   conclusion
        We are deeply grateful for what Congress has already created and
    admirably sustained. New investments will enable us to continue
    providing the Congress with comprehensive nonpartisan research, and the
    nation with the wonderful learning resources that digital technology is
    delivering to schools, libraries and homes. Appropriations for today's
    Library will be investments in tomorrow's minds, in our future
    creativity, and in America's global leadership well into the
    information age.
        Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
                                     ______

                          Open World Leadership Center
        Madam Chairwoman, Mr. Allard, and other Members of the
    Subcommittee, I appreciate the opportunity to submit testimony on the
    Open World Leadership Center's budget request for fiscal year 2008. The
    Center, whose board of trustees I chair, conducts the only exchange
    program in the U.S. legislative branch and has hosted 11,794 leaders
    from Russia, Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova, and other post-Soviet states to
    date. All of us at Open World are very grateful for the continued
    support in the legislative branch and for congressional participation
    in the program and on our governing board. We look forward to working
    with you on the future of Open World.
        Open World has a U.S. hosting network of hundreds of local
    nongovernmental and governmental organizations and more than six
    thousand volunteer host families, enabling us to continue to bring
    large numbers of emerging young post-Soviet leaders to the United
    States. Program participants come to discuss topical issues of mutual
    interest and benefit, such as ways of containing the avian flu,
    developing environmentally responsible public policy, and improving
    educational curricula in primary and secondary schools. They meet with
    Americans who share their interests and are often eager to partner with
    them on collaborative projects.
        The following statement by U.S. District Judge Stephen P. Friot of
    Oklahoma, who hosted five prominent Russian judges for Open World in
    2006, effectively captures the impact of this program on both U.S.
    hosts and foreign visitors: ``The opportunity to learn about the
    judicial system of the Russian Federation made hosting Open World
    delegates one of the most enriching professional experiences I have
    ever had. Russian and American judges face similar problems, and
    programs like Open World help us overcome them by providing the
    opportunity to learn with each other and from each other.''
        In 2006, after seven years of operation, Open World assessed its
    accomplishments and completed a new strategic plan under the leadership
    of former U.S. Ambassador to Russia James F. Collins, one of our
    longest-serving trustees. The plan envisions expanding the Open World
    Program to all the countries of Eurasia \1\ and the Baltic States by
    fiscal year 2011. Expansion programs are already under way in five new
    countries: Azerbaijan, Georgia, Moldova, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan.
    One result of this expansion is that Open World will reach many more
    Muslims. Some 30 million Muslims live in the countries participating in
    Open World 2007, more than double the Open World 2006 figure of 14
    million.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Eurasia here means Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova, Armenia,
    Georgia, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan,
    and Kyrgyzstan.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The Center's budget request of $14.4 million for fiscal year 2008
    (Appendix A) reflects an increase of $0.54 million (4.0 percent) over
    fiscal year 2007 funding. This funding will enable the Center to
    continue its proven mission of hosting young leaders from Russia and
    Ukraine; conduct programs in our five new expansion countries, in
    accordance with recommendations from Members of Congress and directives
    from the Board of Trustees; and respond to any requests for small-
    scale, preliminary expansion to additional countries made by the Board
    of Trustees in consultation with the Appropriations Committees.
                       program mission and strategic plan
        The Open World strategic plan, completed in 2006, adopted the
    following mission statement:

        To enhance understanding and capabilities for cooperation between
    the United States and the countries of Eurasia and the Baltic States by
    developing a network of leaders in the region who have gained
    significant, firsthand exposure to America's democratic, accountable
    government and its free-market system.

        In light of this mission, Open World will continue to bring
    emerging leaders from this region to the United States, while
    endeavoring to foster lasting ties and ongoing cooperation between Open
    World delegates and their American hosts and professional counterparts.
    The program seeks to nurture civic and political environments where
    civil society develops not only from the top down, but also from the
    ground up and the periphery in. This goal is furthered by developing a
    network of leaders who regularly communicate and collaborate with
    fellow citizens and American peers on concrete projects.
        The Open World strategic plan focuses on building and strengthening
    a network of American and foreign community leaders through both
    enhancing existing ties and forming new ones. It also stresses the
    importance of measuring progress quantitatively by numbers of
    partnerships, joint projects, and ripple effects, and by tracking how
    they grow and strengthen.
        Open World's core competency lies in identifying promising young
    leaders, matching them with capable and appropriate U.S. host
    organizations, and networking them with their American counterparts.
    Open World has developed close coordination with U.S. Embassies and
    various nominating organizations. Wherever possible, Open World tries
    to complement other U.S. government-funded programs as well as other
    initiatives in Open World countries that involve U.S. citizens.
        For example, Open World joined with the U.S.-Ukraine Foundation to
    help solidify relations between Omaha, Nebraska, and Artemivsk,
    Ukraine, which had previously been paired under a foundation program.
    In December 2006, community leaders in Omaha hosted a delegation of
    city administrators from Artemivsk, which applied to become a sister
    city of Omaha as a direct result of the visit. A delegation of Omaha
    city representatives (including university faculty and students) will
    make a return visit to Artemivsk in May 2007. Omahans have raised funds
    in the United States to help renovate an orphanage in Artemivsk this
    year; and for the first time, a group from the Omaha Ukrainian diaspora
    is visiting Artemivsk to build ties.
        West Jordan, Utah, the sister city of Votkinsk, Russia, provides
    another example of such an initiative. To help develop projects based
    on this sister-city tie, Open World made it possible for a
    competitively selected medical team from Votkinsk to visit West Jordan
    in September 2006 to learn more about U.S. emergency medical care and
    community health fairs. One month after returning to Votkinsk, the Open
    World delegates replicated a community health fair. They invited the
    mayor of West Jordan as well as a health team from Jordan Valley
    Hospital to take part in the event. More than 600 Votkinsk citizens
    attended this one-day event and learned about Utah's ties to Votkinsk.
    Sister Cities International's Utah state coordinator and veteran Open
    World host Jennifer Andelin had this to say after the trip: ``Open
    World is definitely a program that is positively impacting both Russia
    and Utah. I often refer to Open World as the `glue' that holds the
    Utah/Russia partnerships together.''
                         calendar year 2006 activities
        In 2006, Open World brought 1,142 Russians and 223 Ukrainians to
    the United States for high-level professional programs in 46 U.S.
    states and the District of Columbia. Out of these: 228 delegates
    studied rule of law; 279 delegates studied accountable governance; 216
    delegates studied women as leaders issues; and 345 delegates studied
    health, social issues, the environment, and education.
        The Open World 2006 programs for Russia and Ukraine focused on
    overarching themes like accountable governance and rule of law, as well
    as critical challenges that face both countries and America as well,
    such as AIDS prevention and emergency preparedness. For instance, a
    team of Russian avian flu experts came to meet with their counterparts
    at the Food and Drug Administration, the National Institutes of Health
    (NIH), and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and spoke at
    the 2nd Bird Flu Summit in Washington, D.C. The trip initiated an
    ongoing dialogue between the NIH and Russian laboratories that will
    lead to cooperative projects as well as a formal cooperative
    partnership agreement to be signed in spring 2007. (On March 10, 2007,
    another Open World delegation of Russian infectious disease
    epidemiologists joined the State of North Carolina, the Scian
    Institute, and the National Peace Foundation in a ``Community
    Preparedness Planning Template Project'' partnership designed to help
    small and medium-sized communities in the United States and elsewhere
    develop emergency response plans to deal with pandemics.)
        In another example, four high-level government physicians from
    Russia involved in HIV/AIDS prevention, TB control, forensic medicine,
    and prison health care visited New Orleans in fall 2006 to learn about
    operations at counterpart agencies in Louisiana. The delegates toured
    and had briefings at the Orleans Parish Jail and the state penitentiary
    in St. Gabriel, took part in informative discussions with the state
    epidemiologist and the head of the state Tuberculosis Control Program,
    and visited the Jefferson Parish Forensic Center in Harvey. Staff of
    the Louisiana State University Health Science Center introduced the
    Russians to the center's medical training and research programs and
    juvenile justice program. The delegates praised the program for giving
    them the opportunity to interact with Louisiana professionals who
    ``have the same positions and work . . . on the same problems'' as they
    do in Russia.
        Open World 2006 continued the rule of law program, which has
    benefited so much from the involvement of U.S. Supreme Court justices
    and many other prominent members of the American judiciary and has
    brought nearly 1,100 Russian and Ukrainian judges to the United States.
    A highlight of last year's program was an exchange for five Ukrainian
    judges hosted by U.S. District Judge David R. Herndon of East St.
    Louis, Illinois. Not only did the Ukrainians observe the workings of
    the U.S. legal system, they also discussed what they saw with key
    actors in the judicial process. Judge Herndon arranged for them to
    observe him conduct several sentencings, after which he held a Q-and-A
    session that included the counsel involved in the sentencing hearings.
    After observing a jury trial at the Madison County (Illinois)
    Courthouse, the visiting judges had a ``postmortem'' with members of
    the defense's legal team. The Ukrainians also participated in the
    quarterly administrative meeting for all Southern District of Illinois
    judges and court staff, giving them invaluable insights into judicial
    administration in the United States. And during a tour of the Federal
    Correctional Institution and Camp in Greenville, Illinois, the
    Ukrainians were able to ask questions not only of the warden but of
    inmates as well--something still not readily allowed for visitors to
    their own country.
        Open World 2006 also continued the focus on accountable local
    governance that had been added as a program theme in 2005. The Russians
    and Ukrainians who participated in these exchanges received practical
    advice from their American counterparts and onsite insights into how to
    make local government more open, responsive, and efficient. For
    example, several small-town mayors from Ukraine spent part of their
    Open World exchange visiting rural communities outside Lincoln,
    Nebraska, to see firsthand how these towns used public/private economic
    development projects to improve quality of life and retain population.
    Four Russian municipal executives hosted in Parker, Colorado, reviewed
    the town government's budget and operations with the mayor and two of
    his top staff, then sat in as the proposed 2007 budget was presented
    for first reading to the Parker Town Council. Delegates from the
    formerly closed nuclear city of Zheleznogorsk, Russia, met with the
    planning directors for their Tennessee sister communities of Alcoa,
    Maryville, and Blount County to brainstorm ways of making Zheleznogorsk
    more accessible for trade and travel. And in Springfield, Illinois,
    Ukrainian city officials interested in zoning issues met with the
    city's zoning administrator for an interactive session complete with
    maps and blueprints.
                             open world in america
        Open World delegates are hosted by a large and dedicated group of
    American citizens who live in cities, towns, and rural communities
    throughout the United States:
      --Since Open World's inception in 1999, more than 6,000 U.S. families
            have hosted participants in 1,575-plus communities in all 50
            states.
      --Open World's 2006 host families lived in 227 different
            congressional districts.
        American hosts' generosity toward and enthusiasm for Open World are
    a mainstay of the program. In 2006, interested host communities' demand
    for Open World visitors was more than double Open World's actual number
    of program participants. U.S. hosting organizations were prepared to
    host more than 2,300 Russian participants, well above our funded
    hosting capacity of 1,150 Russian participants. Americans' enthusiasm
    for the Open World Program is reflected in their generous giving in
    2006 of an estimated $1.6 million worth of in-kind contributions in
    terms of free accommodations and meals.
        The blossoming relationship between Los Alamos, New Mexico, and the
    formerly closed nuclear research city of Sarov, Russia, offers other
    examples of the dedication of Open World's American hosts. In September
    2006, Open World brought four delegates from Sarov to Los Alamos. As a
    result of the trip, a videoconference site was organized using
    equipment donated to Sarov by citizens of Los Alamos. Videoconferences
    are being used both to organize a 2007 trip to Sarov by Los Alamos
    firefighters and police officers to discuss how to control wildfire (a
    major issue of concern in both communities), and to make plans for six
    children from Los Alamos to attend a summer camp outside Sarov.
        Open World delegates have impacted American communities by sharing
    ideas with their professional counterparts, university faculty and
    students, governors and state legislators, emergency response crews,
    and other American citizens in a variety of settings, including group
    discussions, Rotary Club breakfasts, and town hall meetings.
        One Rotarian, Wayne R. Oquin of Houston, Texas, had this to say
    about the impact of Open World on him as a host:

