[Senate Hearing 111-609]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 111-609
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011
=======================================================================
HEARINGS
before a
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
on
S. 3799
AN ACT MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH FOR THE FISCAL
YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2011, 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.gpo.gov/fdsys
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
54-980 PDF WASHINGTON : 2010
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC
20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii, Chairman
ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi
PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri
TOM HARKIN, Iowa MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky
BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama
HERB KOHL, Wisconsin JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire
PATTY MURRAY, Washington ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah
BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas
DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas
RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee
TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota SUSAN COLLINS, Maine
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio
JACK REED, Rhode Island LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey
BEN NELSON, Nebraska
MARK PRYOR, Arkansas
JON TESTER, Montana
ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania
Charles J. Houy, Staff Director
Bruce Evans, Minority Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on the Legislative Branch
BEN NELSON, Nebraska, Chairman
MARK PRYOR, Arkansas LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
JON TESTER, Montana THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi
DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii (ex officio)
(ex officio)
Professional Staff
Nancy Olkewicz
Rachelle Schroeder (Minority)
Sarah Wilson (Minority)
Administrative Support
Teri Curtin
C O N T E N T S
----------
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Page
U.S. Senate:
Office of the Secretary...................................... 1
Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper.............................. 72
United States Capitol Police..................................... 93
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Architect of the Capitol......................................... 133
Office of Compliance............................................. 152
Thursday, April 15, 2010
Government Accountability Office................................. 173
Government Printing Office....................................... 183
Congressional Budget Office...................................... 189
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Library of Congress.............................................. 225
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011
----------
THURSDAY, MARCH 4, 2010
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 4:32 p.m., in room SD-138, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Ben Nelson (chairman) presiding.
Present: Senators Nelson, Pryor, Tester, and Murkowski.
U.S. SENATE
Office of the Secretary
STATEMENT OF HON. NANCY ERICKSON, SECRETARY OF THE
SENATE
ACCOMPANIED BY:
CHRIS DOBY, FINANCIAL CLERK
SHEILA DWYER, ASSISTANT SECRETARY
opening statement of senator ben nelson
Senator Nelson. The subcommittee will come to order. Good
afternoon, everyone and welcome. I apologize for the start of
this afternoon being different than scheduled, but sometimes
the call of Senate business for votes hops in the way of what
we were otherwise planning to do. So thank you for your
indulgence.
We meet this afternoon to take testimony on the fiscal year
2011 budget request for the Secretary of the Senate, the Senate
Sergeant at Arms, and the U.S. Capitol Police. This is our
first hearing of fiscal year 2011, and once again, I look
forward to working closely with my good friend and ranking
member, Senator Murkowski, and the other members of the
subcommittee, Senator Pryor and Senator Tester. I understand
Senator Pryor will be joining us here shortly.
I think we had four very productive budget hearings last
year, and it is my hope that we can continue that trend again
this year.
Having said that, I must say that I am very concerned that
the subcommittee has, once again, been presented with a fairly
large budget request for fiscal year 2011. The 2011 budget
request for the legislative branch totals $5.1 billion, an
increase of $466 million, or 10 percent, over the current year.
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, we really do need
to reduce these numbers, but the fact is that this country
remains in economic turmoil and the American taxpayers simply
will not tolerate increased Government spending at a time of
such significant high levels of unemployment.
Last year, we received an overall increase of 5 percent in
the legislative branch, including some large-ticket items for
the House, over which we clearly have no control. But I hope
that we will not be seeing an increase of that magnitude this
year. In fact, I have stated repeatedly that I am going to do
everything I can to hold the legislative branch flat this year.
I think we really do need to lead by example with this
subcommittee and we cannot do that by appropriating large
increases to our agencies.
The President sent the message very loud and clear in his
State of the Union Address this year noting that families
across the country are tightening their belts and making tough
decisions. The Federal Government must do the same he said, and
he announced a 3-year freeze on nonsecurity discretionary
Government spending.
The President said ``Like any cash-strapped family, we will
work within a budget to invest in what we need and sacrifice
what we don't.''
And he went on further, ``If we do not take meaningful
steps to rein in our debt, it could damage our markets,
increase the cost of borrowing, and jeopardize our recovery,
all of which would have an even worse effect on our job growth
and family incomes.''
So with that having been said, I am happy today to
introduce and welcome our three witnesses, Nancy Erickson,
Secretary of the Senate; Terrance Gainer, the Senate Sergeant
at Arms; and Phillip Morse, the Chief of the Capitol Police.
I first want to acknowledge the dedication and work of all
of you and your staffs. The Senate worked many late nights into
early mornings, right up to the holidays this year, and even
during our record snowfall this winter, your staff, all of
them, did an exceptional job of maintaining the services that
we rely on here in the Capitol environs. We are grateful to
each and every one of them and to you for keeping the Senate
running safely and smoothly every day. To the extent it was not
smooth, it was not your fault.
Ms. Erickson, we are pleased to have you here this
afternoon, and I look forward to hearing your testimony. Among
many others on your staff, I want to acknowledge Chris Doby of
the Disbursing Office for his fine work in balancing the books
for the Senate. It is no easy task, but he and his team do a
great job and we appreciate their dedication and commitment to
this institution.
For fiscal year 2011, your office is requesting a total of
$60.2 million, which is an increase of $32.4 million, or a
little over double your fiscal year 2010 amount. Now, I
understand that the bulk of this increase, to be clear, $32
million, is a result of the transfer of the Senate information
services to your office from the Senate Sergeant at Arms where
it is currently funded. So I look forward to hearing more about
the specifics of your budget request and how we might fund this
transition over several years as opposed to funding it perhaps
as much as we are asked to in fiscal year 2011.
Chief Gainer, the Sergeant at Arms request for 2011 totals
$240 million, a 7 percent increase over fiscal year 2010, and I
realize that your request includes several big-ticket items as
well for the Senate community which are expensive, but I look
forward to working with you to identify what our true needs
are, both in terms of salaries and expenses to maintain our
current services. Terry, I want to personally thank Skip Rouse
and Grace Ridgeway of your office for their outstanding service
to this subcommittee.
And finally, Chief Morse, I understand you have recently
resubmitted your fiscal year 2011 budget request based on your
first quarter review of fiscal year 2010 expenditures. The
fiscal year 2011 request totals $385 million which is an
increase of $57 million, or 17 percent, over the enacted fiscal
year 2010 level. This includes a request for 52 additional
officers and 12 civilians.
Chief Morse, I understand that your quarterly review also
identified some miscalculations in your fiscal year 2010
appropriation, which obviously is somewhat disturbing, and I
look forward to discussing this with you just a little bit
later. It seems that your department continues to be plagued
with some financial management challenges, and needless to say,
that causes us on the subcommittee tremendous concern. We hope
that you will be able to help us understand.
Your budget request does include, I understand, $16 million
for the indoor coverage portion of the radio project, which
will be the final installment of funding for this project. So I
look forward to receiving an update on this project from you as
well.
Now it is my pleasure to turn to the ranking member of the
subcommittee, Senator Murkowski, for her opening remarks.
Senator.
statement of senator lisa murkowski
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
It sure does not seem like a year since we were here with
these three fine individuals that are before us. It goes by
quickly.
I want to thank you for calling the hearing and allowing
the consideration of the 2011 legislative branch budget
request. I felt like we worked pretty well together last year
in putting together a proposal that we could stand up and
clearly support. But it was very clear that even with the
package that we had, I think, skinnied down and yet still
allowed for a level of funding that allowed for the system to
work here, there was a fair amount of criticism at that budget
for the increases that we saw then.
So I too share your concern that we are back a year later
and the proposals that we have are proposals for increases and
an overall requested increase of 10 percent, which I would
concur with you, Mr. Chairman, we need to lead by example here
within the legislative branch, and now is not the time to be
seeing 10 percent increases. So I am absolutely behind you when
you have suggested that we need to work together to figure out
how we can allow for the smooth functioning of the operations
that must proceed here but do so in a manner that indicates
that we are tightening our belts, along with everybody else in
this country.
I would like to welcome all of the witnesses and the
deputies that you have pointed out. This is a very important
discussion that we are having today on how the agencies that
you all represent are planning to move forward in this next
fiscal year.
Again, just the general sense of disappointment when we
look at this budget and see that it is 10 percent over the
fiscal year 2010 enacted level. And I do realize that the
witnesses that we have here today are only responsible for
three pieces of this increase. But you and I, Mr. Chairman, are
responsible for looking at the big picture and balancing the
needs of each of the agencies within this bill. So we have got
to consider your requests within the full context.
Clearly, each of you is requesting significant increases.
The Secretary of the Senate is requesting an increase of
$32.4 million, or 116.7 percent. I have to admit that when I
looked at that, I thought that the decimal was in the wrong
place and that it was 11.6 percent, but it is 116 percent,
which includes an increase of $441,000, or 1.7 percent for
salaries; $32 million, or 1,600 percent, for expenses. The
extraordinarily large increase is associated with the transfer
of just one program, as I understand, from the Sergeant at Arms
to the Secretary's office. So it is good that we have got you
both here together today to tell the subcommittee more about
this particular program, how its funding needs work.
The Sergeant at Arms Office is requesting an increase of
$15.7 million, or 7 percent. It includes an increase of $8
million, or 11.4 percent, for salaries and $7.7 million, or 5
percent, for expenses. Although we have seen the Sergeant at
Arms make tremendous strides last year in filling the
vacancies, we still have 23 vacant positions that I would like
to hear about today. I am also eager to learn how we are coming
with the telecom modernization and the payroll system upgrade
projects, how these are progressing.
And then finally, the Capitol Police is requesting an
increase of $57.2 million, or 17.4 percent, which includes an
increase of $17.1 million, or 6.3 percent, for salaries and a
51.6 percent increase for expenses. Now, I understand that
these increases support a total of 2,307 sworn positions, which
would include an increase of 52 sworn officers, 12 new civilian
positions, for a 2.9 percent increase in personnel over fiscal
year 2010.
I am curious to know how this increase in personnel is
going to impact the overtime issue that the Capitol Police
continues to face. As I understand, we are not going to be
seeing a decrease in the overtime, which is a concern, because
last year, when we met to consider this with the new positions,
as I recall, the assurance was this will help us finally get
out of that situation with the overtime. So I would like to
hear more about that. Of course, I also look forward to an
update on the radio modernization program.
I think the chairman has said very clearly the economic
landscape across our country has not improved much over the
last year. In fact, there are a lot of folks out there that
would say the situation has even worsened. I said it last year.
