[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
-