        On a personal note, I have never been one to push the international
    side of Rotary. I'm recognized as a community service Rotarian. I must
    admit that the Open World Program has changed my perspective. I was
    very apprehensive about my role as an Open World coordinator for my
    District. It really turned out to be easy, informative and extremely
    rewarding to me personally. I can honestly say that my time with this
    Open World delegation has been my most enjoyable week ever spent as a
    Rotarian.
                         results and impact of program
        Open World delegates return to their countries and apply their Open
    World experience to improve their local communities and regions. For
    example, an elementary school principal from Tver, Russia, was hosted
    in November 2004 by the Paso Robles (California) Rotary Club. Upon her
    return, she instituted a set of reforms based on what she had seen at
    the Georgia Brown Elementary School in Paso Robles. Among other
    projects, she started a board of trustees that was chaired by the
    mother of one of the students at her school. The board, in turn, worked
    with the principal to add electives to the school curricula, including
    a course on principles of democracy and election legislation. As a
    result of these reforms, the Russian Ministry of Education awarded the
    school a one million ruble prize as one of the ``Best Schools of the
    Year'' for 2006.
        In another instance, a city administrator from Ulan-Ude visited
    Louisiana and was inspired to launch a campaign in support of NGOs in
    her region. During a meeting with the Louisiana Office of Family
    Support, she was particularly impressed by the role of nongovernmental
    community organizations such as Louisiana Eastern European Adoptive
    Families. Upon her return, she teamed up with the first deputy
    chairperson of her department, another Open World alumna, to promote
    NGO development in Ulan-Ude. As a result of their teamwork, on October
    3, 2006, the City of Ulan-Ude declared 2007 ``The Year of Civic
    Initiatives'' and allocated 2.8 million rubles (approximately $106,000)
    to be distributed among 32 local NGOs to organize 100 different
    activities and programs throughout this year.
        Sometimes results take time to come to fruition. A judge from
    Barnaul, Russia, visiting Washington, D.C., in 2003 was particularly
    impressed by the use of information technology in the Superior Court of
    the District of Columbia. Upon her return, she started to take computer
    classes and, in 2005, was instrumental in instituting the use of web
    cameras and computerized court records in her region's supreme court.
        In another example, the director of a Yekaterinburg refugee aid
    organization and a Native American Open World host--who first met
    during the director's 2004 Open World visit--just partnered on a March
    14 videoconference between Native American children in Oklahoma and
    indigenous children in Ufa-Shigiri, Russia. The videoconference, which
    was co-hosted by the U.S. Consulate in Yekaterinburg, is intended to be
    the first in a series of events that will allow these children to share
    information about their lives, cultures, and aspirations for their
    communities.
                                scope of program
        In addition to the qualitative assessments described above, the
    Center also tracks quantitative performance measures to ensure that
    Open World is focusing on a geographically and professionally broad
    cross-section of emerging leaders who might not otherwise have the
    opportunity to visit the United States:
      --Delegates have come from all the political regions of Russia,
            Ukraine, and Lithuania, and from 13 of Uzbekistan's 14
            political regions.
      --88 percent of Russian participants live outside Moscow and St.
            Petersburg.
      --More than 6,500 federal, regional, and local government officials
            have participated, including 157 members of parliament.
      --The average age of Open World delegates is 38.
      --93 percent of delegates are first-time visitors to the United
            States.
      --51 percent of delegates are women.
                       open world 2007 and plans for 2008
        In calendar year 2007 we plan to continue bringing Russian
    political, civic, and cultural leaders, as well as Ukrainian political
    and civic leaders, to the United States. In addition, through Open
    World, at least 175 leaders from Georgia, Moldova, Azerbaijan,
    Tajikistan, and Kyrgyzstan will visit the United States in 2007,
    virtually all for the first time. Chicago and Atlanta welcomed the
    first Open World Georgian delegations in early March. The Chicago
    visitors, all regional and city officials, reported that one of their
    favorite sessions was a morning spent at the village hall of suburban
    Bellwood, where they received a comprehensive overview of the town
    government, participated in lengthy Q-and-A with the mayor and other
    Bellwood officials, and toured town departments and facilities. Open
    World's first Moldovan delegations also arrived last month: one, a
    delegation of senior government and NGO officials, met with their
    counterparts in Washington, D.C., to explore ways to curb human
    trafficking. The other group, composed of one federal and three
    municipal officials, studied public finance with city administrators
    and economic experts in the Research Triangle area of North Carolina.
        Open World administrative activities in 2007 include developing
    annual plans for 2007-2011 as part of the strategic planning process,
    and finalizing all assessment tools to measure program successes. Open
    World will explore ways to recognize some of our most dedicated U.S.
    hosts, and the Board will consider additional countries for possible
    inclusion in the 2008 expansion program.
                        fiscal year 2008 budget request
        The budget request supports hosting and other programmatic
    activities at a level of approximately 1,400 participants total. Actual
    allocations of hosting to individual countries will be determined by
    the Board of Trustees in consultation with the Appropriations
    Committees. The requested funding support is also needed to cover
    anticipated fiscal year 2008 pay increases and the Department of
    State's obligatory Capital Security Cost Sharing charge for the
    Center's two Foreign National Staff attached to the U.S. Embassy in
    Moscow.
        Major categories of requested funding are:
      --Personnel Compensation and Benefits ($1.379 million)
      --Contracts ($8.075 million--awarded to U.S.-based entities) that
            include:
        --Coordinating the delegate nomination and vetting process
        --Obtaining visas and other travel documents
        --Arranging and paying for air travel
        --Coordinating with grantees and placing delegates
        --Providing health insurance for participants
      --Grants ($4.6 million--awarded to U.S. host organizations) that
            include the cost of providing:
        --Professional programming for delegates
        --Meals outside of those provided by home hosts
        --Local transportation
        --Professional interpretation
        --Cultural activities
        --Administrative support
                                   conclusion
        The fiscal year 2008 budget request will enable the Open World
    Leadership Center to continue to make major contributions to the
    deepening understanding of democracy, civil society, and free
    enterprise in a region of vital importance to the Congress and the
    nation. This Subcommittee's interest and support have enabled this
    unique program to obtain gratifying results and a special status in the
    successor states of the USSR.
        I thank the Subcommittee for its continued support of the Open
    World Program.

              OPEN WORLD LEADERSHIP CENTER BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 2008
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Fiscal Year
                           Description                        2007 Estimated
                                                                Obligations
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    11.1  Personnel Compensation............................      $1,085,000
    12.1  Personnel Benefits................................         293,700
    21.0  Travel............................................          97,500
    22.0  Transportation....................................           2,000
    23.0  Rent, Comm., Utilities............................           6,100
    24.0  Printing..........................................           2,100
    25.1  Other Services/Contracts..........................       8,309,500
    26.0  Supplies..........................................           4,100
    31.0  Equipment.........................................  ..............
    41.0  Grants............................................       4,600,000
                                                             ---------------
          TOTAL, Fiscal Year 2008 Budget Request............      14,400,000
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                     ______

      Prepared Statement of Daniel P. Mulhollan, Director, Congressional
                                Research Service
        Madam Chairwoman and Members of the Committee: Thank you for the
    opportunity to appear before you today to present the fiscal year 2008
    budget request for the Congressional Research Service (CRS). I come to
    you with great appreciation for the support you have given us in past
    years. Having worked closely alongside Congress for more than 13 years
    now in my capacity as Director of CRS, I know full well the fiscal
    pressures under which you must operate, and that frame your
    deliberations.
                        fiscal year 2008 budget request
        The CRS fiscal year 2008 budget request is $108,702,000. This
    request covers mandatory pay increases for CRS staff, as well as price
    level increases due to inflation for the goods and services we require
    in the course of doing our work. We are not asking for any funds for
    new initiatives or program growth and are undertaking all of our
    initiatives within current funding.
        CRS is appreciative of Congress' continuing support. Even in these
    times of constrained resources we have managed to sustain our full
    services to the Congress, serving every Member and congressional
    committee. Our highest priority is to ensure that Congress has
    continued access to the nation's best thinking on policy issues, and to
    that end we devote almost 90 percent of our budget to personnel. Since
    1994 we have successfully increased the number of analysts within the
    organization from 313 to 343, and they along with our information
    professionals represent 75 percent of our total staff. At the same
    time, the overall number of CRS staff has declined by about 10 percent.
        The pressures and evolving priorities of Congress drive CRS' short-
    and long-range planning. We strive to strengthen our analytic capacity
    and the quality of our analysis. We evaluate a host of factors in an
    effort to target and improve our analyses, including: institutional
    changes within Congress; demands on Members' time; turnover of Members
    and staff; complexity and interdependencies of policy issues before the
    Congress; need for creative new solutions to policy questions; cultural
    shifts in the United States and abroad; global integration; continuing
    rapid advances in technology; and growth in information sources.
        We stand in direct service to Congress. We continually review our
    services to improve access, streamline operations, and increase our
    efficiency. We are: enhancing our website so that you have targeted
    access to the analysis you need; providing our staff with the research
    tools they need to accomplish their work; protecting the safety of our
    staff and ensuring that, if disaster strikes, CRS' services to the
    Congress will remain available; looking for economies within the
    organization and efficient ways of undertaking our mission; and
    minimizing our non-personnel costs through systematic assessments of
    each program activity and support function.
                                research agenda
        Congress turns to CRS daily. In fiscal year 2006 we provided over
    900,000 services to the Congress. These included more than 65,000
    customized products and services such as memoranda, telephone and in-
    person briefings. In addition, CRS created over 800 new reports,
    bringing the total number of reports available to the Congress to over
    5,800, all available through the CRS website.
        As in previous years, in the months before the start of the 110th
    Congress, our experts from across CRS got together, assessed events
    here in the United States and around the world, and working closely
    with every congressional committee, determined the issues that would
    most likely face this Congress. The result of this and ongoing work is
    the creation and maintenance of a robust and evolving research agenda
    framed around almost 150 policy issues. We continue to work alongside
    you as you identify and clarify policy problems, explore policy
    options, monitor and assess program implementation, and conduct
    oversight.
        CRS approaches its work with a commitment to serving the Congress
    and a spirit of collaboration, resulting in research and analyses that
    are creative, interdisciplinary and insightful. As Congress conducts
    its deliberations, CRS makes every effort to provide the best thinking
    on the problems that congressional lawmakers address. To meet these
    demands, CRS staff must have access to the best research and
    information resources to provide authoritative analysis whenever and
    however Congress requires assistance. Thus the Service invests in
    education and training for staff members to stay current in their
    respective disciplines, and ensures that staff are challenged and
    informed by interactions with colleagues in other disciplines.
        All this, of course, means nothing unless our analysts also
    understand the intricacies of the legislative process and remain
    sensitive to the competing demands on time that Members of Congress
    juggle day after day. CRS' analysts are therefore educated about the
    workings of the Congress so that they have a command of Congress as an
    institution--its rules and procedures--and an understanding of
    Congress' processes in enacting legislation and in conducting
    oversight.
                                  core values
        As Congress adjusts to the changes in the world and CRS realigns
    its services to meet those changes, our commitment to our core values
    does not waiver. CRS analysis is renowned for being confidential,
    objective and authoritative. These core values underscore our service
    to Congress and remain stable regardless of the changes around us.
        In today's marketplace of ideas, we strive to outpace all others.
    CRS is unique among the legislative branch agencies and like no other
    think tank, government bureau, or policy organization in the world.
    According to the guiding principles that Congress set forth when it
    established CRS in 1914, our sole purpose is to support the United
    States Congress, serving equally both chambers and both parties on all
    issues.
        I came to this subcommittee in 1996 asking for assistance in
    addressing the challenge that half of CRS staff would be eligible to
    retire by 2006. Well, the future is here and thanks to the support the
    Congress provided for our succession planning, we hired one-third of
    our staff in the past four years. They are all enthusiastic, highly
    credentialed individuals, dedicated to public service. Our more tenured
    staff work closely with these new employees to transfer their
    institutional memory and expertise in the legislative framework. I tell
    all new employees that it is an honor to work for the Congress. But it
    is also a weighty responsibility. And so honoring and applying our core
    values becomes at once a reward, a challenge, an obligation.
        CRS holds confidentiality as its first core value and highest
    priority. When working with CRS, Congress can access information,
    dispute it, ask questions about it, knowing that questions and comments
    are held in the strictest confidence. I am frequently told by Members
    of Congress that the promise of confidentiality is what keeps them
    coming back to utilize our services. Members know they can come to us
    to float an unusual idea or explore issues, and they can do so without
    question, challenge, or disclosure.
        Our second value is objectivity. Because our work is objective and
    non-partisan, we sit in a unique position. We focus all our efforts on
    getting you, the Congress, what you need, when you need it--and in a
    form that works for you. CRS works one-on-one with Members and
    committees to address specific questions as they arise. Those who
    choose to reference or distribute our work can do so with confidence,
    knowing each report we produce is objective and fair.
        As CRS provides authoritative and confidential assistance, we are
    vigilant about our ability to analyze issues without bias or unexamined
    assumptions. Our outstanding reputation for objective and nonpartisan
    analysis is hard-won by every one of our policy experts, each and every
    day.
        Finally, CRS ensures that the research and analysis it provides are
    authoritative. Rigorous research methodologies must be free of built-in
    bias. Every critical assumption must be presented, explained, and
    justified. Data anomalies must be investigated and rechecked for
    appropriateness and applicability. Primary resources are used whenever
    available, all statements of fact are double- or triple-checked, all
    sources are documented and appropriately caveated. We at CRS understand
    that our research and analysis must be authoritative and above reproach
    if it is to continue to serve as the foundation upon which Congress
    engages in debate.
        Such assurance is critical. For example, as Congress sought to
    improve preparation for and response to future catastrophes, such as a
    national flu pandemic, CRS experts assisted with appropriations
    legislation and oversight. When the House and Senate continued to
    confront the myriad issues stemming from the government's response to
    Hurricane Katrina, CRS experts analyzed flood insurance reform and the
    funding of infrastructure repairs on highways, bridges, ports, and
    airports. Analysts used mapping software to estimate the
    characteristics of individuals most likely affected by the storm. We
    examined the entire range of federal agencies' preparedness and
    response. For example, in addition to extensive examinations of such
    agencies as the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Army Corps
    of Engineers, CRS prepared analyses on the Department of Housing and
    Urban Affairs' role in responding to past disasters. This provided
    precedents and an analytic framework for further consideration of
    disaster-related housing needs and use of Section 8 housing vouchers.
                             management initiatives
        In the coming years, CRS will continue to align research capacity
    to meet congressional needs, to improve congressional access to our
    services, and to develop tools for our research managers and staff to
    facilitate their work. This year we will launch a new authoring and
    publishing system that will reduce the time devoted to writing and
    publishing reports and memoranda, thus freeing up the time available to
    CRS analysts to undertake their research. This new tool will
    standardize the presentation format and enhance graphic capabilities.
        In a world of ever-evolving technologies and a constant need for
    information, CRS is forefront. We plan to enhance our online services--
    be it podcasts, webcasts, or interactive discussions. For example,
    mapping and spatial software will allow Congress to manipulate data to
    determine the possible implications of legislative options for specific
    populations, regions, industries or economic sectors. In addition to
    providing Congress with analysis, this next step would make analytic
    tools available for Congress and staff to use. Another example is a
    legacy series that will capture the knowledge and institutional memory
    of our experts before they retire, further preserving their valuable
    analysis for the Congress and their successors.
                                   conclusion
        I wish to thank the Congress for its continuing support for CRS. In
    keeping with the current fiscal realities, the CRS budget request for
    fiscal year 2008 does not seek additional funds to support program
    growth. The Service seeks your support for the mandatory pay increases
    for CRS staff and price-level increases for goods and services.
        These funds will allow CRS to continue serving the legislative
    needs of the 110th Congress.
                                     ______