I will say it again. I believe it is absolutely important that
we lead by example in exercising fiscal discipline. We have got
to demonstrate that our house is in order before we can expect
others to follow.
So I am anxious to hear what you all have to say today
about this year's request and to discuss how we can really find
that common ground to balance the needs with what is
economically feasible and fiscally responsible.
So I look forward to working with you, Mr. Chairman, as
well as all those who are working so hard to serve us. We thank
you.
Senator Nelson. Thank you, Senator.
Now we would like to begin with the witnesses. I would
appreciate it if we can hold the opening statements to about 5
minutes, although we will not run the clock for that. Ms.
Erickson, perhaps we will start with you and then we will go to
Mr. Gainer and Chief Morse.
summary statement of hon. nancy erickson
Ms. Erickson. Chairman Nelson, Senator Murkowski, I
appreciate this opportunity to provide testimony on behalf of
the Office of the Secretary and our employees. With me today is
Chris Doby, our Financial Clerk, and Sheila Dwyer, our
Assistant Secretary. I ask that my statement which includes our
department reports be submitted for the record.
Senator Nelson. It will be submitted, received.
Ms. Erickson. I am pleased to be testifying on a day that
is historically significant in the life of our Nation. It was
on March 4, 1789, that the United States Government began its
operations. March 4 was when Presidents took the oath of office
and when the Senate convened to confirm the President's
Cabinet. In those bygone years, the Senate would then adjourn
and not come back into session until December.
In 1933, ratification of the 20th amendment moved the
opening of new sessions of Congress up to January 3 and
presidential inaugurations to January 20. Still, it seems worth
remembering today that inaugurations of all our Presidents,
from George Washington to Franklin Roosevelt, and the start of
so many Senate sessions took place on this day, March 4.
Since 1789, the Secretary of the Senate has been tasked
with legislative, financial, and administrative
responsibilities to support the Senate. It is, indeed, a
privilege to serve the Senate in this manner.
Our budget request for fiscal year 2011 is $60,231,000, of
which $26,231,000 is salary costs; $2 million is operating
costs, the same level as last year; and $32 million is for the
administration of the Senate information services, or SIS
program.
The salary budget represents an increase of $441,000 over
fiscal year 2010 as a result of the costs associated with the
annual cost-of-living adjustment. I am proud that our
department managers have demonstrated wise stewardship of our
financial resources while maximizing the services we provide
the Senate community.
Needless to say, my total budget request this year at first
glance is a real eye-opener. In July 2009, the chairman and
ranking member of the Senate Committee on Rules and
Administration approved the transfer of the SIS program from
the Sergeant at Arms to the Secretary of the Senate, and this
subcommittee authorized transfer of line budgeting
responsibility for this program and the accompanying
appropriation from the Sergeant at Arms to the Secretary
beginning in fiscal year 2011.
As Mr. Gainer and I note in our request to you and the
Rules Committee, all parties involved in both of our
organizations strongly supported the transfer. And I commend
the Sergeant at Arms Manager for Tech Development, Tom Meenan,
for his management role of the SIS program during its tenure.
The SIS program was established by a regulation of the
Senate Rules Committee in 1987 to provide Senate offices access
to research services. Since 2000, the Sergeant at Arms has
administered the program, providing unlimited access to select
information services for all Senate staff and prohibiting
vendors from charging offices user fees. This model has enabled
the Senate to maximize its purchasing power and streamlined
administrative procedures. The Rules Committee has maintained
close association with and direct oversight of the SIS program
since it was established.
This year within my budget is a new request of $32 million
for the administration of SIS, which I would like to request in
the form of a single, multiyear appropriation that would be
utilized for a 5-year period through September 30, 2015.
Together with the Sergeant at Arms, SIS, and procurement staff,
we have determined the annual costs and projected future costs
to establish the amount requested today. My staff will track
usage of SIS program funds, and I can assure you there will be
a firewall between these funds and my office operating funds,
providing greater program transparency.
We stand ready to accept this program. The Senate Librarian
and her senior staff already have considerable expertise in
negotiating and administering contracts with information
industry service providers, and they bring content expertise to
the table. With their extensive knowledge of information
service providers, we hope to bring even greater economic
efficiencies to the table, eliminating duplicative services
wherever possible. In addition, their daily work supporting
Senate staff research needs and coordinating training of online
research products will be a great benefit in our oversight
role.
We look forward to working closely with our oversight
committees as we assume administration of the SIS program and
we welcome your subcommittee's guidance as we seek the best
method for funding this program.
I am also pleased to report that, in conjunction with the
Sergeant at Arms, we are moving ahead with the replacement of
our Senate's payroll system. As you may recall from last year's
testimony, it had become clear that the current system is
outdated and soon will be no longer supported by its developer.
After a competitive bid process, we have selected a vendor to
provide the software and are close to completing the process to
select the software integrator. We will work closely with
Senate offices to ensure that the product meets their needs. We
have also learned a great deal from our House counterpart's
experience in standing up a new payroll system and remain
grateful for the Sergeant at Arms technical support in this
effort, particularly that of Jay Moore and his team. We are
hopeful that it will be launched sometime in the next 18 to 24
months.
Our Disbursing Office staff and Senate Webmaster are also
implementing the new reporting requirements in Public Law 111-
68, mandating that the semi-annual report of the Secretary,
which is a listing of all Senate expenses, be produced in a
searchable electronic format. The first electronic report will
cover the first full reporting period in 2011.
Electronic filing requirements are old hat for the Office
of Public Records, which has fully implemented the requirements
of the Honest Leadership Open Government Act. It requires
quarterly and semi-annual filings from registrants and
lobbyists, and almost 135,000 lobbying reports and
registrations were filed last year. Although the volume of
reports increased by over 50 percent, I am proud that we
handled the additional responsibilities without adding staff.
This year, the office has focused on compliance and has
referred close to 4,400 cases to the Department of Justice for
possible noncompliance.
This past year, my office oversaw the closing of Senator
Edward Kennedy's office, as required by S. Res. 458, as
amended, as well as the handling of Senator Norm Coleman's
office closing per S. Res. 14. While this is never an easy
task, I am grateful for the support of the Rules Committee and
the professionalism of Senator Kennedy's and Senator Coleman's
staff during a very difficult time for their offices.
Finally, when I was elected Secretary 3 years ago, I must
admit I was a little intimidated to be considered Senate
Historian Dick Baker's boss. I speak for others in the
Secretary's Office when I say we were proud to be Dick's
colleagues. We are grateful to Leader Reid, Leader McConnell,
the Sergeant at Arms, Capitol Police, and the Rules Committee
for implementing Dick's retirement wish, that the Senate
galleries be reopened to the public during Senate recesses,
like the pre-September 11 days.
I am also grateful to another public servant, Pam Gavin,
who for more than 24 years shepherded and safeguarded the
filings of thousands of Senate public documents. She will
always have my appreciation and pride for her efforts to
implement the wide-ranging requirements of the Honest
Leadership Open Government Act in roughly 11 weeks.
prepared statement
This institution is a better place because of their service
and their commitment and pride in public service is shared by
the great staff I have the privilege of leading. Thank you for
support of our efforts to serve the Senate community.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Nancy Erickson
Mister Chairman, Senator Murkowski, 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 2011.
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 each department of the office,
their recent achievements, and their plans for the upcoming fiscal
year.
My statement includes: Presenting the fiscal year 2011 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 2011 budget request
I am requesting a total fiscal year 2011 budget of $60,231,000. The
request includes $26,231,000 in salary costs and $34,000,000 for the
operating budget of the Office of the Secretary. The salary budget
represents an increase of $441,000 over the fiscal year 2010 budget as
a result of the costs associated with the annual cost of living
adjustment. The operating budget increased by $32,000,000 solely as a
result of this office's assuming the administration of the Senate
Information Services Program (SIS) from the Sergeant at Arms.
The net effect of my total budget request for 2011 is an increase
of $32,441,000. The single multiyear funds requested for the SIS
program will provide for the continued operation of the current program
within the Senate while also providing the flexibility to review
existing services and provide updates as requested by the Senate
community. The balance of our request is consistent with the amounts
requested and received in recent years through the Legislative Branch
Appropriations process.
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY APPORTIONMENT SCHEDULE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
available Budget
Items fiscal year estimates Difference
2010, Public fiscal year
Law 111-68 2011
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Departmental operating budget:
Executive office............................................ $550,000 $550,000 ..............
Administrative services..................................... 1,390,000 33,390,000 \1\ $32,000,00
0
Legislative services........................................ 60,000 60,000 ..............
-----------------------------------------------
Total operating budget.................................... 2,000,000 34,000,000 32,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This difference represents the costs associated with the assumption of the administration of the Senate
Information Services (SIS) Program.
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 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 2009 and the beginning of fiscal year 2010,
specific progress made on the FMIS project included:
--Web FMIS was upgraded three times this year: in March 2009, August
2009 and January 2010. This system is used by office managers
and committee clerks, staff in the Sergeant at Arms Office
(SAA) and the Secretary's office to create vouchers and manage
their office funds, by the Disbursing Office to review vouchers
and by the Committee on Rules and Administration to sanction
vouchers. Additionally, it is used by staff who incur official
expenses, primarily staff who travel, to prepare their expense
summary reports (ESRs). The releases provided both technical
and functional changes. The March release brought Web FMIS
reports rewritten in a report-writer that enables additional
features, an improved document search feature, a revamped the
ESR with new fields for providing additional information, and
real-time e-mail notifications to the staffers. The August
release focused on implementing new functionality for
Disbursing staff such as integrated contract tracking
functionality, ADPICS document viewers that enable Disbursing
staff to see, via Web FMIS, documents created in ADPICS, and
integrated checkwriter software. The integration of the first
and last of these into Web FMIS are especially important in our
ability to fully function in the event of displacement from the
physical Disbursing Office. The January release was the first
of three planned releases for WebPICS. The WebPICS project
enables SAA users to access ADPICS functionality through a web-
based front end and provides robust search function. This first
release focused on the needs of requisitioners and requisition
approvers. The second release will focus on the SAA accounts
payable process and the third release will focus on purchase
order creation and approval.
--The computing infrastructure for FMIS is provided by the SAA. Each
year the SAA staff upgrades the infrastructure hardware and
software. During 2009 the SAA implemented two major upgrades to
the FMIS infrastructure by upgrading WebSphere software to
version 7 and upgrading the database software, DB2. After the
DB2 upgrade, the Web reporting tables were partitioned to
improve system efficiency. The SAA made several micro-code
updates, operating system ``maintenance'' releases and
maintenance for the Virtual Tape Library. For each activity,
Disbursing staff tested the changes in the FMIS testing
environment and then validated the changes in the production
environment.
--A primary goal of the FMIS project is to process vouchers without
paper supporting documentation and ``wet'' signatures. During
2008, Disbursing staff conducted a prototype imaging system in
which paper vouchers and supporting documentation were imaged
by the staff and routed electronically. The hands-on experience
of this prototype was especially useful in refining our imaging
system requirements. During 2009 and 2010 Disbursing
participated in selecting software for the image database and
image viewer, and finalized imaging and electronic signature
requirements. During the remainder of 2010, this information
will be used in planning necessary software purchases and
coordinating with a separate SAA smart card ID project. The
smart cards will be used for electronic signatures.
During the remainder of fiscal year 2010 the following FMIS
activities are anticipated:
--Implementing WebPICS releases for phase II and III which will focus
on SAA accounts payable process and on purchase order creation
and approval, respectively;
--Coordinating with SAA the timeframes for the implementation of the
smart card ID project for electronic signatures, and finalizing
with the Committee on Rules and Administration any changes to
existing rules and regulations as well as any changes to
statutes pertaining to delegation of authority;
--Implementing online distribution of monthly ledger reports;
--Implementing automated clearing house payment for the 21 remaining
state tax jurisdictions;
--Implementing a pilot of the image database software, likely for the
SAA finance staff as part of WebPICS;
--Participating in the yearly disaster recovery test; and
--Finalizing the selection of the PeopleSoft payroll system
integrator and start with the new system implementation.
During fiscal year 2011 the following FMIS activities are
anticipated:
--Conducting a pilot of the technology for paperless payment--both
document imaging and electronic signatures. This assumes
resolution of related policy and process issues;
--Continuing the implementation and the required updates to the
Hyperion Financial Management application to provide the Senate
the ability to produce auditable financial statements;
--Continue the implantation of online financial reports;
--Continue with the new payroll system implementation and start
parallel testing; and
--Review existing systems and develop a long term modification and
replacement plan for key systems.
A more detailed report on FMIS is included in the departmental
report of the Disbursing Office.
legislative offices
The Legislative Department provides support essential to Senators
in carrying out their daily chamber activities as well as the
constitutional responsibilities of the Senate. The Legislative Clerk
sits at the Secretary's desk in the Senate Chamber and reads aloud
bills, amendments, the Senate Journal, Presidential messages, and other
such materials when so directed by the Presiding Officer of the Senate.
The Legislative Clerk calls the roll of members to establish the
presence of a quorum and to record and tally all yea and nay votes. The
office staff 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 staff is
responsible for verifying the accuracy of information entered into the
LIS system by the various offices of the Secretary.
Additionally, the Legislative Clerk acts as supervisor for the
Legislative Department, providing a single line of communication to the
Secretary and Assistant Secretary and is responsible for overall
coordination, supervision, scheduling, and cross-training. 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.
Summary of Activity
The Senate completed its legislative business and adjourned sine
die on December 24, 2009. During 2009, the Senate was in session 191
days and conducted 397 roll call votes. There were 199 measures
reported from committees and 24 special reports submitted to the
Senate. There were 478 total measures passed. In addition, there were
3,892 amendments submitted to the desk.
Cross-Training and Continuity of Operations (COOP) Planning
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 half of the legislative staff are currently
involved or have recently been involved in cross-training.
Each office and staff person within the Legislative Department
participated in numerous ongoing COOP discussions and exercises
throughout the past year. These discussions and exercises are a joint
effort involving the Office of the Secretary and the Office of the
Sergeant at Arms.
Succession Planning
The average number of years of Senate service among the Secretary's
Legislative Department supervisors is 19 years. It is critical that the
Secretary's Legislative Department attract and keep talented employees,
especially the second tier of employees just behind the current
supervisors because of the unique nature of the Senate as a legislative
institution. The arcane practices and voluminous precedents of the
Senate make institutional experience and knowledge extremely valuable.
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 staff 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 through 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. The Bill Clerk's office is generally
regarded as the most timely and most accurate source of legislative
information because all the information received in this office comes
directly from the Senate floor in written form within moments of the
action involved.
Legislative Activity
The Bill Clerk's staff processed 773 fewer legislative items into
the database than in the previous Congress' first session, an overall
decrease of slightly more than 9 percent. Only three legislative
categories (Senate Bills introduced, House Bills received, and House
Messages) saw increases in activity during this legislative period. For
comparative purposes, below is a summary of the first sessions of the
110th and 111th congresses:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
110th 111th
Congress, 1st Congress, 1st Percentage
Session Session Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate Bills.................................................... 2,524 2,920 +15.69
Senate Joint Resolutions........................................ 27 25 -7.41
Senate Concurrent Resolutions................................... 64 48 -25.00
Senate Resolutions.............................................. 418 387 -7.42
Amendments Submitted............................................ 3,892 3,298 -15.26
House Bills..................................................... 513 382 -25.54
House Joint Resolutions......................................... 9 10 +11.11
House Concurrent Resolutions.................................... 93 67 -27.96
Measures Reported............................................... 428 199 -53.50
Written Reports................................................. 254 113 -55.51
-----------------------------------------------
Total Legislation......................................... 8,222 7,449 -9.40
===============================================
Roll Call Votes................................................. 442 397 -10.18
House Messages \1\.............................................. 263 292 +11.03
Cosponsor Requests.............................................. 8,859 7,205 -18.67
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This number reflects how many messages from the House are typed up by the Bill Clerks for inclusion in the
Congressional Record. It excludes additional activity on these bills.
Assistance from the Government Printing Office (GPO)
The Bill Clerk's staff maintains an exceptionally good working
relationship with the Government Printing Office 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 requests,
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 60 measures for floor
consideration by the Senate during the first session of the 111th
Congress.
captioning services
The Office of Captioning Services (OCS) provides real-time
captioning of Senate floor proceedings for the deaf and hard-of-hearing
and unofficial electronic transcripts of Senate floor proceedings for
Senate offices on Webster, the Senate intranet.
General Overview
Captioning Services strives to provide the highest quality closed
captions. For the 16th year in a row, the office has achieved an
overall accuracy average above 99 percent. Overall caption quality is
monitored through daily translation data reports, monitoring of
captions in real-time, and review of caption files on Webster.
The real-time searchable closed caption log, available to Senate
offices on Webster, continues to be an invaluable tool for the Senate
community. In particular, legislative staff continue to depend upon its
availability, reliability and content to aid in the performance of
their duties. Additionally, the Senate Recording Studio introduced a
complementary video component in 2009 called Video Vault, which now
adds searchable video to the audio and text.
Continuity of Operations (COOP)
Continuity of operations (COOP) planning and preparation continues
to be a top priority and was brought to the forefront this year by
additional pandemic planning with regard to the H1N1 virus. Regular
testing and review of COOP procedures as well as the additional
component of pandemic planning ensures that the staff are prepared and
confident about the ability to relocate and successfully function from
a remote location and/or reduced personnel in the event of an emergency
or pandemic. The OCS also participates with the Senate Recording Studio
in an off-site location exercise at least once a year.
daily digest
The Office of the Senate Daily Digest is pleased to transmit its
annual report on Senate activities during the first session of the
111th Congress. First, a brief summary of a compilation of Senate
statistics:
Chamber Activity
The Senate was in session a total of 191 days, for a total of 1,420
hours and 39 minutes. There were 3 quorum calls and 397 record votes.
(See Attachment for 20-Year Comparison of Senate Legislative Activity).
20-YEAR COMPARISON OF SENATE LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITY
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate Convened..................................... 1/23 1/3 1/3 1/5 1/25 1/4 1/3 1/3 1/27 1/6
Senate Adjourned.................................... 10/28 1/3/92 10/9 11/26 12/01 1/3/96 10/4 11/13 10/21 11/19
Days in Session..................................... 138 158 129 153 138 211 132 153 143 162
Hours in Session.................................... 1,25014" 1,20044" 1,09109" 1,26941" 1,24333" 1,83910" 1,03645" 1,09307" 1,09505" 1,18357"
Average Hours per Day............................... 9.1 7.6 8.5 8.3 9.0 8.7 7.8 7.1 7.7 7.3
Total Measures Passed............................... 716 626 651 473 465 346 476 386 506 549
Roll Call Votes..................................... 326 280 270 395 329 613 306 298 314 374
Quorum Calls........................................ 3 3 5 2 6 3 2 6 4 7
Public Laws......................................... 410 243 347 210 255 88 245 153 241 170
Treaties Ratified................................... 15 15 32 20 8 10 28 15 53 13
Nominations Confirmed............................... 42,493 45,369 30,619 38,676 37,446 40,535 33,176 25,576 20,302 22,468
Average Voting Attendance........................... 97.47 97.16 95.4 97.6 97.02 98.07 98.22 98.68 97.47 98.02
Sessions Convened Before 12 Noon.................... 116 126 112 128 120 184 113 115 109 118
Sessions Convened at 12 Noon........................ 4 9 6 6 9 2 15 12 31 17
Sessions Convened after 12 Noon..................... 17 23 10 15 17 12 7 7 2 19
Sessions Continued after 6 p.m...................... 100 102 91 100 100 158 88 96 93 113
Sessions Continued after 12 Midnight................ 6 4 9 7 3 1 ............ ............ ............ ............
Saturday Sessions................................... 3 2 2 2 3 5 1 1 1 3
Sunday Sessions..................................... 2 ............ ............ ............ ............ 3 ............ 1 ............ ............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
20-YEAR COMPARISON OF SENATE LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITY--Continued
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate Convened..................................... 1/24 1/3 1/23 1/7 1/20 1/4 1/3 1/4 1/3 1/6
Senate Adjourned.................................... 12/15 12/20 11/20 12/9 12/8 12/22 12/9 12/31 1/2 12/24
Days in Session..................................... 141 173 149 167 133 159 138 189 184 191
Hours in Session.................................... 1,01751" 1,23615" 1,04323" 1,45405" 1,03131" 1,22226" 1,02748" 1,37554" 98831" 1,42039"
Average Hours per Day............................... 7.2 7.1 7.0 8.7 7.7 7.7 7.4 7.2 5.37 7.44
Total Measures Passed............................... 696 425 523 590 663 624 635 621 589 478
Roll Call Votes..................................... 298 380 253 459 216 366 279 442 215 397
Quorum Calls........................................ 6 3 2 3 1 3 1 6 3 3
Public Laws......................................... 410 136 241 198 300 169 313 180 280 125
Treaties Ratified................................... 39 3 17 11 15 6 14 8 30 1
Nominations Confirmed............................... 22,512 25,091 23,633 21,580 24,420 25,942 29,603 22,892 21,785 23,051
Average Voting Attendance........................... 96.99 98.29 96.36 96.07 95.54 97.41 97.13 94.99 94.36 96.99
Sessions Convened Before 12 Noon.................... 107 140 119 133 104 121 110 156 147 148
Sessions Convened at 12 Noon........................ 25 10 12 4 9 1 4 4 4 2
Sessions Convened after 12 Noon..................... 24 21 23 23 21 36 24 32 33 41
Sessions Continued after 6 p.m...................... 94 108 103 134 129 120 129 144 110 152
Sessions Continued after 12 Midnight................ 2 3 8 2 3 3 4 4 2 2
Saturday Sessions................................... 1 3 ............ 1 2 2 2 1 3 5
Sunday Sessions..................................... 1 ............ ............ 1 1 2 ............ 1 1 4
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prepared by the Senate Daily Digest--Office of the Secretary.