      Prepared Statement of Marybeth Peters, The Register of Copyrights,
                                Copyright Office
        Madam Chairwoman, Senator Allard, and other members of the
    Subcommittee: Thank you for the opportunity to present the Copyright
    Office's fiscal year 2008 budget request.
        The Copyright Office is completing its reengineering project which
    you have generously supported for the past seven years. In fiscal year
    2008 we are returning $10.1 million in non-recurring funding from the
    Basic Fund that was used for this project. Renewal receipts are
    decreasing by $850,000. Our mandatory and price level request is $3.4
    million, and we request a temporary $1 million increase in offsetting
    collections authority to use receipts in the no-year account to fund
    the Office's Records Preservation Project. The net effect of these
    requests is a $6.6 million decrease in the Copyright Office Basic fund.
    In addition, we request a $5.6 million decrease in permanent net
    appropriations spending authority and a corresponding permanent
    increase in offsetting collections spending authority due to the July
    1, 2006, fee increases that bring in more annual receipts. The net
    impact on the total spending authority is zero.
        The Office requests the elimination of the CARP fund since these
    program activities have been transferred to the Copyright Royalty
    Judges, an independent entity under the Librarian of Congress. We also
    request mandatories and price levels for the Licensing Division.
        I will discuss these requests in more detail, after I provide some
    brief highlights of the Office's work and an overview of our
    accomplishments in reengineering.
                        review of copyright office work
    Policy and Legal Activities
        We continue to work closely with the Senate Committee on the
    Judiciary; this year the focus is on ``orphan works,'' that is
    photographs, text and other content for which a user cannot identify or
    locate the copyright owner. At the request of Senators Leahy and Hatch,
    the Office conducted a year long study of the problems and potential
    solutions. Our report, delivered in January 2006, recommended a new
    section 514 which would allow a good faith user to proceed to use such
    a work following a reasonably diligent search to locate the copyright
    owner. If the copyright owner emerged, he would receive reasonable
    compensation from the user, except in one limited situation. Although
    no bill was introduced in the Senate last year, the Senate Subcommittee
    on Intellectual Property held a hearing on April 6, 2006, on our
    recommended solution; the Associate Register for Policy and
    International Affairs, the primary drafter of the report, represented
    the Office. We expect a bill to be introduced in the Senate in the not
    to distant future, and we are hopeful that it will be enacted.
        The Copyright Office participated in numerous multilateral,
    regional, and bilateral negotiations and U.S. delegations to meetings
    of international organizations in fiscal year 2006. This included
    heading the U.S. delegation to the 14th and 15th sessions of the World
    Intellectual Property Organization's Standing Committee on Copyright
    and Related Rights, which considered the draft basic proposal for a
    treaty on the protection of broadcasting organizations.
        The Office also continued to assist the Justice Department in a
    number of important court cases related to copyright or with
    significant copyright implications, including cases on the
    copyrightability of settlement prices, the constitutionality of various
    provisions of the copyright law, refusal to register certain claims,
    and Supreme Court cases raising antitrust issues.
    Registration and Recordation
        During fiscal year 2006, the Copyright Office received 594,125
    claims to copyright covering more than a million works and registered
    520,906 claims, including 20,434 registrations submitted
    electronically. We recorded 13,016 documents covering more than 350,000
    titles of works. During the year, the Office transferred 1,120,791
    copies of registered and nonregistered works valued at more than $41
    million to the Library of Congress for its collections.
    Public Information and Education
        The Office logged more than 31 million external hits on key pages
    of its website during the year--a six percent increase over the
    previous year. In fiscal year 2006, the Office responded to 338,831
    requests for direct reference services, and assisted 8,886 members of
    the public in person, taking in 12,758 registration applications and
    2,463 documents for recordation. The Office answered 106,141 telephone
    inquiries, 8,380 letter requests, and 29,795 email requests for
    information from the public.
        In response to public requests, the Office searched 12,792 titles
    and prepared 832 search reports and assisted 8,886 visitors to the
    Copyright Card Catalog. The Office published twenty issues of NewsNet,
    an electronic news update about the Copyright Office and copyright-
    related activities, to 6,333 subscribers.
    Licensing Activities
        The Licensing Division collected nearly $227 million in royalty
    payments during fiscal year 2006 and distributed royalties totaling
    more than $191 million. The division worked on developing options for
    electronic filing for cable Statements of Account to be tested in a
    pilot e-filing program, scheduled for fiscal year 2007.
                             reengineering program
        The Copyright Office has many to thank for the support we have had
    during the past seven years for our Reengineering Program initiative.
    We especially thank the Committee for the support you have given us
    through appropriations; we thank the Architect of the Capitol for their
    dedication to completing the facilities work on time and within budget;
    and we thank the Library's infrastructure units, the labor
    organizations, and our own staff, whose support has been crucial to our
    success.
        Online service is at the heart of improvements coming to the Office
    as part of this major reengineering effort. The Copyright Office of the
    future is scheduled to arrive this year with the full implementation of
    eCO, the electronic Copyright Office, which combines the efficiency and
    cost savings of an integrated, enterprise-wide information system with
    the reach of the World Wide Web. The eCO system will improve the
    timeliness of our services, increase public access to copyright
    records, and provide better tracking of individual items in the
    workflow. At the same time, eCO will greatly enhance our ability to
    acquire digital works for the Library's collections. This is
    particularly important since we expect the number of ``born digital''
    works submitted for deposit to trend upward indefinitely.
        The Office's implementation efforts in fiscal year 2006 continued
    to focus on the three components that support the reengineered
    processes: information technology, facilities, and organization.
    Because the three components are interconnected and the Office must
    provide uninterrupted customer service, the Office will implement all
    components at one time when it switches to new processes in 2007.
    Information Technology
        At that time, the Office will release eCO Service to the public who
    can submit applications, deposits, and fees electronically through a
    portal on the Copyright Office website. This will reduce the paperwork
    and the effort involved in submitting an application and, as a further
    incentive, we are proposing to offer a reduced fee for this online
    registration. A copy of the work being registered can also be uploaded
    along with the electronic application or submitted separately in hard
    copy according to the Library's best edition regulation. In addition to
    reducing the burden for the applicant, online registration will also
    reduce the cost to the Copyright Office in the long term. For
    applicants who choose not to use the eCO Service, we will also put in
    place the capability to process paper applications.
        Enhanced online search capability for Copyright Office records will
    be implemented in 2007 for searching registrations and recordations
    created since 1978. The eCO Search feature will have the look and feel
    of the Library's bibliographic record system. The copyright record will
    clearly delineate the information provided by the applicant and the
    bibliographic information taken from the deposit copy.
        During fiscal year 2008, the Office will refine the information
    technology processes through adjustments and reconfiguration of the
    software. Despite the testing and pilot processing that has been done
    and will continue, the first year of use may be a challenging year as
    the system is exercised under full load. A help desk will be available
    to staff and the public to assist them in their use of the new system.
    Organization
        On the organization front, the Copyright Office presented its
    reorganization package to the Library's Office of Human Resources
    Services on November 20, 2006. The package included the plan for the
    reorganization and 125 new position descriptions that were created to
    align job duties with our new business processes under reengineering.
    The Librarian reviewed and approved the reorganization package and
    implementation will begin almost immediately in order to have staffing
    completed in time for the move back to the Madison Building. The Office
    must bargain any impact of the reorganization with the labor
    organizations.
        Training has already begun to provide staff with skills needed in
    their new positions and will intensify in the spring of 2007. For the
    past 16 months, examiners and catalogers have been cross-trained to be
    able to perform both duties in the new registration specialist
    position. The Office hired a Training Specialist in 2006 and she
    refined the Training Plan to include methods for training 35 trainers
    who will in turn train the staff in eCO. Training in soft skills, such
    as effective communication and team building, was required of the
    entire staff involved in the reorganization.
    Facilities
        The project passed two major milestones in fiscal year 2006. First,
    nearly all staff and contractors moved to swing space locations to
    permit the renovation of Copyright Office space in the Madison
    Building. Approximately 75 percent moved to temporary swing space in
    Crystal City in July 2006; others moved to swing space within the
    Capitol Hill complex; and a few remained in place until the new space
    was ready for occupancy. Second, after years of planning, the Architect
    of the Capitol began the renovation of Copyright Office space in the
    Madison Building. The Architect of the Capitol is making great progress
    and remains on schedule to complete the renovation of Copyright Office
    space in the Madison Building this year. Of particular note, the new
    Copyright Public Record Reading Room, which houses the Office's card
    catalog comprising some 30,000 individual catalog drawers in 1,234
    cabinets, opened to the public on December 11th of last year. Most
    Office staff that remained on Capitol Hill during the renovation have
    already moved into their newly renovated space, and staff currently
    working in temporary office space in Crystal City will move back to the
    Madison Building beginning June 1 and ending August 10, 2007.
                        fiscal year 2008 budget request
    Reengineering
        No new funding is needed for reengineering in fiscal year 2008.
    Rather, the Office is reducing its offsetting collections authority for
    reengineering by $6.1 million and its net appropriation authority by
    $4,036,000 for a total reduction of $10.1 million since most of the
    reengineering program will be completed in fiscal year 2007 except for
    the IT system, which will be completed in fiscal year 2008 with
    adjustments and reconfiguration of the software as necessary.
    Renewal Receipts
        With respect to renewal registrations, the Office is reducing its
    offsetting collections authority by $850,000 and reducing staff by five
    due to the fact that the number of renewal registrations will decrease
    significantly in fiscal year 2007 and remain at that level or lower
    from that point on.
        When renewal registration was required, the Office annually
    registered approximately 52,000 claims. Since the enactment of the
    automatic renewal provision in 1992, the number of renewal claims has
    decreased each year. In fiscal year 2006, the Office received
    approximately 8,782 renewal claims bringing in fees of approximately
    $531,305. In fiscal year 2007, we believe that amount will drop to
    about $150,000 and continue at that level or lower in fiscal year 2008
    and thereafter.
    Adjustment of Fees
        The Office requests an increase in offsetting collections spending
    authority of $5.6 million that is matched by a reduction in net
    appropriation spending authority of $5.6 million due to an increase in
    its fees in July 2006. In accordance with  708 of the copyright law,
    the Office completed a cost study and, for services specifically
    enumerated in  708(a)(1)-(9) (statutory fees), submitted the cost
    study and proposed fee schedule increase to Congress on March 1, 2006.
    The major change was the increase in the basic registration fee from
    $30 to $45. Congress took no action and the Office implemented the new
    fees. The new fees are projected to bring in an additional $5.6 million
    in receipts.
        On February 21, 2007, the Office submitted a second cost study,
    entitled ``Analysis and Proposed Copyright Fee Adjustments,'' to
    Congress. The key proposal is a lower fee of $35 for electronic
    registration. The Copyright Office plans to implement the use of the
    lower fee service on or after July 1, 2007, to coincide with its
    transition to the new, reengineered processes and the initiation of eCO
    Service. The lower fee for electronic filings has been proposed for two
    reasons. First, the proposed fee adjustment for basic registration
    filings is being adopted in anticipation of lower processing costs
    which will be realized once the Office has had an opportunity to fully
    integrate the new processes. Electronic filings will be processed in
    fewer steps than paper filings and thus represent a savings to the
    Office. Moreover, a lower fee will provide applicants with a strong
    incentive to file electronically.
        The impact of electronic filing on the Office will not be known for
    at least one year. Until that time the Office will be unable to project
    any fee or staff adjustments.
    Copyright Records Preservation
        The Office requests $1 million in offsetting collections authority
    to use no-year receipts to fund the digitization of 70 million pre-1978
    copyright records. The key objectives of this record digitization
    project are (1) disaster preparedness preservation of pre-1978 public
    records and (2) provision of online access to those public records.
    Copyright records are vital to the mission of the Library and the
    Copyright Office and they are important to the public and the copyright
    industries that are a significant part of the global economy. The pre-
    1978 records document the ownership and copyright status of millions of
    creative works. Loss of these sole-copy public records due to a site
    disaster would trigger a complex and expensive intellectual property
    ownership dilemma.
        The first stage would cost approximately $6 million over a six year
    period and would achieve the preservation goal and very basic online
    access. The second stage would add item level indexing, enhanced
    searching and retrieval, costing between $5 million and $65 million
    depending on the extent of fields indexed.
    CARP
        With respect to CARP, the Office is reducing its offsetting
    collections authority by $297,000 and terminating the CARP Fund.
                                   conclusion
        Madam Chairwoman, I ask you to support the fiscal year 2008
    Copyright Office budget request for the Basic and Licensing
    Appropriations of $50.1 million for a permanent decrease in the
    Copyright appropriations of $6.6 million. Our request includes a non-
    recurring funding for the Records Preservation Project.
        I thank the Congress for its past support of the Copyright Office
    requests and for your consideration of this request in this challenging
    time of transition and progress.