Committee Activity
Senate committees held a total of 1,138 meetings during the first
session, as contrasted with 823 meetings during the second session of
the 110th Congress.
All hearings and business meetings, including joint meetings and
conferences, are scheduled through the Office of the Senate Daily
Digest and are published on its Web site on the Webster intranet, in
the Congressional Record, and entered in the Web-based Legislative
Information System (LIS). Meeting outcomes are also published by the
Daily Digest in the Congressional Record each day and continuously
updated on the website.
Computer Activities
The Digest staff continue to work closely with Senate computer
staff to refine the LIS/DMS system, including further enhancements to
the Senate Committee Scheduling application which will improve the data
entry process.
The Digest office staff continues to electronically transmit the
publication at the end of each day to the Government Printing Office
(GPO). The Digest staff continues the practice of sending a disc along
with a duplicate hard copy to GPO, even though GPO receives the Digest
copy by electronic transfer long before hand delivery is completed
adding to the timeliness of publishing the Congressional Record. The
Digest office staff continue 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.
Government Printing Office
The Daily Digest staff work closely with the GPO on printing issues
and are pleased to report that with the onset of electronic transfer of
the Digest copy, occurrences of editing corrections or transcript
errors are infrequent.
enrolling clerk
The Enrolling Clerk prepares, proofreads, and prints all
legislation passed by the Senate prior to its transmittal to the House
of Representatives, the White House, the National Archives, the
Secretary of State, and the United States Claims Court.
During the first session of the 111th Congress the Enrolling
Clerk's office prepared the enrollment of 34 bills (transmitted to the
President), 4 enrolled joint resolutions (transmitted to the
President), 10 concurrent resolutions (transmitted to the National
Archives) and 94 appointments (transmitted to the House of
Representatives). In addition, approximately 94 House of
Representatives bills (including 12 Appropriations bills, the Budget
Concurrent Resolution, 33 House Concurrent Resolutions and 7 House
Joint Resolutions) were either amended or acted on in the Senate
requiring action on the part of the staff of the Enrolling Clerk's
office.
A total of 478 pieces of legislation were passed or agreed to
during the first session of the 111th Congress. Many other Senate bills
were placed in the calendar, all of which were processed in the
Enrolling Clerk's office including 66 engrossed Senate bills, 5 Joint
Resolutions, 22 Concurrent Resolutions and 249 Senate Resolutions.
During the First Session of the 111th Congress, the Enrolling Clerk
delivered 78 messages to the House Chamber and 55 messages to the House
Clerk's office, along with 94 appointments prepared and transmitted to
the House of Representatives, informing the House of Senate actions on
legislation passed or amended.
The Senate Enrolling Clerk is also responsible for electronically
transmitting the files of engrossed and enrolled legislation to the
Government Printing Office for overnight printing. The office also
follows up on all specific requests and special orders for printing
from the Senate floor.
Continuity of Operations (COOP)
In addition to updating the office's COOP plan, the Enrolling Clerk
has begun training additional staff from GPO in the office's operations
to provide backup in the event the office is displaced.
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 prepares daily the Executive Calendar as well as
all nomination and treaty resolutions for transmittal to the President.
Additionally, the Executive Clerk's staff processes all executive
communications, presidential messages and petitions and memorials.
Nominations
During the first session of the 111th Congress, there were 1,341
nomination messages sent to the Senate by the President, transmitting
24,951 nominations to positions requiring Senate confirmation and 15
messages withdrawing nominations sent to the Senate. Of the total
nominations transmitted, there were 2,526 nominees in the following
``civilian list'' categories: Foreign Service, Coast Guard, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and Public Health Service. An
additional 696 were for other civilian positions. Military nominations
received this session totaled 21,729 (7,870 Air Force; 7,223 Army;
4,442 Navy and 2,194 Marine Corps). The Senate confirmed 23,050
nominations this session. Pursuant to the provisions of paragraph six
of Senate Rule XXXI, 8 nominations were returned to the President
during the first session of the 111th Congress.
Treaties
There were 4 treaties transmitted to the Senate by the President
during the first session of the 111th Congress for its advice and
consent to ratification, which were ordered printed as treaty documents
for the use of the Senate (Treaty Doc. 111-1 through 111-4). The Senate
gave its advice and consent to one treaty with one condition, and one
declaration to the resolution of advice and consent to ratification.
Executive Reports and Roll Call Votes
There was one executive report relating to a treaty ordered printed
for the use of the Senate during the first session of the 111th
Congress (Executive Report 111-1). The Senate conducted 38 rollcall
votes in executive session, all on or in relation to nominations.
Executive Communications
For the first session of the 111th Congress, 7,072 executive
communications, 84 petitions and memorials and 39 Presidential messages
were received and processed.
Environmental Impact
In an effort to save money and eliminate unnecessary paper, the
Executive Clerk reduced the copies of nominations printed for the
committees by 95 percent. All but one committee allows the paperwork to
be transmitted by e-mail, decreasing the need for duplicate paper
copies.
LIS Update (Projects)
The staff consulted with the Senate Computer Center during the year
concerning ongoing improvements to the LIS pertaining to the processing
of nominations, treaties, executive communications, presidential
messages and petitions and memorials.
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 content of the Senate Journal is governed by Senate
Rule IV. The Senate Journal is published each calendar year, and in
2009, the Journal Clerk completed the production of the 964 page 2008
volume. It is anticipated that work on the 2009 volume will conclude in
June 2010.
The Journal staff take 90-minute turns at the rostrum in the Senate
chamber, noting the following 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 rollcall votes taken), (v)
amendments submitted and proposed for consideration, (vi) bills and
joint resolutions introduced, and (vii) concurrent and Senate
resolutions as submitted. These notes of the proceedings are then
compiled in electronic form for eventual publication of the Senate
Journal at the end of each calendar year. Compilation is efficiently
accomplished through utilization of the LIS Senate Journal Authoring
System. The Senate Journal is published each calendar year.
Continuity of Operations (COOP)
In 2009, in continuing to support the Office of the Secretary's
commitment to continuity of operations programs, the Journal Clerk
required the daily Minute Book pages to be scanned into a secure
directory. Additionally, the files are copied onto a flash drive
storage device weekly and transported off-site each night. Although the
actual Minute Books for each session of a Congress are sent to the
National Archives the year following the end of a Congress, having
easily-accessible files, both on a remote server and on portable
storage device, will ensure timely reconstitution of the Minute Book
data in the event of damage to, or destruction of, the physical Minute
Book.
Preparations undertaken by the Office of the Journal Clerk in
support of continuity of Chamber operations in anticipation of H1N1
pandemic helped to strengthen overall COOP procedures. Such
preparations included successful testing and exercise of remote work
capabilities using Senate-provided equipment and accessing servers
through public computers of those functions not requiring physical
attendance in the Chamber.
official reporters of debates
The Office of the Official Reporters of Debates is responsible for
the stenographic reporting, transcribing, and editing of the Senate
floor proceedings for publication in the Congressional Record. The
Chief Reporter acts as the editor-in-chief and the Coordinator
functions as the technical production manager of the Senate portion of
the Record. The office interacts with Senate personnel on additional
materials to be included in the Record.
On a continuing basis, all materials to be printed in the next
day's edition of the Record are transmitted electronically and on paper
to the Government Printing Office (GPO).
Each day the Senate is in session roughly 90 percent of the
transcript of Senate floor proceedings and Morning Business is sent to
GPO electronically, permitting the Congressional Record to be viewed on
the Internet at approximately 7 a.m. every day.
The Official Reporters of Debate have placed continued emphasis on
cross training of personnel.
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,
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 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 Vice President of the United States and the staff
of the Vice President whenever he performs his duties as President of
the Senate.
The Parliamentarians serve as the agents of the Senate in
coordinating the flow of legislation with the House of Representatives
and with the President, and ensure that enrolled bills are signed in a
timely manner by duly authorized officers of the Senate for
presentation to the President.
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 time on the
floor of the Senate when time is limited or controlled under the
provisions of time agreements, statutes or standing orders. 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 3,298
amendments during 2009 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 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 2009, the
Parliamentarian and his assistants referred 3,482 measures and 7,193
communications to the appropriate Senate committees. The office staff
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. In 2009, as in the past, the parliamentarians conducted
several briefings on Senate procedure to various groups of Senate
staff, on a non-partisan basis.
During 2009, as has been the case in the past, the staff of the
Parliamentarian's Office was frequently called on to analyze and advise
Senators on a great number of issues arising under the Congressional
Budget Act of 1974, the Trade Act of 1974, the Congressional Review
Act, and many other provisions of law that authorize special procedural
consideration of measures.
During all of 2009, the parliamentarians were deeply involved in
interpreting the ethics reform proposals adopted in 2007, especially
the language dealing with earmark accountability and scope of
conference.
Since the election in 2008, all of the parliamentarians have
participated in orientation sessions for the newly elected and
appointed Senators, and have assisted each of them in their initial
hours as Presiding Officers. The parliamentarians also participated in
an orientation session on the Senate floor for Senate staff.
Throughout 2009, as is the case following each general election,
the parliamentarians received all of the certificates of election of
Senators elected or re-elected to the Senate as well as those Senators
appointed to fill vacancies, and reviewed them for sufficiency and
accuracy, returning those that were defective and reviewing their
replacements.
The parliamentarians have each been trained on and successfully
remotely accessed to the office's computers facilitating
communications, research, and other work after hours, enabling them to
have the office function during possible emergencies. The
Parliamentarian's Office continues to participate extensively in
emergency preparedness training for the Senate Chamber and has been
heavily involved with the Sergeant at Arms Office of Police Operations,
Security and Emergency Preparedness for years in the planning phases of
the Senate's evacuation and shelter-in-place procedures.
financial operations
disbursing office
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 offices of the United States Senate and
to members and employees of the Senate. 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, 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.
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.
Executive Office
The primary responsibilities, among others, of the Executive Office
are to:
--oversee the day to day operations of the Disbursing Office (DO);
--respond to any inquiries or questions that are presented;
--maintain fully and properly trained staff;
--ensure that the office is prepared to respond quickly and
efficiently to any disaster or unique situation that may arise;
--provide excellent customer service;
--assist the Secretary of the Senate in the implementation of new
legislation affecting any of her departments; and
--handle all information requests from the Committee on
Appropriations and the Committee on Rules and Administration.
After finalizing procedures and requirements to stand up the
Congressional Oversight Panel established by the Emergency Economic
Stabilization Act of 2008, Public Law 110-343, Disbursing continues
reporting to the U.S. Department of the Treasury the amounts incurred
by the panel on a monthly basis. Disbursing continues to work with the
Committee on Rules and Administration, the House of Representatives,
and the U. S. Treasury on funding of the panel.
As in previous years, the Financial Clerk and the Assistant
Financial Clerk continue to attend Legislative Branch Financial
Managers Council (LBFMC) meetings to share issues that affect other
Congressional managers. In addition, the Financial Clerk and the
Assistant Financial Clerk, along with key Disbursing Office staff and
the Sergeant at Arms (SAA) technical support staff, completed the
requirements and participated in vendor demonstrations for the
procurement of a new payroll system. The new payroll system has been
selected, and Disbursing and the SAA are now in the process of
selecting a payroll system integrator through an open competition. The
selection is anticipated to be made by the end of March with the
expectation to begin implementation early this summer.
Disbursing, in coordination with the Committee on Rules and
Administration, worked on the collection of excess mileage
reimbursements for privately owned vehicles (POV) paid to staff between
January and April 2009. The office prepared letters to all affected
staff and notified them of the excess mileage and the options they had
to pay it back, processing all the checks received and making the
deposit to each office account. For those that did not pay it back by
the stipulated date, adjustments were made to their W-2s for calendar
year 2009.
In addition to the regular work derived by a new election cycle at
the beginning of each session of Congress, additional letters for
displaced staff were necessitated for Senate staff working for Senators
filling several cabinet positions. Towards the end of the fiscal year,
Disbursing handled matters related to the resignation of Senator Mel
Martinez and the death of Senator Edward M. Kennedy.
Under the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act for 2010, Public
Law 111-68, an administrative provision to change the distribution
method for the Report of the Secretary of the Senate was approved. The
provision requires the Report be published and publicly posted online
by the end of the 112th Congress. Meetings and discussions have started
with the Office of the Secretary of the Senate, the Committee on Rules
and Administration and the Government Printing Office (GPO). During the
next few months, a project plan and timeline will be developed to meet
the mandated deadline.
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. The deputy also coordinates the
interaction between the Front Office, Employee Benefits, and Payroll
Sections, and is responsible for the planning and project management of
new computer systems and programs. The deputy 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 and information for use in all
three sections.
General Activities
The staff worked to assist incoming and outgoing members and staff
personally. There was need for extensive research relating to various
administrative situations (e.g. contested elections, resignations to
accept cabinet posts, transition of Senators to vice president and
president, chairmanship changes, etc.).
After the year-end processing of payroll for calendar year 2008 was
completed, the Disbursing Office issued W-2 forms promptly and made
them immediately available to Disbursing Office staff on the document
imaging system (DIS). During March and April, the delayed cost of
living adjustment (COLA) was administered and processed over two cycles
to accommodate the ``retroactive'' portion of that COLA. Throughout the
year, other minor changes were made to the Human Resources Management
System (HRMS) as a result of changes in regulations, policies and
needs.
The Disbursing Office, in tandem with SAA Technical Support,
continued research and procurement of a new payroll system. Staff
diligently assessed current system requirements and parameters as well
as requirements and parameters for a new system. The staff continued to
work with the SAA Technical Support group and the contractors to draft,
edit and modify current and future system requirements. Staff drafted
specific and technical scripts for two series of vendor demonstrations
as well as methods for ranking results. Staff attended several day-long
demos and interacted with vendors to determine system capabilities.
Specific attention was paid to how the vendors would accommodate the
Senate's unique requirements, laws and regulations governing the
services and programs administered by the payroll system. After
extensive coordination, feedback and assessment, a software selection
was made. During the early part of 2010, the Disbursing Office and SAA
will begin the process of selecting a new system integrator through an
open competition.
As part of continuing efforts to achieve full continuity of
operations compliance, the office requested an upgrade to the DIS.
Needed and desired programming modifications were identified,
documented, developed and tested during 2009. Final implementation took
place late in 2009. The system now has increased functionality and
provides greater flexibility of use. Post system implementation follow-
up and trouble-shooting are currently in process. Procedures to take
advantage of the increased functionality will be developed and
implemented in 2010.
Several pieces of legislation passed in 2009 required action and
administration by the Disbursing Office. The Economic Stimulus package
provided for Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHB) Premium
Assistance for Federal employees who were displaced from their jobs.
Staff worked to draft guidance and information for affected employees
and implement procedures within the office and with Office of Personnel
Management (OPM) and the National Finance Center for administration of
this new provision. Also passed was a provision to supplement the pay
of Federal employee reservists who were placed in leave without pay
(LWOP) due to a call to active duty. Although OPM and Department of
Defense (DOD) guidance on implementation of this provision was slow in
coming, staff worked extensively with OPM and the affected employees to
ensure that we were prepared for implementation as soon as practicable.
Also passed, was a provision for credit of Federal Employees Retirement
System (FERS) sick leave upon retirement. The legislation was assessed
and guidance was issued by this office within the parameters of
established policies and procedures. Additionally, legislation which
allowed for Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) agency contributions to begin
immediately upon hire took effect during the summer. Staff worked with
the SAA Technical Support group and determined system requirements and
made programming modifications to accommodate this change.
Informational guidance was drafted and distributed to affected staff.
Front Office--Administrative and Financial Services
The Front Office is the main service area for all general Senate
business and financial activity. The Front Office staff maintains the
Senate's internal accountability of funds used in daily operations. The
reconciliation of such funds is executed on a daily basis. The Front
Office staff also 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 Senators, 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. Advances are issued to Senate
staff authorized for official Senate travel. Cash and check advances
are entered and reconciled in Web FMIS. After the processing of
certified expenses is complete, cash travel advances are repaid.
Numerous inquiries are handled daily, ranging from pay, benefits, taxes
and voucher processing, to 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. The Front Office maintains the Official Office
Information Authorization Forms that authorize individuals to conduct
various types of business with the Disbursing Office.
General Activities
Processed approximately 1,000 cash advances, totaling approximately
$700,000 and initialized 1,200 check/direct deposit advances, totaling
approximately $900,000;
Received and processed more than 23,600 checks, totaling over
$1,700,000;
Administered oath and personnel affidavits to more than 2,800 new
Senate staff and advised them of their benefits;
Maintained brochures for 14 Federal health insurance carriers and
distributed approximately 4,000 brochures to new and existing staff
during the annual Federal Benefits Open Season; and
Provided 32 training sessions to new administrative managers.
The Front Office continues its daily reconciliation of operations
and strengthening of internal office controls. Security devices were
tested and some were replaced with more modern equipment. Training and
guidance to new administrative managers and business contacts continued
and was enhanced by the revamping of training materials that were
provided to newly authorized personnel. A large number of committee
leadership changes prompted a major increase in the number of S. Res. 9
certifications. This required additional processing of documentation
necessary to execute the continuance of compensation to certified
employees. The Front Office successfully processed over 1,400 such
payments.
Due to the reimbursement of mileage for POV over the Internal
Revenue Service (IRS) maximum allowable rate, the Front Office received
and documented over 550 cash returns related to the overpayment of
previously processed POV vouchers. Front Office staff received many
positive comments regarding the use of the DIS, which immediately
reproduces W-2 forms and other documents for employees who request
duplicates. As more information was imaged into the DIS, more inquiries
were able to be processed immediately. Several pieces of legislation
were passed during 2009 that affected Senate employee's deductions and
benefits. The adoption of these new regulations created many inquiries
from Senate staff. Front Office staff continued assisting employees in
maximizing their 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,
committees 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 is
responsible for the administration of the Senate Student Loan Repayment
Program (SLP) and for the audit and reconciliation of the Flexible
Spending Accounts (FSAs) and Federal Employees Dental and Vision
Insurance Program (FEDVIP) bill files received each pay period. 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
electronically to all Senate offices twice a month. The Payroll Section
issues the proper withholding and agency contribution reports to the
Accounting Department and transmits the proper TSP information to the
National Finance Center. In addition, the Payroll Section maintains
earnings records, which are distributed to the Social Security
Administration and employees' taxable earnings records, which are used
for W-2 statements. This section is also responsible for the payroll
expenditure data portion of the Report of the Secretary of the Senate
and calculates, reconciles and bills the Senate Employees 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
In January 2009, the Payroll Section conducted all year-end
processing and reconciliation of pay records and produced W-2 forms for
employees and state tax agencies, which are also maintained in the DIS.
The Payroll Section maintained the normal schedule of processing TSP
election forms.
In March 2009, an employee COLA of 4.78 percent was authorized and
administered. Because the language afforded a retroactive COLA, the
salary changes were administered over both March and April. Statutory
rates and program caps were updated in HRMS.
The Payroll staff participated extensively in the selection of a
new payroll system. They provided job and task summaries, records of
reports and system output, and attended numerous strategy sessions to
determine current system requirements as well as future system
requirements. Staff attended and reviewed numerous vendor
demonstrations and participated in the drafting of demo scripts.
The Payroll Section administers the SLP, which includes initiation,
tracking and transmission of the payments, determination of eligibility
and coordination and reconciliation with office administrators and
program participants. The program is very popular and participation
remains high. The SLP Administrator continues to improve processes for
administration of the program and document procedures.
In 2009 Senate travelers were allowed to repay the excess amount of
POV mileage reimbursement that exceeded the IRS maximum. For those that
did not repay, the overpayments needed to be reported as taxable
income. The Payroll Section staff was required to research and
implement processes and program modifications to accommodate the
reporting of several hundred mileage overpayments on the 2009 W-2s.
As a result of the 2008 elections, the Payroll Section provided
assistance and guidance to the offices of numerous incoming and
outgoing Senators, as well as the President and Vice President-elects.
The payroll group also assisted Senator Edward M. Kennedy's staff upon
his death. In addition, the Disbursing Office staff looked into the
specifics of applicable Senate resolutions to determine their impact,
if any, on outgoing and potentially outgoing staff in order to ensure
that current procedures allowed for the proper administration of the
resolutions and provided guidance to staff on those resolutions.