                    LIBRARY ROLE IN DYNAMIC INFORMATION AGE

        Senator Landrieu. The vote was just called, but we have
    about 10 or 15 minutes before we have to walk over, so we'll
    address our questions, and then anything that you all want to
    submit for the record, please do. And I want to meet with you
    all personally, in some depth, about some of these issues.
    Because I want to go on record, as the Chair of this
    subcommittee that, I don't believe the Library of Congress
    should be a museum for books.
        I believe it should be a leader in a dynamic information
    age, and I want to support you in that. And I realize that
    we've had quite a few setbacks with the continuing resolution
    last year.
        But we've got to find a path, reasonable path, forward, and
    I'm committed to help you do that. I'm not exactly sure how
    we're going to do it, but I'm personally committed to help you
    figure it out.

                              BOOKS FOR THE BLIND

        I also want to say, since our time is short, that I've
    worked with the Federation of the Blind personally now for many
    years. I'm very familiar with some of their leaders that are
    here today. I realize that the machine that exists today is
    very outdated. Millions of visually impaired and handicapped
    individuals have to use this machine now, and the fact is that
    there are not many players that even use this kind of
    technology. It reminds me of what my father still uses to
    listen to music. He doesn't even have--you know, not every
    household has an iPod.
        But we need to move up, and I want to help you with that.
    Again, we want to be careful, though, in purchasing
    technologies with them changing so rapidly, that we'll be in 2
    years, stuck with something that's outdated. So, I'd like to
    ask you more questions about that at a later date.
        Senator Allard, what are some of your questions?
        Senator Allard. Thank you, Madam Chairman.

                                EVOLVING MISSION

        You know, I don't want to see us just collecting books for
    the sake of collecting books, but I think you need to keep
    original, old editions, so that you have a good database of
    information. And, I think you can use technology to make that
    available for the public.
        And I know that Dr. Billington has a huge challenge in
    prioritizing everything that's going to come into that Library,
    and how he's going to store it, and what he's making it
    available to the public electronically, and I sympathize with
    you. I know that in order to try and meet that challenge,
    you've been doing some strategic planning, and I want to
    compliment you on that effort. You've come up, I understand,
    with a new 5-year strategic plan, and you have used that to
    develop your 2008 budget, as I understand.

                               NEW STRATEGIC PLAN

        Dr. Billington. Yes, it's informed by it, but we will
    derive the 2009 budget from it. The 2008 budget has already
    been informed by the new plan, with a reduction, for instance,
    from 18 organization-centric goals of our previous plan to just
    five strategic goals that are Library-wide. So, we're getting
    the value of synergy, and we're deriving performance
    evaluations from the plan. I know that GPRA is an interest of
    yours----
        Senator Allard. Here's my question, Dr. Billington--I'd
    like to have some specific examples of items which were not
    included in the budget as a result of your strategic planning,
    can you provide us with those?
        Dr. Billington. I'm sorry, I didn't quite understand the
    question.
        Senator Allard. Well, when you set your strategic plan in
    place----
        Dr. Billington. Yes.
        Senator Allard [continuing]. Like you said, you started
    with a list of 18 goals----
        Dr. Billington. Sure.

                         BUDGET AND LIBRARY-WIDE GOALS

        Senator Allard [continuing]. And you reduced that down to
    five or so. I'd like to have an understanding of how you
    arrived at the five that you have, or however many that you
    have, but in order to get an understanding of how you arrived
    at it, my question is this--what items did you not include in
    your strategic plan?
        Senator Landrieu. And, Doctor, if you want to answer that
    you can, both of you can----
        Dr. Billington. Well, Jo Ann Jenkins, our Chief Operating
    Officer--she certainly can. If you're looking for a detailed
    answer for the record----
        Senator Allard. That's probably enough.
        Dr. Billington. All I would say, in a general way, is that
    we removed goals that were unit-specific, rather than Library-
    wide. And therefore, in accordance with the five central
    strategic goals--content, customer, outreach, organization, and
    workforce--performance will be determined in accordance with
    those goals, rather than with the greater multiplicity of goals
    focused on individual organizations.
        Now, Ms. Jenkins may wish to add to something more on that,
    but we will give you a full account of exactly what was, what
    was eliminated as a result of this reduction in goals.
        Senator Allard. Okay.
        Dr. Billington. With the increase in accountability,
    together with the reduction of goals.
        Senator Allard. And I realize that's a complicated
    question, and you probably won't be able to provide us in
    full----
        Ms. Jenkins. We'll be more than happy to provide more
    detailed information for the record. We have a very extensive
    budget process, and provide recommendations to the executive
    committee. We weed out probably 80 percent of all requests
    before we come to the Appropriations Committee to request
    funds. We'll be more than happy to share.
        Senator Allard. And, like I say, I know you have a huge
    challenge, and I am very empathetic to----
        Dr. Billington. The result was reached in a process in
    which everybody--including myself and Ms. Jenkins--were active
    participants. All levels of the Library were represented.
        Senator Allard. Well, that's important.
        Dr. Billington. Yes, sir.
        Senator Allard. I want to compliment you on that effort,
    and----
        Dr. Billington. We'll get you those specifics.

                          PERFORMANCE-BASED BUDGETING

        Senator Allard. Now, the inspector general, when he did the
    report on your performance-based budgeting, he stated that
    you're off to a good start, but yet, there's still challenges
    ahead that we've got to deal with, and anybody that's worked
    with performance-based budgeting, knows that it isn't perfect
    the first time you do it. It's something that grows, and it's
    something that you learn to work with as you move forward.
        I noticed that the Financial Officer disagreed with many of
    the report's recommendations. For the record, can you provide
    me a detailed description of how the Library will implement
    those recommendations from the inspector general?
        Dr. Billington. Ms. Jenkins.
        Ms. Jenkins. The inspector general and myself and the Chief
    Financial Officer (CFO) have met on all of the recommendations
    that the inspector general reported. I believe that we have
    reached agreement on how we will implement the recommendations
    that the inspector general has put forward, from doing
    performance-based budgeting to how that falls into our annual
    performance planning. We have already automated for the Library
    the entire, what we call the AP3, annual program performance
    planning process, so it is now automated. The point that we're
    trying to reach is the new levels of documentation of dollar
    requests to which we can link specific performance indicators,
    and we're trying to work with the financial accounting system
    as to how we might track that. I think the inspector general
    and CFO and myself have reached an agreement of how we will
    reach that point that we can all live with.

     NATIONAL DIGITAL INFORMATION INFRASTRUCTURE AND PRESERVATION PROGRAM
                        RESCISSION AND OTHER PRIORITIES

        Senator Allard. Very good. And, I appreciate your initial
    efforts on that.
        Now, one more question.
        You've asked for $21.5 million to be included in fiscal
    year 2008 for the NDIIPP, the National Digital Information
    Infrastructure and Preservation Program. With that being
    included, your total budget would increase by about 22 percent
    over the budget we're dealing with now, that's excluding that
    rescission.
        Are there lower-priority activities that you could cut from
    your budget?
        Dr. Billington. There are other things in the budget that
    we didn't mention, because we tried to focus on several key
    priorities.
        But, I think projects like the Lincoln Exhibit are
    essential. We've been cooperating with the Commission for the
    Lincoln Bicentennial, and we have the basic Lincoln collection,
    all online, so everyone can get to it. There are other elements
    of the budget, I'm prepared to respond to them, but that was
    one I would particularly mention, because, like other needs, it
    cannot really wait. More than just the Library is involved.
        Senator Allard. Well, you know, my staff may come back to
    you on that.
        Dr. Billington. Yes, we'd be happy to----
        Senator Allard. The subcommittee staff may come back, and
    try to work with you on that as we kind of filter through this
    budget, so we can give you the maximum amount we can afford,
    and get your highest priorities taken care of. And I think both
    of us are very sensitive to the challenges you face. It's an
    important institution in this country, but we want to come up
    with the best program, and so----
        Dr. Billington. We appreciate that, Senator.
        Senator Allard. Thank you.