Employee Benefits Section (EBS)
The primary responsibilities of the Employee Benefits Section are
administration of health insurance, life insurance, TSP, 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
the Federal Flexible Spending Account (FSA) Program, the Federal Long
Term Care (LTC) Insurance Program and FEDVIP. 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. It also verifies the
accuracy of the information provided and reconciles, as necessary, when
official personnel folders and transcripts of service from other
Federal agencies are received. 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 to perform
military service. EBS participates fully in the Centralized Enrollment
Clearinghouse System (CLER) Program sponsored by OPM to reconcile all
FEHB enrollments with carriers through the National Finance Center. EBS
is responsible for its own forms inventory ordering and maintenance, as
well as all benefits, TSP, and retirement brochures, for the Disbursing
Office. EBS processes employment verifications for loans, bar exams,
the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), OPM, and 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), retirement, and unpaid
compensation are filed and checked by EBS.
General Activities
The year began with EBS finalizing retirement estimates and
processing many retirement cases associated with outgoing Senators and
their staffs, as well as those staff on committees who were affected by
the changes. Many regular retirement, death, and disability cases were
also processed throughout the year.
After the 2008 elections, EBS met with all new Senators to go over
benefit choices available to them. New members appointed numerous
employees from the House and the Executive Branch, and many other
employees left with their outgoing members, many of whom were appointed
to positions in the Executive Branch. This resulted in a significant
increase in the number of appointments to be researched and processed,
retirement records to be closed out, termination packages of benefits
information to be compiled and mailed out, and health insurance
enrollments to be processed. Transcripts of service for employees going
to other Federal agencies, and other tasks associated with employees
changing jobs were at a high level this year. These required prior
employment research and verification, new FEHB, FEGLI, FSA, FEDVIP,
CSRS, FERS and TSP enrollments, and the associated requests for backup
verification. Also EBS counseled many employees who were affected by
these employment changes. In addition, transcripts of service for the
110 Capitol Guide Service employees transferred to the payroll of the
Architect of the Capitol were prepared and forwarded in early 2009.
Many employees changed health plans during the annual Benefits Open
Season. These changes were processed and reported to carriers very
quickly. This year, the Disbursing Office again offered 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. The Disbursing Office also hosted an Open
Season Benefits Fair, which was informational and well attended. The
Benefits Fair included representatives from local and national FEHB
plans, as well as representatives from LTC, FSA and FEDVIP.
The year saw many benefits and retirement changes due to changes in
laws and regulations. EBS interpreted the legislation as it applied to
their administration, determined policies and procedures and provided
guidance or informational material where needed. Public Law 111-5
provided for ``premium assistance'' for the continuation of health
insurance for employees who lost their jobs. Public Law 111-8 provided
for the non-reduction in pay for Reservists and National Guard members
who were called to active duty. Public Law 111-31 enhanced the TSP to
immediately eliminate the waiting period for new employees to receive
agency matching contributions. Public Law 111-84 allowed for several
retirement changes, of greatest impact was the availability of credit
for unused sick leave under FERS, the repayment of refunds under FERS,
and the expansion of the class of retirees eligible for the actuarially
reduced annuity under CSRS. The LTC program offered extensive program
and premium changes, which required many enrollees to make an
alternative coverage decision, which required assistance from EBS.
EBS conducted agency-wide seminars on CSRS and FERS and attended
interagency meetings as a result of the many ongoing changes to the TSP
Program. EBS participated in a number of meetings and presentations
with potential payroll system contractors to try and determine the best
fit for our needs.
Disbursing Office Financial Management
Headed by the Deputy for Financial Management, the mission of this
group is to coordinate all central financial policies, procedures, and
activities; to process and pay expense vouchers within reasonable
timeframes; 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, and 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
two functional departments: Accounting and Accounts Payable. The
Accounts Payable Department is subdivided into three sections: Vendor
(formerly Senate Automated Vendor Inquiry, also known as SAVI),
Disbursements and Audit. The Accounting Department is subdivided into
two sections: Budget and Accounting. The Deputy coordinates the
activities of the functional departments, establishes central financial
policies and procedures, and carries out the directives of the
Financial Clerk and the Secretary of the Senate.
As part of its continuity of operations (COOP) plans, the
management visited the Alternate Computing Facility (ACF) on several
occasions during the year to make sure the location was operational and
adequately stocked. Additionally, the Deputy was able to log in
remotely to accomplish a few predetermined tasks, and to assess the
viability of performing more sensitive and complicated tasks in the
future.
Accounting Department
During 2009, the Accounting Department approved 53,537 expense
reimbursement vouchers (an increase of 2,322 vouchers, or 5 percent,
over the previous year) and 26,972 certification and vendor uploads,
processed 2,170 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 (an increase of 820
deposits, or 61 percent, over the previous year). Of the increase of
820 deposits, 559 (or 41 percent) are attributed to the POV
reimbursement, which resulted from the overpayment of POV rates.
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 continues to scan 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 two Web FMIS
releases. The Accounting Department requested that some of its manual
prepared reports be made into Web FMIS reports. One of the reports, the
General Ledger Account Relationship Reconciliation, and a Status of
Committee Funding report were developed for the fall 2009 release and
made it into production in January 2010.
During January 2009, the Accounting Department completed the fiscal
year 2008 year-end process to close and reset revenue, expense, and
budgetary general ledger accounts to zero. Currently, Accounting is in
the process of testing the closing of fiscal year 2009 accounts which
is expected to be done in the production environment the second week-
end in February.
The Department of the Treasury's monthly financial reporting
requirements includes 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 of 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 10 months' worth
of 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. In November, the Accounting Department was set up in the
IRS Electronic Federal Tax Payment System, or EFTPS, and made the
November and December Federal withholding tax payments electronically
through this system. EFTPS will also be used to transmit the 2009
fourth quarter 941 report to the IRS. The department also performed
quarterly reporting to the 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. System modifications installed in 2008 that allow automated
clearing house (ACH) payment of quarterly state taxes has resulted in a
50 percent participation rate by taxing jurisdictions. Numerically, 21
of 42 tax jurisdictions are receiving their quarterly state tax
payments via ACH. The remaining 21 tax jurisdictions require a one-time
``Pre-Note'' to be transmitted prior to making ACH payments. The
Accounting Department is working to get the remaining 21 tax
jurisdictions set-up for ACH. 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 is working with the IT Department and SAA
Technical Support Staff to research the feasibility of electronically
distributing these reports.
The Accounting Department, in conjunction with the Deputy for
Financial Management and the Assistant Financial Clerk, continues to
work closely with the SAA Finance Department in completing a new draft
of the Senate-wide financial statements for fiscal year 2008 in
accordance with OMB Bulletin 01-09, ``Form and Content of Agency
Financial Statements'' and any updates required by OMB Circular A-136,
``Form and Content of the Performance and Accountability Reports''.
Work to finalize the implementation of the fixed asset system
continues. Statements and other issues and priorities are discussed in
monthly accounting meetings.
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. Because of a continuing
resolution and a change in Administration in fiscal year 2009, the
budget justification worksheets for fiscal year 2010 were mailed to the
Senate accounting locations and processed in February and March 2009.
The budget baseline estimates for fiscal year 2010 were reported to OMB
by mid-March. The budget analyst is also responsible for the
preparation of 1099 forms and the prompt submission of forms to the IRS
before the end of the January.
Accounts Payable: Vendor Administration (formerly Senate Automated
Vendor Inquiry Section)
The Vendor Administration 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, which was
previously known as SAVI. SAVI was decommissioned, and the vendor
tracking system was incorporated into Web FMIS. This section also
assists the Information Technology (IT) department by performing
periodic testing and by monitoring the performance of the vendor
system, including the conversion from SAVI to Staffer Functionality in
Web FMIS. Currently, more than 17,300 vendor records are stored in the
vendor file, in addition to approximately 10,000 employee records.
Daily requests for new vendor addresses or updates to existing vendor
information are processed within 24 hours of receipt. Besides updating
mailing addresses, the section facilitates the use of ACH by switching
the mode of vendor payment from paper check to electronic deposit.
Whenever a new remittance address is added to the vendor file, a
standard letter is mailed to the vendor requesting tax and banking
information, as well as contact and e-mail information. If a vendor
responds indicating they would like to receive ACH payments in the
future, the method of payment is changed.
The conversion from SAVI to Staffer Functionality was done in 2008,
but SAVI was not decommissioned until 2009 as some offices still had
records in the old system. All Web FMIS users are using the Staffer
Functionality exclusively, and new offices are automatically
established with it. 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
for system user identification and passwords and for the reactivation
of accounts. Employees may also request an alternative expense payment
method. Employees can choose to have their payroll set up for direct
deposit or paper check, but can have their expenses reimbursed by a
method that differs from their salary payment disposition.
The Vendor section works closely with the A/P Disbursements group
to resolve returned ACH payments. ACH payments are returned
periodically for a variety of reasons, including incorrect account
numbers, incorrect routing numbers, and, in rare instances, a
nonparticipating financial institution.
During 2009, the Vendor section processed over 2,600 vendor file
additions, completed more than 4,370 service requests, mailed
approximately 2,000 vendor information letters, and converted more than
650 vendors from check payment to electronic payment. The increased
activity in service requests stemmed from an unusually large number of
14 new offices. The Vendor section electronically scans and stores all
supporting documentation of existing vendor records and new vendor file
requests. When this section receives replies asking for ACH
participation, the vendors are asked if they wish to be notified by e-
mail when payments are sent. Currently, over 2,600 of the 3,200 ACH
participants also receive e-mail notification of payment. Scanning and
e-mail reduce the need for paper and envelopes.
The Vendor section sent out 530 Web FMIS information e-mails to
assist the IT department with the Staffer Functionality conversion. A
mass mailing was sent to our 88 landlords, and 30 of them were
converted to ACH payment as a result.
Accounts Payable: Disbursements Department
The Disbursements Department is the entry and exit point for
voucher payments. The department physically and electronically receives
all vouchers submitted for payment. It also pays all of these vouchers,
as well as the items submitted by upload and the various certifications
and adjustments that are submitted periodically. The department
received 153,000 vouchers and paid an additional 26,000 uploaded
expenses. All of these items were paid by the department via Treasury
check or ACH. Multiple payments to the same payee are often combined.
As a result, 22,600 checks were issued, while 62,780 ACH payments were
required. The decreased check volume and increased ACH volume is a
desired result as the department continues its efforts to substantially
reduce reliance on paper checks.
The checkwriter system was upgraded and is now incorporated into
Web FMIS. The new functionality allows greater ease of access to
payment schedules for COOP purposes, but still maintains the security
necessary to prevent unauthorized use of the system. Payment schedules
may be retrieved, but payments cannot be made without proper
authorization.
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. Files are maintained in-house for the current period and two
prior periods, as space is limited. Older documents are stored in the
Senate Support Facility (SSF). The inventoried items are sorted and
recorded in a database for easy document retrieval. Several document
retrieval missions were successfully conducted, and the department
continues to work closely with warehouse personnel. Approximately 3,000
vouchers involving POV travel needed to be retrieved to validate POV
overpayments. Additionally several trips to the SSF were necessary to
pull documents to meet the request of offices.
A major function of the department is to prepare adjustment
documents. Adjustments are varied, and include 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 ACH. The department maintains a spreadsheet that
tracks cases of non-receipt of salary checks, including stop payment
requests and re-issuances.
While experiencing an increase in ACH payments, Disbursing also
experienced an increase, though small, in the number of ACH returns.
Returns are usually the result of receiving incorrect account or
routing information and are easily corrected with payee contact. Some
returns result from account closings or non-participating financial
institutions and, while a bit more difficult; these items are resolved
either by receiving updated information or simply converting the
payment to a check.
The department also prepares the stop payments forms as required by
the Department of the Treasury. Stop payments are requested by
employees who have not received salary or expense reimbursements, and
vendors claiming non-receipt of expense checks. This year, the PACER
system was replaced by the Treasury Check Information System (TCIS).
TCIS allows the department 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 2009, over 500
requests were received for check copies. TCIS saves the Disbursing
Office a $7.50 processing fee for each request, is Web-based, and is
accessible from multiple workstations in Disbursing.
Accounts Payable: 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. Travel advances must be repaid within 30 days of
trip completion, and petty cash advances must be repaid whenever new
funding authority is established. Web FMIS accommodates the issuance,
tracking, and repayment of advances. It also facilitates the entry and
editing of election dates and vouchers for Senators-elect to ensure
compliance of Senate Rules. In addition to other functionality, an
advance type of petty cash was created and is in use. Regular petty
cash audits are performed by the section and all petty cash accounts
were successfully audited in 2009.
The Accounts Payable Audit Section processed more than 152,600
expense vouchers in 2009, as well as 26,400 uploaded items. Audit
sanctioned more than 83,000 vouchers under authority delegated by the
Senate Committee on Rules and Administration. This translates to
roughly 13,800 vouchers processed per auditor, and 27,600 vouchers
posted per authorized sanctioner. 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 are expected to be paid
within 8 to 10 business days. In 2009, the average for Committee on
Rules and Administration sanctioned items was 6 days and the average
for Disbursing sanctioned items was 4 days.
Uploaded items are of two varieties: certified expenses and vendor
payments. Certified expenses have been around since the 1980's, and
include items such as stationery, telecommunications, postage, and
equipment. Currently, the certifications include mass mail, franked
mail, excess copy charges, Photography 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 used to pay vendors for the Stationery Room,
Senate Gift Shop and state office rentals, and refund security deposits
for the Senate Page School. The methodology is roughly the same as that
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, which is consistent with the general policy of paying
rent in advance.
The Disbursing Office has sanctioning authority for vouchers of
$100 or less, subject to post-payment audit by the Committee on Rules
and Administration. These vouchers comprised approximately 54 percent
of all vouchers processed and are usually paid within 5 business days.
As in the previous year, Disbursing passed two post-payment audits
performed by the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, and no
exceptions were found.
The Accounts Payable Audit Group provided training sessions in the
use of new systems, the process for generation of expense claims, and
the permissibility of expenses; and participated in seminars sponsored
by the Secretary of the Senate, the SAA, and the Library of Congress.
The section trained eight new administrative managers and chief clerks
and conducted four 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 new
hardware, software, and system applications. Web FMIS 2009-1 and 2009-2
were implemented, testing continued for a voucher imaging prototype,
testing began for electronic invoicing, and all employee numbers have
now been completely converted to a non-Social Security Number format.
Web FMIS 2009-1 concerned the addition of certification language on
vouchers, and field additions to the expense summary report, all of
which save time for voucher preparers and auditors. This will also be
helpful for the imaging and digital signature functionalities. Now that
initial testing for imaging and electronic invoicing has been
completed, discussions have begun in 2010 to revisit these initiatives.
Digital signature functionality is essential for imaging to proceed.
Information regarding laws and current and past practices has been
gathered, so the next phase is to hold meetings with all concerned
parties.
One of the major benefits of electronic invoicing is a reduction of
paperwork and postage, as the need for separate mailings of individual
bills is not necessary. It also fits well into imaging. Major benefits
of imaging are a reduction in paperwork as well as the elimination of
physically receiving paper documents.
The major functionality for Audit in Web FMIS 2009-2 was the
creation of a Web-based contract tracking module to replace an existing
legacy system. In addition to incorporating the data into the new
system, additional functionality was established so that all AP Audit
staff can access the system from their own workstations. Contracts can
now be monitored and linked to their respective purchase orders and
funding periods.
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
Web FMIS which is used by staff in 140 Senate accounting locations
(i.e., 100 Senate personal offices, 20 committees, 20 leadership and
support offices, the Office of the Secretary of the Senate, the SAA,
the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration Audit section, and the
Disbursing Office). The group consists of six full time staff.
Responsibilities of the department include:
--supporting current systems;
--testing infrastructure changes;
--maintaining contact with system users to ensure their needs are
met;
--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 Disbursing Office is the ``business owner'' of FMIS and is
responsible for making the functional decisions about FMIS. The SAA
Technology Services staff is responsible for providing the technical
infrastructure, including hardware (e.g., 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.
The office utilizes the support of a contractor, along with the SAA who
are responsible for operational support and application development.
The three organizations work cooperatively.
Highlights of the year include:
--implemented three releases of FMIS, including the first release of
WebPICS, which provides a Web-based front end to ADPICS plus
additional functionality that is being used by the SAA staff;
--tested infrastructure changes that included upgrades to the
mainframe operating system (Z/OS), the database (DB2), and Web
Sphere;
--supported the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration's post
payment audit of a statistically valid sample of vouchers of
$100 or less;
--upgraded PC software throughout the Disbursing Office; and
--conducted monthly classes and seminars on Web FMIS.
Supporting Current Systems
IT supports Web FMIS users in all 140 accounting locations, the
departments in the Disbursing Office (e.g., Accounts Payable (A/P),
Accounting, Disbursements, Vendor Administration 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 such as those for database access
optimization;
--Security--maintain user rights for all ADPICS, FAMIS, and Web FMIS
users;
--System administration--design, test and make entries to tables that
are at the core of the system;
--Support of accounting activities--perform functional testing and
production validation of the cyclic accounting system
activities. This includes rollover, the process by which tables
for the new fiscal year are created, and archive/purge, the
process by which data for the just lapsed fiscal year are
archived for reporting purposes and removed from the current
year tables;
--Support the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration post
payment voucher audit process--provide the data from which the
Committee on Rules and Administration audit staff selects a
statistically valid sample of vouchers for $100 or less. In
this way, the Committee on Rules and Administration audit staff
review vouchers sanctioned under authority delegated to the
Financial Clerk; and
--Training--provide functional training to all Senate FMIS users.
Testing Infrastructure Changes
The SAA provides the infrastructure on which FMIS operates,
including the mainframe, the database, security hardware and software,
and the telecommunications network. Activities for changes to the
infrastructure include testing of all functionality prior to
implementation and validating critical functionality post
implementation. During 2009, the SAA implemented two major upgrades to
the FMIS infrastructure. In addition, the SAA made regular micro-code
updates, operating system ``maintenance'' releases, and maintenance for
the virtual tape library.
Maintaining Contact With System Users to Ensure Their Needs
are Met
Communicating with our large user base is critical to providing the
service that we provide. IT meets on a regularly scheduled basis with
representatives from Accounting, A/P, and the SAA. In addition, IT
meets with user groups as it gathers requirements for new
functionality. Meetings are advertised, and users self-select to
participate. This year, IT met with the administrative managers, chief
clerks and their staff who prepare expense summary reports (ESRs) to
discuss changes to the data entry for the ESRs; and SAA users who
prepare requisitions, or who approve requisitions to discuss the
functionality to be addressed in the first phase of ``WebPICS'', a Web-
based front end to ADPICS with additional functionality developed to
address SAA user needs.
The administrative manager, chief clerk and ESR users pointed out
the need for an ``itinerary wizard'' that would assist travelers enter
an itinerary correctly. As a result, IT will develop a new ESR
interface that enables travelers to enter expenses by date and have the
system rearrange them into the four expense categories required by the
Committee on Rules and Administration. This strategy will also build
the itinerary based on the information provided. The functionality will
be developed during 2010 and is scheduled to be implemented on a pilot
basis in the FMIS 2010-2 release in the summer of 2010.
WebPICS functionality for the SAA requisition and approver users
was developed during 2009, and delivered in FMIS 2010-1, which was
implemented in January 2010.
Managing and Testing New System Development
During 2009, IT supervised development, performed extensive
integration system testing, and implemented changes to FMIS subsystems.
The implementation and production verification activities were
completed over a weekend in order to minimize system downtime to users.
Since 2006, multiple sub-system upgrades have been consolidated into
two or three releases each year. This reduced the amount of regression
testing required. In order to accurately reflect the variety of changes
in each release, the releases are now numbered by fiscal year. During
2009, Disbursing implemented the following three major releases:
--FMIS r2009-1, implemented in March 2009;
--FMIS r2009-2, implemented in August 2009; and
--FMIS r2010-1, implemented in January 2010.
In addition, IT worked on functionality that will be included in
future releases, of which one, the FMIS Imaging Product Analysis is
especially important.
FMIS 2009-1
FMIS 2009-1 was implemented in March 2009. The major new
functionality delivered in this release related to the following four
things:
--Web FMIS reports, including the document print;
--Improved document search features;
--Real-time e-mail notification; and
--Changes to the Expense Summary Report (ESR).
The Web FMIS reports were re-written to provide such functionality
such as drill downs from the summary level report to voucher detail
level reports and to retire obsolete hardware and software. Additional
report changes with this release included (1) adding a new unallocated
subtotal at the end of the summary reports, so that the unbudgeted
figure would be more clearly visible, and (2) defining the commuting/
mass transit expense category codes as non-payroll expenses.
The improved document search feature enabled searching on more
criteria (e.g., a range of dates) and enabled printing documents from
the search criteria. Using the search function to print documents
created today with a single button click on ``today's documents'' was
especially well received by the user community.