                         ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

        Senator Landrieu. We thank you very much for your testimony
    this morning, and look forward to working with you on the new
    initiatives that you've outlined. And, again, I know that
    you've got a very tough job, Dr. Billington, in working with
    professional staff to expand the focus of the Library in a new
    and emerging technological age. You've got a lot of demands on
    you, but I've got confidence in your leadership and look
    forward to working with you.
        [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 Wayne Allard
                          performance-based budgeting
        Question. The Library's Inspector General released a report in
    October on LOC's efforts in performance-based budgeting. The IG found
    that LOC's efforts were ``a good start but much work remains.'' The IG
    found that ``the Library's overall budget base is not being
    ``scrubbed.'' Given the enormous increase you are requesting, it is
    critical the Library look at its ``base'' resources and determine
    whether certain activities are not providing the outcomes we desire.
    What are your plans to go back and more carefully assess the base
    budget?
        Answer. The Library of Congress has fully embraced the call to
    implement the spirit of GPRA. We recently revised the Library's
    Strategic Plan which engaged the Library's senior leadership, including
    the Librarian, the Chief Operating Officer, the Executive Committee,
    and senior managers, as well as a cross-section of the Library's
    subject experts. This process represented an unprecedented level of
    collaboration, cooperation, consultation and communication across the
    Library. The new Strategic Plan focuses on long-term strategic results
    with five Library-wide goals, replacing the previous strategic plan,
    which had 18 organization-specific goals.
        Since completing the new draft Strategic Plan, the Library has
    implemented strategy mapping for all Library Service/Support Units to
    link the draft Strategic Plan to our organizations' annual program
    performance plans. We have also developed an automated database system
    for managing the annual program performance plan process and ensuring
    the strategy mapping links are retained in the annual plans. Finally,
    we are developing a Management Dashboard to track monthly progress in
    key Library infrastructure operations. The dashboard approach to
    managing the Library's Strategic Plan and related goals, outcomes and
    performance targets will eventually be implemented Library-wide.
        The efforts detailed above represent the many significant steps the
    Library has already taken to implement the spirit of GPRA, steps that
    will ultimately lead to implementing performance-based budgeting (PBB).
    Although the IG report indicated that ``much work still remains,'' the
    Library has provided a plan for the next steps in implementing PBB, and
    the IG has accepted the plan.
        Implementing PBB is an iterative process, one that must be built on
    a solid foundation. The Library has established that foundation in our
    new draft Strategic Plan, in our Library-wide strategy mapping efforts,
    in our automation of the annual program performance planning process,
    and in our more recent efforts to use dashboards to reinforce
    accountability to the Strategic Plan and to demonstrating results.
    Other efforts will include a current Library initiative to improve
    workforce performance management. The Workforce Performance Management
    Initiative (WPMI) will ensure that workforce planning and management
    takes the links between the Library's Strategic Plan and organizations'
    annual performance plans and extends those linkages to the annual
    performance plans of individual employees. This initiative will be
    coordinated Library-wide, ensuring that workforce performance
    management is a central element in the workforce transformation process
    for the Library.
        Another PBB next step will be the Library's effort to use the
    direction of the new Strategic Plan and the structure of the annual
    performance plans as the roadmap for formulating the fiscal year 2009
    budget request. The five strategic plan goals will provide a framework
    for analyzing, prioritizing, realigning (where necessary) and defending
    both our base budget and any new and expanded requests. The annual
    plans will provide strategies and measurable performance targets which
    will be the basis for demonstrating results.
        The budget formulation process will require each organization to
    develop resource requirements in accordance with their annual program
    performance plans and to identify base savings to offset the new and
    expanded resource needs. Budget requests will be reviewed and approved
    (or denied) by the Library's Operations Committee, under the direction
    of the Chief Operating Officer, with recommendations for approval by
    the Library's Executive Committee and the Librarian. In short, the
    Library's fiscal year 2009 and future budget requests will fully
    incorporate both the scrubbing of the base budget and the alignment of
    resource needs with the goals of the Library's Strategic Plan.
        Although we are outlining future steps for implementing the spirit
    of GPRA at the Library and a more carefully mapped-out format for
    performance-based budgeting, the Library can provide a number of
    current examples of how we have been engaged in ongoing efforts to
    ``scrub'' our base budget numbers before going to Congress to request
    additional resources. With respect to the ``enormous increase'' we have
    requested in our fiscal year 2008 budget, we would argue that the
    combined big-ticket items coming together in this one fiscal year's
    (fiscal year 2008) budget request is the result of an unplanned and
    unfortunate synchronicity of competing program priorities. Funds
    requested for the Digital Talking Books request have been in planning,
    with the full knowledge of the Appropriations Committees, for almost 17
    years. The NDIIPP funding request comes as a result of the rescission
    of $47 million in no-year funding that the Library was on the verge of
    obligating. The Logistics Center request was a scrubbed resubmission of
    the Library's fiscal year 2007 budget request. No amount of internal
    base-budget scrubbing would enable the Library to simply reprogram and
    absorb these important budget requests.
        Finally, while the Library has set as its number one priority to
    maintain current services funding levels, this funding request does
    represent the results of a scrubbed budget at many levels throughout
    the Library. Some examples of our internal efforts to analyze and
    reprioritize our base budgets follow:
    National Library--Basic (Library Services)
        Library Services' internal budget development process is designed
    to meet its highest priorities in an increasingly tight fiscal climate.
    Library Services divisions submit itemized requests for all budget
    needs, including contracts, travel, equipment, and new hires. Funding
    for employees currently occupying positions are considered part of the
    base.
        Through this approach, Library Services has denied an approximate
    total of $28 million in internal personal and non-personal requests for
    the past three fiscal years. They have also limited over 215 vacancy
    requests to internal postings; thus moving existing staff into
    positions where the need was greatest, rather than hiring new staff
    from outside the Library.
        As part of the fiscal year 2007 Operating Plan, Library Services
    moved $3.65 million from personnel compensation to GenPac acquisitions
    to permit the purchase of collections now available that would
    otherwise be lost to the Library and the Nation. Some of the planned
    acquisitions are electronic resources that are needed to meet
    Congressional needs, such as Jane's Information Group (definitive
    reference source on defense, geopolitics, transport and police),
    Science Direct (science, technology, and medicine full-text database),
    and Historical Newspapers (online versions of New York Times and The
    Washington Post). Secondly, special materials that are now in the hands
    of private collectors are coming available and the Library must
    purchase them now. Examples of such collections are the Tony Schwartz
    Recorded Sound Collection, a unique collection of 30 years' worth of
    off-air recordings of the sounds of New York City, everything from
    street noises to campaign films and tapes, to speeches and press
    conferences; the papers and photographs of African-American
    photographer, Gordon Parks; and the Zinmann Collection of Americana, a
    collection of rare American Colonial pamphlets.
    Congressional Research Service
        CRS incurs a significant personnel cost for research analysts
    moving through our career ladder promotion plan (GS 11-GS 15) that is
    not requested in the fiscal year 2008 budget. In order to fund this
    cost, CRS eliminated lower priority pay requirements in the amount of
    $155,000.
        Rather than requesting additional funding from Congress, CRS made
    major reductions to its Workspace Transformation Project for improving
    space utilization and providing a more efficient office layout. The
    desired plan would have required more than $1.5 million in supplemental
    funding, with approximately half of that amount needed in the first two
    years.
        The manpower costs for support personnel are being reduced by
    satisfying near-term needs with individuals hired in positions that
    have NTE limits of one year or less. This provides the opportunity to
    accomplish the work while taking steps to improve efficiency and reduce
    future manpower requirements. Three individuals were hired on this
    basis in fiscal year 2007 and the money needed for their pay and
    benefits was budgeted for research analysts in fiscal year 2008.
    Law Library
        Each year the Library of Congress has attempted to identify and use
    savings from all sources within the Library's S&E account to address an
    urgently needed reclassification project critical to providing public
    access to a significant portion of the Law Library's historic
    collection.
    Other Library S&E
        While the Library has requested funding (including mandatory pay
    and price level increases) to maintain current services funding levels,
    the Library has repeatedly scoured its base funding in order to
    identify resources to fund high priority initiatives internally and
    without seeking additional funding from Congress. The following are
    among the many examples of such scrubbing of the Library's base budget:
      --This year the Library identified the need to perform an agency-wide
            supervisory training program for all Library managers. This
            program will cost the Library a total of $345,000, none of
            which has been included in the budget request.
      --Re-equipping the preservation lab in the Madison building.
            Equipment required to establish a preservation research and
            testing laboratory that meets requirements for a national
            preservation program. All upgrades of preservation lab have
            been accomplished with base funding--$2 million.
      --Purchase of shelving and shelf equipment required to help maintain
            the Library's collections and to help protect against potential
            damage caused by improper housing of materials--$850,000.
      --Books for the Blind and Physically Handicapped program purchase of
            spare parts for cassette players. Manufacturer will no longer
            make spare parts for these players. Purchase of existing spare
            parts will provide sufficient inventory for cassette players as
            Library transitions from analog to digital technology--$3.28
            million.
      --Contractual service support to automate the Library's patient
            management system, to include digitization of medical records--
            $145,000.
      --Improve the Library's environmental and hazardous materials program
            to meet regulations and requirements on handling and disposal
            of hazardous waste--$80,000.
      --Purchase of Escape Hoods for Library staff--$737,000.
      --Human Resources contract for support for retirement benefit
            counseling--$73,000.
      --Purchase of digital video recorders to replace analog recorders in
            reading rooms. Digital video recording technology enhances
            security of collections and efficiency of staff time--$250,000.
        Finally, as part of an effort to develop an enhanced budget
    justification, the Library commits to identifying within the fiscal
    year 2009 (and future) justifications, those specific areas of the
    budget where programs and initiatives are being reduced in order that
    other higher priority programs and initiatives may be funded.
                                     ndiipp
        Question. Dr. Billington, I understand that restoring funds to the
    National Digital Information Infrastructure and Preservation Program is
    now your highest priority. You have asked that $21.5 million be
    included in fiscal year 2008 for NDIIPP. This would bring your total
    budget to $682 million--a 22 percent increase over fiscal year 2007--
    excluding the 2007 rescission. Are there lower-priority activities
    which you could cut from your budget?
        What has been accomplished to date with NDIIPP?
        What would you do with the $21.5 million you are requesting?
        Answer. The accomplishments of the national program to preserve the
    nation's digital heritage are many.
        National Digital Preservation Network.--The NDIIPP network of
    partners has grown to 67 and, with restored funding, will grow to well
    over 100 and include projects to assist the states in preserving
    critical state records. This national network, which was Congress's
    vision for NDIIPP, supports the catalytic basis for NDIIPP and ensures
    that the sum of what is achieved is greater than the individual parts.
    The Library is also working with other federal agencies such as GPO and
    NARA and with the private sector.
        Selecting, Collecting and Preserving Content.--Approximately 230
    terabytes of born-digital information has been saved by current
    partners and the Library. NDIIPP has worked with the Congressional
    Research Service and Law Library to identify content of particular
    interest to the national legislature. For example:
      --The current partners are collecting and preserving information of
            interest to Congress such as geospatial information, social
            science datasets, foreign news broadcasts, judicial proceedings
            and political Web sites.
      --The Library has itself collected Web sites relating to national
            elections, the Iraq war and Hurricane Katrina.
        Technical Architecture.--To enable this information to be securely
    saved, partners have identified models and standards that are flexible
    and reliable, yet can be used by other institutions. For example:
      --The San Diego Supercomputer Center (SDSC) is working with NDIIPP to
            test the reliability of third-party storage of digital
            materials. SDSC will host partners' digital content and
            guarantee data integrity and access. This will enable the
            NDIIPP partners to remotely access, manage, process, and
            analyze that content.
        Digital Preservation Research.--In concert with the National
    Science Foundation, the Library has developed the first digital-
    preservation research grants program. Ten university teams are:
      --Working to ensure that what is preserved today does not become
            inaccessible in the future due to format obsolescence.
      --Exploring challenging topics, such as preserving rich oceanographic
            data from hundreds of deep-sea submersible missions; automating
            methods to describe digital objects and place them in secure
            archival storage; testing how to preserve digital video when it
            is first created; preserving complex three-dimensional digital
            content such as engineering drawings.
        Informing the Public.--The work of NDIIPP has helped to promote a
    national conversation on the importance of preserving born digital
    content--not only for archival institutions but also for the general
    public. For example, major articles on NDIIPP and digital preservation
    have appeared in:
      --The Atlantic Monthly (September 2006)
      --The Washington Times (April 26, 2007)
      --National Public Radio's ``All Things Considered'' interviewed Laura
            Campbell (October 2004) on NDIIPP
      --New York Times (September 2004).
        Outreach efforts have included:
      --Workshops for all 50 states and territories
      --Workshops for commercial content distributors and owners
      --Workshops for archival institutions
      --Workshops with computer scientists and technology companies to
            address technical challenges.
        The new NDIIPP Web site, which has been refocused to appeal to a
    broader public, now offers a section on ``Preserving Your Digital
    Memories'' at http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/you/
    digitalmemories.html.
        The $21.5 million would ensure the future viability of NDIIPP for
    both current and future partners, by providing funding for:
      --Current partners: to continue to select, collect and preserve
            important born-digital content; and to continue development of
            a technical infrastructure to provide tools and services to
            support the network's preservation activities.
      --Future partners: States Demonstration Projects will comprise four
            multi-state initiatives to develop digital archives of at-risk
            digital content needed as part of a national digital
            collection. The goal is to build digital repositories among the
            states and share in costs by leveraging scarce resources.
                              books for the blind
        Question. GAO recently completed a review of the Library's $75
    million plan to convert its books for the blind to digital format. No
    one could disagree that the old cassette players are cumbersome and
    outdated and need to be replaced with new technology. However, GAO
    found that the Library's planning and analysis for the new digital
    talking book was insufficient. The program is already underway, with
    books being converted to the new ``flash memory'' format. Do GAO's
    findings impact your $19 million budget request?
        Is it too late to consider GAO's concerns?
        What specifically will you do to incorporate GAO's recommendations?
        Answer. The Digital Talking Books program has been carefully
    planned over the last decade. Congress has been informed throughout the
    process, and based on the plans for converting to digital technology,
    the last order has been placed for analog machines. The $19 million
    budget request will allow us to produce a sufficient number of new
    digital players to meet the first year's needs of the users who depend
    upon this service. The full $76.4 million is required to fulfill the
    total requirement and to meet the legislative mandate of NLS.
        We are carefully considering GAO's concerns. Deanna Marcum,
    Associate Librarian for Library Services, met with Linda Koontz, head
    of the GAO audit team, and Carrie Apostolou, Senate clerk, in April to
    discuss the best way to proceed in light of the GAO briefing to the
    Appropriations clerks. Ms. Koontz acknowledged that the flash
    technology selected for the program is appropriate but noted that NLS
    has not adequately analyzed commercial options and different
    distribution systems.
        The Library's chief concern is that the program is already in
    progress. The last order for analog machines has been placed, and
    without manufacturing new digital machines, we cannot provide equipment
    to everyone who needs it.
        Ms. Marcum agreed that the Library will carefully analyze the
    broader questions raised by GAO, i.e., how can the new system
    accommodate rapidly changing technology. GAO is concerned that it is
    not practical today to try to design a system that has a long life span
    and believes that the commercial sector is more likely than government
    entities to incorporate technological improvements more quickly.
        GAO was also concerned that NLS assumed the existing distribution
    system rather than considering new methods. It is the case that NLS
    assumed the continuing existence of the network of participating
    libraries having an active role in the Digital Talking Books program.
    The Library will consider other methods of distribution, but it will
    also analyze the non-financial, non-technological aspects of having
    such a network in place to serve the blind and physically handicapped
    communities.
        One of the questions that has been raised consistently is the size
    of the user population. The Library is conducting the necessary
    research to provide a definitive answer. The Library is also working
    with experts to predict the likely changes in the user population over
    the next several years.
        These analyses will be carried out as quickly as possible, but they
    must not impede the ongoing program of manufacturing new digital
    players to meet immediate and critical needs of our users. Blind and
    physically handicapped individuals have been eagerly awaiting this new
    technology, and we cannot slow progress.
                       crs documents on ``gallery watch''
        Question. CRS does not make its documents available to the public--
    an issue some members have had concerns with. Yet a private
    organization--``Gallery Watch''--has been able to retrieve CRS reports
    and make them available to their subscribers. Please explain how these
    taxpayer-funded reports end up being sold through Gallery Watch and
    whether you are concerned about it.
        Answer. Availability of CRS Products to the Public.--As set forth
    in the Legislative Reorganization Acts, CRS was established as a shared
    Legislative Branch resource, serving all Members and committees with
    authoritative, objective, and non-partisan expertise across the full
    range of legislative policy issues. It does so in a confidential
    relationship--a congressional expectation that is clear not only from
    the legislative history of its creation, but also from annual statutory
    restrictions placed on publication of its work. The prohibition on
    publication of CRS products without oversight committee approval has
    appeared in the annual appropriations acts for the Legislative Branch
    for more than fifty years. This provision is intended to preserve the
    role of CRS as a confidential resource solely available to the
    Congress. The appropriations acts, supplemented by congressional
    guidance that CRS has received over the years and supported by judicial
    opinions, leaves to the Members and committees the decision whether, on
    a selective basis, to place CRS products in the public domain. Members
    have long made CRS products available to interested persons either
    directly, by inclusion in congressional publications, or more recently
    through their office or committee web sites.
        Wholesale public dissemination raises several policy, legal, and
    institutional concerns. Principle among these is the danger of placing
    CRS, a support agency, in an intermediate position between Members and
    their constituents instead of preserving the direct relationship
    between constituents and their elected representatives. This threatens
    the dialog on policy issues between Members and those they represent
    that was envisioned by the Constitution. Further, there is a
    significant risk that wide publication could over time affect the
    mission and congressional focus of the Service, resulting in products
    being written with a large public audience in mind and no longer
    focused solely on congressional needs. Wholesale dissemination would
    inevitably generate a significant number of comments, questions, and
    concerns from the public regarding content. In addition to placing a
    burden on congressional offices, responding to such correspondence
    would require CRS to shift significant resources away from direct
    service to the Congress.
        There is also a very real concern that the current judicial and
    administrative perception of CRS as adjunct congressional staff might
    be altered by congressional authorization of systematic release of CRS
    products. Such action might put at risk speech or debate protections
    critical to the maintenance of confidentiality. The Speech or Debate
    Clause of the Constitution has been interpreted to grant broad immunity
    to Members and their aides when activity occurs in the performance of
    ``legislative acts.'' Widespread dissemination of products to the
    general public would likely be viewed by the courts as an exercise of
    Congress' representational or informing function for which speech or
    debate immunity would not be available. Of major concern has been the
    extent to which a policy permitting significant public dissemination of
    CRS products might render the protection that the Service currently
    enjoys under the umbrella of this constitutional protection of Members
    inapplicable to communications with CRS. Stated simply, if the Service
    were to become generally known to frequently distribute products
    directly to the general public, it might lose these constitutional
    protections regarding even its confidential work, doing irreparable
    harm to its working relationship with congressional clients.
        A frequent lament of proponents of public access to CRS work is
    that taxpayers fund CRS and therefore deserve to have access to its
    products. This is an effective ``sound bite'', but the reality is that
    Congress appropriates funds for CRS to ensure the most effective
    research and analytical support for its legislative activities. Just as
    with Member and committee office staff, Congress' confidential
    relationship with CRS is critical to that support. It is in this way
    that Congress and the American taxpayer get the most for their
    investment.
        GalleryWatch.--CRS does not know how GalleryWatch (which is in
    partnership with Penny Hill Press) obtains its reports. Over the years
    the Service has made efforts to determine whether the source of CRS
    products for outside parties is internal to the organization or
    elsewhere in the congressional community. Whenever CRS has done so (on
    one occasion at the request of an oversight committee and on another at
    its own initiative, and with the help of the Library's Office of the
    Inspector General), the Service has been assured that there was no
    evidence of improper activities by its own or other Library employees.
    CRS also has found no basis for concern that its electronic systems
    might have been compromised and that access to its products has been
    gained through intrusion into CRS or library systems that are well
    protected by firewalls. As a result of these efforts, CRS has concluded
    that it is likely, though not certain, that the source is a person or
    persons with access to the CapNet and the CRS Web Site, who thereby is
    able to download products and convey them to a third party (e.g.,
    GalleryWatch). The source could therefore work in any congressional
    office or for one of the Legislative Branch sister agencies--i.e.,
    anyone with access to the CRS Website.
        CRS products are not copyrighted, and are not in the public domain
    unless and until released by a Member or his/her staff. Any effort to
    curtail or punish an identified congressional source of the report's
    dissemination would likely require proof that not only were the
    products provided, but also evidence of additional factors such as
    receiving payment for the service, unlawful use of government
    equipment, use of official time, violation of ethics rules, etc.
        As to the comprehensiveness of the GalleryWatch inventory, it
    appears that they have a regular source that provides reasonably timely
    copies of our reports. There are gaps however, and some reports do not
    reflect the most recent updating. CRS continues to have concerns
    regarding this phenomenon, but it believes that even though many of its
    reports are made available in this way, it is still in the interest of
    the Congress to preserve the direct communication between Members and
    their constituents regarding their policy deliberations and positions.
    The Service also believes that it is important to preserve an
    enforceable policy of confidentiality and the role of CRS experts as
    adjunct staff.
                          crs earmark reporting policy
        Question. Recently CRS changed its policy with regard to reporting
    on earmarks. Can you explain what the policy is and why it was changed?
        Answer. On February 22, 2007, Director Mulhollan issued a new
    policy statement explaining why CRS will no longer identify earmarks
    for individual programs, activities, entities, or individuals. It also
    stated that, at the request of Congress, CRS can provide information on
    the allocation or distribution of funds for programs and activities
    where the allocation or distribution is clear from the public
    documents, such as the Appropriations Committee reports or the
    Administration's budget justifications. CRS also will continue to
    conduct research in the Legislative Information System and other
    automated systems to identify where funding is specified for particular
    entities noting limitations of this methodology.
        Recent congressional and executive actions make it unnecessary and
    impractical for CRS to attempt to identify earmarks in appropriations
    or other laws. In January 2007, the House, Senate, and Office of
    Management and Budget (OMB) took actions to define, compile, and
    disclose comprehensive information on earmarks. Specifically, the House
    agreed to a rules change (H. Res. 6, 404); the Senate passed a bill
    including rules changes, which has been sent to the House (S. 1, 103);
    and OMB issued a memorandum for the heads of departments and agencies.
    CRS determined that these developments made obsolete their research
    using definitions and methodologies different than those contained in
    the legislation and OMB memorandum. Additionally, it is not possible
    for CRS to conduct research on earmarks using the definitions set out
    by the House, Senate, and OMB. For instance, the House and Senate
    definition of earmark is (in part) that it is a provision or report
    language included primarily at the request of a Member, a criterion of
    which CRS would not have knowledge.
        When Congress has determined to use committees or other sub-
    entities in enforcement of its rules, it has clearly defined their
    roles (e.g., the two ethics committees, or an impeachment investigatory
    entity). The congressional rulemaking process is enshrined in the
    Constitution; Article I, sec. 5, empowers each House to ``determine the
    rules of its proceedings.'' The courts have held that Congress is the
    arbiter of the scope and interpretation of its own rules and the
    exercise of its rulemaking authority is insulated to a large degree
    from judicial review and other outside interference. Separation of
    powers animates this balance but it also serves to underscore the
    plenary nature of congressional rules in ordering the internal
    operations of Congress, its Members and subunits. The House rule and
    the Senate proposed rule (contained in S. 1) governing earmarks, vest
    the responsibilities in the committees and subcommittees. It would not
    be appropriate for CRS--an entity of the Congress that serves as its
    adjunct staff--to embark on work that would duplicate the
    responsibilities described in the rules and, even worse, potentially
    cause confusion in an area in which the body is seeking clarity.
        There is another aspect of earmark research that was considered in
    establishing this new policy. Earmarks are being defined by both Houses
    as provisions that are requested by specific Members. The reports
    required of the requesting Member and the committees include
    identification of the Member and related financial interests in the
    project or activity of the Member and his or her family. Thus, each
    earmark is linked to the Member requesting it, and the rules place
    certain obligations on that Member which become part of the public
    record. CRS is prohibited by a long-standing direction of the Joint
    Committee on the Library from doing research concerning a Member at the
    behest of another Member. We studiously avoid being placed in a
    position of collecting information on specific Members or their
    activities, even basic reference information. While we do at times
    assist the ethics committees or special investigatory committees with
    questions of law and the applicability of rules of conduct, our work is
    carefully generalized and is prepared in a way that is not linked to
    individual Members.
                         teaching with primary sources
        Question. In 2006, permanent authorization was included in the
    legislative branch appropriations bill for the ``Teaching with Primary
    Sources'' program--formerly known as Adventure of the American Mind.
    This program has been very successful in Colorado, first at Metro State
    University and now at Northern Colorado University, teaching educators
    how to use the Library of Congress' online material in their
    curriculum. Can you describe how you plan to change the program, to
    broaden its reach to more teachers nationwide?
        Answer. The Library seeks to broaden the Teaching with Primary
    Sources (TPS) program by piloting a regional-center model to award a
    large number of small grants to new partners in neighboring states,
    encouraging geographic growth of the program. These regional centers
    will be located at Metro State University, at Illinois State
    University, at Waynesburg College in Pennsylvania, and at a location to
    be determined in the South.
        Additionally, an exportable TPS program curriculum will be
    published this fall and available for download on the TPS Web site,
    allowing all interested educational institutions to implement the
    program. An online version of the TPS course will be piloted this
    summer and available to educators nationwide this fall.
                                logistics center
        Question. The Library is requesting $43.9 million for a logistics
    facility. This project was included in last year's AOC budget request
    but did not get funded. During last year's hearing, we raised questions
    about the high cost of the proposed facility. We understand that costs
    have been reduced, but most of the reductions are due to cost
    deferrals. Does the Library have any further plans to look at the total
    cost of the proposed logistics center?
        Answer. At the request of the Senate Appropriations Clerk during
    the fiscal year 2007 budget cycle and in response to concerns expressed
    by the Library's Inspector General, the Library worked closely with the
    Architect of the Capitol to review and reduce where possible the
    Library's program and facility requirements, construction costs, and
    AOC markup costs. Reductions of $12.2 million are reflected in the
    $43.9 million fiscal year 2008 budget request. A recap of actual cost
    reductions and deferrals appears below.
        Looking for ways to further reduce the total project cost in fiscal
    year 2008, the Library and the AOC have again reviewed the construction
    cost estimate, contingencies, and markup to ensure all possible savings
    have been identified. To this end, the AOC has agreed to consider a
    construction management plan that utilizes AOC staff rather than
    outsourcing. The Library is confident the AOC can successfully execute
    the project with in-house staff, and cites recent and sustained success
    in construction of Library projects at Fort Meade, NAVCC and the
    Copyright Office renovation project on Capitol Hill as evidence
    thereof.
        Recap of actual cost reductions and deferrals captured in the
    fiscal year 2007 budget cycle:
      --LOC program reductions of $3 million include elimination of a water
            leak detection system, elimination of COOP space fit-out, and
            removal of furnishings, folding partitions and appliances.
      --AOC markup reductions of $2.4 million were achieved by
            restructuring some aspects of project oversight. The U.S. Army
            Corps of Engineers reduced their fee for construction
            management by accepting a flat fee rather than a percentage of
            construction cost, saving $825,474. The AOC plans to hire two
            temporary employees for project management rather than
            outsourcing this service, saving $1,605,563. The AOC has agreed
            to consider all possible savings that could be realized using
            in-house staff rather than outsourcing. As outlined above, we
            are confident the AOC can successfully execute the project
            using internal resources.
      --Eliminating shelving from the contract for construction reduces
            initial cost by $6.81 million and results in cost reductions of
            $430,000. Savings are realized by purchasing shelving in fiscal
            year 2010 under a separate AOC contract--outside of the
            contract for construction--resulting in cost deferral of $6.38
            million (includes cost escalation to fiscal year 2010).
      --The $43.9 million fiscal year 2008 budget request reflects $12.2
            million in LOC and AOC reductions, plus an amount added for
            cost escalation resulting from delay.
                               space utilization
        Question. Three years ago, the Library's Inspector General
    recommended there be an evaluation of the space utilization in reading
    rooms. Today this evaluation still has not been completed. What
    progress has the Library made so far in addressing the recommendations
    in that IG report? What are the Library's milestones for completing
    this evaluation and making decisions on better utilizing reading room
    space?
        Answer. In March 2004, the Library of Congress' Office of the
    Inspector General issued Final Audit Report No. 2003-PA-104, Reading
    Room Space Allocations Should be Re-evaluated. To produce the report,
    the IG staff conducted a careful audit of floor space considerations in
    the Library's 23 reading rooms, 16 of which are under the jurisdiction
    of Library Services. They noted a significant decline in the numbers of
    patrons visiting the reading rooms since 1993 and as a result,
    concluded that an underutilization of floor space may have resulted
    from this decline. However, a lack of consistent and useful statistical
    data collected by the Library made it difficult to reach definitive
    conclusions and make strong recommendations as to the potential
    reallocation of reading room floor space--based on costs, benefits, and
    other considerations--to offices and collections storage.
        The Report's first general recommendation was: obtain more accurate
    and useful reading room usage data. As a result, on January 3, 2006,
    all Library Services reading rooms instituted a similar method to
    measure utilization, resulting in the accumulation of consistent data.
    All readers are requested to sign in using a daily register kept at the
    entry of all reading rooms. The register records the patron's name, the
    time and date of entry, and in many cases his/her research subject. The
    number of readers accessing the collections through the various reading
    rooms is now based strictly on the number of daily registrants; hourly
    counts are no longer made, nor are directional queries tabulated. All
    divisions report quarterly statistics related to reading room use in an
    accurate, consistent, and useful manner. Management is now in a
    position to compare statistics fairly and to make informed decisions as
    to resource allocation.
        The second general recommendation was: analyze reading room
    requirements. In the 2004 report, the auditors stated that (a) reading
    room space should be used more efficiently, and (b) Saturday hours
    should be reconsidered. Efficiency is an essential goal in our public
    service of the Library's collections--the largest repository of
    recorded knowledge in the widest variety of languages and formats in
    human history. Library Services' 16 reading rooms serve the Library's
    general, area studies, and special format collections--some 129.5
    million items (excluding the Law Library). As points of access to these
    vast and disparate collections, the reading rooms are complex
    organizations of human and material resources, not measurable only in
    terms of floor space.
        Each individual reading room--for example, the Geography and Map
    and the Local History and Genealogy rooms--not only serves research
    materials specific to a subject or a format, but also, through a
    dedicated staff of scholarly experts, provides in-depth reference
    services to patrons. Since the Library collects and makes accessible
    information resources in some 470 ancient and modern languages, the
    reference and subject specialists of the four international area
    studies divisions speak, read, and provide assistance in a wide variety
    of languages. In the African and Middle Eastern Division reading room,
    recognized as a major world resource center for information on Africa,
    the Middle East, the Caucasus, and Central Asia, multilingual staff
    members serve materials from 78 countries recorded in some 35 different
    languages. Their colleagues in the Asian Division reading room serve
    textual materials in some 100 languages.
        Moreover, a majority of the individual reading rooms are
    deliberately co-located with the collections they serve, not only to
    ensure efficiency of public service, but also to provide maximum
    security for Gold and Platinum-level collections. For example, the
    Prints and Photographs Division has custody of pictorial materials with
    a value of $2.2 billion. Its collections storage areas are highly
    secured and reference staff in the adjacent reading room is carefully
    trained in format-specific, safe handling techniques, and also in
    observing patrons to ensure items are not damaged through use or lost
    through theft. The same conditions of public service efficiency and
    collections security apply equally to the Music, Manuscript, Map, and
    Rare Book division reading rooms. The Main Reading Room in the
    Jefferson Building and the Science and Business Reading Room in the
    Adams Building do not serve secured, high value special collections.
    Instead, they are the access points for the general collections.
        In recent years, a decline in on-site readership has been
    experienced by all research libraries. In the digital age, much
    information (not all of it accurate or authentic) can be easily
    obtained via the Internet. However, only a tiny fraction of the
    Library's collections have been digitized. For example, some 11 million
    digital images of primary source documents (i.e., photographs,
    manuscript pages, maps) are available online, but only 2,000 of the
    Library's 29 million books have been scanned so that their full text
    can be read remotely. To gain full access to the nation's strategic
    reserve of recorded knowledge, readers must still come to Congress'
    library and to its various and specialized reading rooms. To make those
    available resources more widely known and attractive to the American
    people, the Library in general--and in particular the divisions of the
    Collections and Services Directorate--must increase public outreach.
        As a destination, the Library of Congress will be transformed once
    the tunnel from the Capitol Visitor Center is opened. The number of
    visitors is estimated to double to 2.8 million. New exhibits and
    educational experiences in the Jefferson Building will greatly expand
    the public's knowledge of the Library's magnificent resources. With the
    inauguration of the New Visitor Experience (NVE) in 2008, we intend to
    offer scheduled tours of the Jefferson Building reading rooms to make
    people aware of the Library's unsurpassed collections and reference
    services. This will likely have a direct impact in augmenting the
    number of readers, but we will need to verify such an increase through
    statistical analysis. The NVE will provide new ways to assess and
    optimize reading room space.
        Nonetheless, Library Services has already studied ways to make more
    efficient use of existing reading room space throughout the Library.
    However, we recognize the reprogramming of specialized spaces to new
    programmatic uses--including the installation of wireless technology to
    enable patrons to access Internet-based information resources such as
    electronic databases--will be a highly complicated and expensive task.
    Large collections will have to be shifted within a stack environment
    that is already overcrowded. But plans are now underway to enlarge the
    Performing Arts Reading Room--to date, serving Music Division
    collections--to incorporate service of the motion picture and recorded
    sound collections of the Motion Picture, Broadcasting & Recorded Sound
    Division, whose staff is presently being relocated to the Library of
    Congress' Packard Campus (NAVCC) in Culpeper, Virginia. Options to
    consolidate some separate reading rooms into the Main Reading Room are
    also being explored, as is the possibility of creating a centralized
    service point for all distributed microform collections. However, given
    the overriding need to provide efficient and secure service of the
    Library's disparate collections, and specialized and multilingual
    reference assistance, there will always be a requirement to have
    numerous reading rooms.
        One of the recommendations of the Final Audit Report was to develop
    a decision model for determining reading room, as well as office and
    collections storage, space requirements. However, Library Services
    decided to continue to use existing pragmatic decision models for
    determining such requirements. Determining the efficient use of all
    Library spaces, both on-site and off, will soon be enhanced by the
    introduction of a new, electronic planning tool--a Web-based Computer
    Assisted Facility Management (CAFM) program--now being populated with
    data and tested by Facility Design & Construction, Facility Services,
    Integrated Support Services.
        The single most important milestone for completing an evaluation of
    reading room space is the effect on the Library's programs of the NVE,
    due to open in the Jefferson Building in 2008. With the increase in
    visitors and an expanded awareness of the Library's research resources,
    we anticipate a rise in readership and need to at least maintain
    current levels of service in the reading rooms. At the same time, there
    may be an institutional demand for more existing spaces to be
    programmed for exhibits. This will necessitate re-evaluating the use of
    present reading rooms. Square footage is but one of a complex of
    resources and requirements to ensure effective service in a reading
    room. Nonetheless, it is a primary consideration for Library Services
    as we continually adjust our collections and public service in an
    environment of physical, societal and technological change.

                             CONCLUSION OF HEARINGS

        Senator Landrieu. Meeting recessed.
        [Whereupon, at 10:49 a.m., Thursday, May 3, 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
    Allard, Senator Wayne, U.S. Senator From Colorado:
        Opening Statement of.........................................    12
        Prepared Statements of......................................27, 130
        Questions Submitted by.....................................125, 227
        Statements of...............................................80, 130
    Ayers, Stephen, Acting Architect of the Capitol, Architect of the
      Capitol........................................................     1
        Opening Statement of.........................................     2
        Prepared Statement of........................................     6

    Billington, Dr. James H., Librarian of Congress, Library of
      Congress.......................................................   203
        Opening Statement of.........................................   203
        Prepared Statement of........................................   206

    Camens, Barbara, Member, Board of Directors, Office of Compliance    52
        Prepared Statement of........................................    57
    Chrisler, Tamara E., Acting Executive Director, Office of
      Compliance.....................................................    52
        Prepared Statement of........................................    54

    Doby, Chris, Financial Clerk, Office of the Secretary, U.S.
      Senate.........................................................   129
    Dwyer, Sheila, Assistant Secretary of the Senate, Office of the
      Secretary, U.S. Senate.........................................   129

    Erickson, Hon. Nancy, Secretary of the Senate, Office of the
      Secretary, U.S. Senate.........................................   129
        Prepared Statement of........................................   133
    Eveleth, Peter A., General Counsel, Office of Compliance.........    52

    Gainer, Hon. Terrance W., Senate Sergeant at Arms; Chairman, U.S.
      Capitol Police Board, Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper, U.S.
      Senate.........................................................    79
        Prepared Statement of........................................    84
        Statement of.................................................    82

    Hoecker, Carl, Inspector General, Sergeant at Arms and
      Doorkeeper, U.S. Senate........................................    79

    Jenkins, Jo Ann, Chief Operating Officer, Library of Congress....   203

    Landrieu, Senator Mary L., U.S. Senator From Louisiana:
        Opening Statements of........................................ 1, 28
        Questions Submitted by.......................................22, 72
        Statements of..........................................79, 129, 203

    Morse, Phillip D., Chief, United States Capitol Police...........   105
        Prepared Statement of........................................   106
    Mulhollan, Daniel P., Director, Congressional Research Service,
      Library of Congress, Prepared Statement of.....................   217

    Nichols, Dan, Assistant Chief, United States Capitol Police......   105

    Orszag, Peter R., Director, Congressional Budget Office..........    49
        Prepared Statement of........................................    50

    Peters, Marybeth, the Register of Copyrights, Copyright Office,
      Library of Congress, Prepared Statement of.....................   220

    Turri, William H., Acting Public Printer, Government Printing
      Office.........................................................    43
        Prepared Statement of........................................    44

    Walker, Hon. David M., Comptroller General of the United States,
      Government Accountability Office...............................    27
        Prepared Statement of........................................    30
        Questions Submitted to.......................................    72
    Willison, Drew, Deputy Sergeant at Arms, Sergeant at Arms and
      Doorkeeper, U.S. Senate........................................    79

                                 SUBJECT INDEX

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page

                            ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL

    Additional:
        Committee Questions..........................................    22
        Funding......................................................     9
    Annual Operating Budget Request..................................     3
    Budget Increases and Project Delays..............................     2
    Capitol:
        Complex Master Plan..........................................     4
            Follow Up................................................    19
            Review Process...........................................    12
        Improvement Prioritization...................................    19
        Police Construction Request..................................    12
        Power Plant..................................................    17
        Visitor Center:
            Governance...............................................    10
            Management Team..........................................     5
            Operations...............................................     5
            Tour.....................................................     1
    Community Group Relationships....................................    18
    Diverse Management...............................................    22
    East Front Rotunda Level.........................................     5
    Exhibition Hall..................................................     5
    Fire Alarms:
        And HVAC Systems.............................................    10
        System Differentiation.......................................    10
    Fort Meade Logistics:
        Center.......................................................    12
        Warehouse....................................................    20
    Government Accountability Office:
        Recommendations..............................................    17
        Testimony....................................................    15
    Information Technology Projects..................................    21
    Legislative Branch Compliance....................................    13
    Library of Congress Tunnel.......................................    11
    Management Controls and Accountability...........................    21
    Operation and Maintenance........................................    22
    Operations Management............................................    14
    Performance:
        Management...................................................     2
        Standards....................................................    18
    Performance-based Budget.........................................    16
    Power Plant Operations Expenses..................................    18
    Project Management...............................................    16
    Schedule Adjustments.............................................     4
    Scheduling Delays................................................    15
    Tunnel Condition Assessment......................................    15
    Utility Tunnels..................................................    14
    Visitor Traffic Flow.............................................    11
    West Refrigeration Plant.........................................    23

                          CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE

    Healthcare.......................................................    49
        Costs........................................................    67
    Operating Under the Continuing Resolution........................    69

                        GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE

    Additional Committee Questions...................................    71
    Coordination of Federal, State, and Local Governments............    68
    GAO:
        Fiscal Year 2008:
            Budget Request...........................................    29
            Request to Support the Congress..........................    39
        Operations Under the Continuing Resolution...................    76
        Supplemental.................................................    77
        Technology Assessment........................................    75
    Hiring in a Competitive Job Market...............................    60
    Human Capital Issues.............................................    72
    Implementing a Technology Assessment at the Government
      Accountability Office..........................................    61
    Justification for Increased Funding in the Government
      Accountability Office..........................................    58
    Key Efforts to Support the Congress..............................    33
    Linking Resources to Results.....................................    59
    Market-Based Compensation at the Government Accountability Office    60
    Need for Increased Funding.......................................    58
    Outcomes of Our Work and the Road Ahead..........................    37
    Performance, Results, and Plans..................................    35
    Proposed Repeal and Modification of GAO Reporting Requirements...    62
    Proposed Transfer of Comptroller General Authorities.............    63
    Rebuilding Government Accountability Office Over the Next 6 Years    30
    Relevance of Existing Mandates...................................    62
    Staffing.........................................................    72

                           GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

    Appropriations Request...........................................    44
    Federal Depository Library Program...............................    67
    Fiscal Year 2008 Appropriations Request..........................    46
    Government Printing Office.......................................    44
        Finances.....................................................    64
    Passports........................................................    65
    Preparing for a Digital Future...................................    45
    Production Facility..............................................    66
    Results of 2006..................................................43, 45
    Special Documents................................................    65

                              LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

    Acquisitions.....................................................   204
    Additional Committee Questions...................................   226
    Architect of the Capitol--Library of Congress Buildings and
      Grounds........................................................   212
    Books for the Blind............................................223, 230
    Budget and Library-wide goals....................................   224
    Calendar Year 2006 Activities....................................   214
    Core Values......................................................   218
    CRS:
        Documents on ``Gallery Watch''...............................   231
        Earmark Reporting Policy.....................................   232
    Digital Talking Books............................................   204
    Evolving Mission.................................................   224
    Fiscal Year 2008 Budget Request...........................216, 217, 222
    Library Role in Dynamic Information Age..........................   223
    Logistics Center.................................................   233
        At Fort Meade................................................   204
    Management Initiatives...........................................   219
    National Digital Information Infrastructure and Preservation
      Program........................................................   229
        And Other Priorities.........................................   226
        Rescission...................................................   204
    New Strategic Plan...............................................   224
    Open World:
        In America...................................................   215
        Leadership Center............................................   212
        2007 and Plans for 2008......................................   216
    Performance-based Budgeting....................................225, 227
    Program Mission and Strategic Plan...............................   213
    Proposed Changes to Legislative Language.........................   212
    Reengineering Program............................................   221
    Research Agenda..................................................   218
    Results and Impact of Program....................................   215
    Review of Copyright Office Work..................................   220
    Scope of Program.................................................   216
    Space Utilization................................................   234
    Teaching With Primary Sources....................................   233
    The Library and Its Programs.....................................   206
    The Library's:
        Fiscal Year 2008 Budget Request..............................   208
        Funding Priorities...........................................   209
    Working With Partners............................................   205

                              OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE

    Additional Full-time Equivalent Positions........................    53
    Dispute Resolution...............................................    56
    Education and Outreach...........................................    55
    Fire Alarm Testing in the Capitol Visitor Center.................    70
    Management Support...............................................    56
    Monitoring Abatement of Most Serious Hazards.....................    53
    Occupational Safety and Health...................................    54
    Office of Compliance:
        As Resource to Legislative Branch............................    52
        Strategic Plan Guides Budget Request.........................    52
    Workload Due to Capitol Visitor Center...........................    70

                          UNITED STATES CAPITOL POLICE

    Additional Committee Questions...................................   125
    Chief Morse's Departmental Vision................................   115
    Civilian Positions in Office of Financial Management.............   117
    Comparison of Starting Salaries Between USCP and Local
      Jurisdictions..................................................   123
    Coordinating With Surrounding Local Police Departments...........   119
    Departmental Accountability......................................   112
    Financial Management.............................................   126
    Government Accountability Office Report Recommendations..........   112
    Library of Congress Police Merger................................   121
    Managing Visitors to the U.S. Capitol............................   117
    New Civilian Positions...........................................   116
    Staffing and Overtime............................................   120
    Sworn Staffing...................................................   125
    Tunnel Access....................................................   118

                                  U.S. SENATE

                            Office of the Secretary

    Administrative Offices...........................................   161
    Budget Request...................................................   131
    Capitol Visitor Center...........................................   135
    Continuity of Operations and Emergency Preparedness Planning.....   136
    Crosstraining....................................................   201
    Curator..........................................................   132
    Disbursing Office................................................   133
    Financial Operations: Disbursing Office..........................   146
    Implementing Mandated Systems....................................   134
    Legislative:
        Department...................................................   131
        Information System (LIS) Project.............................   193
        Offices......................................................   136
    Merit Increases..................................................   200
    Parliamentarian..................................................   132
    Presenting the Fiscal Year 2008 Budget Request...................   133
    Primary Goals....................................................   195
    Senate:
        Employment Study.............................................   196
        Historian....................................................   132
    Stationery Room..................................................   132
    Student Loan Reimbursement Program...............................   199
    Webster..........................................................   200

                        Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper

    Comparison of United States Capitol Police Salaries to Local
      Jurisdictions..................................................   122
    Coordinating With Surrounding Local Police Departments...........   119
    Impact of the Capitol Visitor Center Delay.......................   111
    Information Technology--A Strategy for Security and Customer
      Service........................................................    90
    Introduction.....................................................    84
    Operations and Support: Consistently Delivering Excellent Service    95
    Priorities of the Inspector General..............................   115
    Risk and Vulnerability Assessment................................   111
    Role of Former Metropolitan Police Chief Ramsey..................   114
    Security and Preparedness: Protecting the Senate and Planning for
      the Unknown....................................................    85
    Security:
        In the Capitol Complex.......................................   113
        On the Capitol Campus........................................   109
    Semiannual Congressional Report..................................   115
    Senate Sergeant at Arms Staffing Level...........................   113
    Sergeant at Arms Comprehensive Strategic Plan....................   114
    Telecommunications Modernization Program.........................   111
    Tunnel Access....................................................   118
    U.S. Secret Service Security Assessment..........................   110
    United States Capitol Police Salary Budget Increases.............   122
    Visitor Stratification...........................................   118

                                       -