The release included real-time e-mail for two functions: e-mail
notification to a staffer that an ESR had been returned and e-mail
notification to Disbursing requesting that a User ID be established for
a staffer. Prior to this release the notification was done as part of
the overnight batch process. Bringing these into real time solved two
different problems. For the ESR return, it eliminated confusion for the
staff getting an e-mail notice in the morning that an ESR had been
returned when s/he may have already resolved the issue with the ESR the
afternoon before. For the User ID request, it enabled Disbursing to
respond more quickly to requests for establishing staff User IDs.
The changes to the ESR were originally requested by the SAA Finance
staff, but were applicable to all offices and include fields for
providing additional information, such as the dollar amount of a travel
advance, any charges that were paid on the office credit card, and a
field for the signature of an office-level approver. It also corrected
a problem with the calculation of POV mileage by requiring the entry of
mileage in whole miles only.
FMIS 2009-2
FMIS 2009-2 was implemented in August 2009. This release included a
small number of enhancements for WebFMIS users, but was focused on
implementing new functionality for the Disbursing staff, including:
--Contract tracking--this functionality brings information previously
tracked in a database into WebFMIS, with the added bonus that
staff at the Committee on Rules and Administration can view the
same information;
--ADPICS document viewers--this functionality enables Disbursing
staff to see, via Web FMIS, information on documents created in
ADPICS, including requisitions, purchase orders and invoices.
For the Disbursing A/P staff, these documents can be supporting
documentation to a voucher;
--The advance-related Web FMIS reports used by Disbursing were
rewritten in new software;
--Changes to the checkwriter software--these changes enabled us to
integrate the checkwriter functionality into WebFMIS; and
--Refresh several security pages used by the WebFMIS system
administrators.
Three items composed the major new functionality for Senate offices
delivered in this release, including:
--display of an additional category (``unallocated'') on the budget
summary shown on users' home page, which matched the changes to
the subtotals on the summary reports implemented in the prior
release;
--implementation of four new queries that are available as of prior
months in the Reports/Reconciliation function, and as of now in
the Reports/Main List function:
--Certifications (Total):
--Payroll (Total);
--Documents Posted to FAMIS (DO Total);
--Documents Posted to FAMIS (Office Total); and
--implementation of eight new reports, the first four of which were
especially appreciated by administrative managers:
--Traveler Summary by Month;
--Cross fiscal year Summary by Location;
--Cross fiscal year Summary by Month;
--Cross fiscal year Historical Projections;
--Payroll and Non-Payroll Summary by DC vs. State Office;
--Committee--Payroll and Non-Payroll Summary by Party and Location;
--Committee--Payroll and Non-Payroll Summary by Location and Party;
and
--Leadership--Cross fiscal year Summary by Appropriation.
FMIS 2010-1
FMIS 2010-1 was originally scheduled for implementation in December
2009, but was moved to January 2010 in order to provide more testing
time for the WebPICS functionality. This release included a small
number of enhancements for WebFMIS users, but was focused on
implementing the first of three planned releases for WebPICS. The
WebPICS project enables SAA users to access ADPICS functionality
through a web-based front end, and provides additional functionality,
such as a robust search function. The SAA follows a structured
procurement process that includes creating requisitions, creating
purchase orders from requisitions, receiving goods, entering invoices,
and creating vouchers from purchase orders. For many years, the SAA has
used ADPICS, a mainframe system, to perform these activities. This was
especially difficult for occasional users. Using a variety of
technologies, the WebPICS project replaces use of ADPICS with access to
user-friendly web pages. This release focused on the needs of
requisitioners and requisition approvers, who are occasional users, and
included:
--a robust requisition search function, through which a user can find
a requisition, its related purchase order, any change orders,
and the document's history, by entering minimal information,
such as the create date, the commodity code used, by whom it
was created or the department for whom it was created;
--links to purchase orders via a viewer that formats mainframe data
into web pages;
--a streamlined requisition create function that displays data from
multiple ADPICS screens on three tabs--basic information on the
header tab; what is being requested and who will pay for it
(i.e., commodity information, commodity specifications, and the
accounting information) on the items tab; and additional
information for the vendor on the terms tab;
--a streamlined requisition change order function that shows, on the
same page, the old information and the new information;
--look-up tables for selecting, rather than entering, information
such as commodity codes and accounting codes when searching for
and creating requisitions; and
--use of the existing Web FMIS inbox to identify, check out, view,
and approve or reject requisitions.
A pilot of SAA requisitioners and requisition approvers began using
WebPICS in early January. Based on feedback from users involved in the
acceptance testing as well as a few others who have seen the new
application, the SAA staff is excited about using WebPICS. Additional
users will be trained beginning in February; all requisitioners should
be using the new functionality by the summer of 2010. The second
release will focus on the SAA Accounts Payable process (e.g., receipt
of goods, invoice processing and approval, voucher creation, and
approval). The third release will focus on purchase order creation and
approval.
The functions in the 2010-2 release for WebFMIS users included:
--an automated password reset feature available for all users--by
selecting and answering security questions users who forget
their passwords will be able to reset their passwords and
receive the temporary password via e-mail;
--online travel expense summary report (ESR) and the 60-day
moratorium rule for ESR users--the online travel ESR will warn
staffers when their travel expenses violate the 60-day
moratorium;
--graphs on summary reports for administrative manager and chief
clerk users--four of the summary reports now display two pie
charts of information; the first shows payroll vs. non-payroll
expenditures; the second pie chart shows six pieces of non-
payroll expenditures: the top five non-payroll expense
categories and one with all other expense categories combined;
and
--electronic invoicing for credit card charges for use by
administrative manager and chief clerk users--with this release
we have begun a pilot of making credit card invoices received
electronically from the Senate's credit card vendor available
via Web FMIS for use in easily creating vouchers. This
functionality is similar to the ESR ``import'' functionality
and users are able to select some or all charges and create a
voucher with minimal typing.
FMIS Imaging Product Analysis
During 2008, Disbursing implemented a prototype imaging system in
which paper vouchers and supporting documentation were imaged by
Disbursing staff and routed electronically. The hands-on experience of
this prototype was especially useful in refining system requirements.
The work begun in 2009 and to be completed in 2010 revolved around
selecting software for the image database and image viewer, and to
finalize imaging and electronic signature requirements. During 2010
this information will be used in planning necessary software purchases
and coordinating with a separate SAA smart card ID project. The smart
cards will be used for electronic signatures.
Planning
The Disbursing IT department performs two main planning activities:
--Schedule coordination--planning and coordinating a rolling 18-month
schedule; and
--Strategic planning--setting the priorities for further system
enhancements.
Schedule Coordination
In 2009, this department continued to hold two types of meetings
between Disbursing and the SAA to coordinate schedules and activities.
These were:
--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., archive/purge meetings
and Web FMIS budget function meetings); and
--technical meetings--a weekly meeting 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
18-month timeframe of the technical meeting schedule. It is designed to
set the direction and priorities for further enhancements. In 2002 a
strategic plan was written by the Disbursing 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, this will implement new technology, including imaging
and electronic signatures, in order to reduce the Senate's
dependence on paper vouchers. This will enable the continuation
of voucher processing operations from an alternate 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.
We have almost completed these objectives and during 2009 held
meetings to ``envision the future.'' The implementation of a new
payroll system will require substantial changes to current systems,
including the interface from payroll into the General Ledger (FAMIS) of
payroll expenditures and projections, the interface from the payroll
system into the master vendor file (in FAMIS), and the payroll reports
provided to the offices via Web FMIS. Additionally, Disbursing is
beginning to investigate the issues around replacing the Senate's
General Ledger and procurement systems (FAMIS and ADPICS) with software
that runs on a server instead of a mainframe.
Managing the FMIS Project
The responsibility for managing the FMIS project was transferred to
the Disbursing IT department during the summer of 2003, and includes
developing the task orders with contractors, overseeing their work and
reviewing invoices. In 2009, the following two new task orders were
executed:
--Service Year 2010 extended operational support, which covers
activities from September 2009 to August 2010; and
--FMIS Imaging Product Analysis, which will help Disbursing determine
what software will be used for paperless voucher processing,
including managing images, viewing images, annotating images
and reading smart cards, which will have a component of the
electronic signature.
In addition, work continued under three task orders executed in
prior years:
--Imaging and signature design and electronic invoicing enhancement
continuation;
--Web FMIS reporting enhancements; and
--Service year 2009 extended operational support (covered activities
from September 2008 to August 2009).
Administering the Disbursing Office's Local Area Network
(LAN)
Disbursing continued to administer its own local area network
(LAN), which is separate from the network used by the rest of the
Secretary's Office. It is used by over 50 staff. Upkeep of the LAN
infrastructure, including performing routine daily tasks and replacing
equipment regularly, is critical to providing services. During 2009,
LAN administration activities included:
--maintaining and upgrading the Disbursing Office's LAN;
--installing specialized software; and
--maintaining projects for the payroll and benefits section.
Maintaining and Upgrading the Disbursing Office LAN
Disbursing maintained the existing workstations with appropriate
upgrades including:
--upgrading PC software on Disbursing Office desktop and laptop
computers;
--installing a client/server version of Reveal, software used to view
mainframe reports;
--installing new laptops for COOP users; and
--managing seven blackberry devices.
Installing Specialized Software
During 2009, the IT staff transitioned its processes to Senate-
supplied software, which improved efficiency and improved communication
with the SAA technical staff. The improved processes include:
--Problem Reporting.--Began using new software to report problems
with FMIS, improving the IT staff's efficiency; the SAA staff
testing WebPICS were able to enter their own problem reports.
--Migration Management.--We began to use an electronic review/
approval function in SharePoint for management of documents
relating to migration of software (e.g., the DO approval for
software to be migrated from acceptance to production). This
required establishing a one-way trust to the SAA domain for
access to a server available to the SAA, our support vendor,
and now the DO staff.
Maintaining Projects for Payroll and Employee Benefits
Sections
Disbursing continued to support the Payroll/Benefits imaging system
developed by SAA staff. This system electronically captures and indexes
payroll documents submitted at the front counter, and is critical for
the Payroll and Employee Benefits sections. During 2009, a new version
of this software was installed. In addition, IT worked with the SAA
Network Operations staff to establish point-to-point security for
access to CLER, a benefits validation service.
Coordinating the Disbursing Office's Disaster Recovery
Activities
In prior years, the Disbursing Office and the SAA have conducted a
FMIS-only disaster recovery test during the year. As in previous years,
the 2009 test was scheduled to include fail-over of our systems to the
ACF, activity at the ACF, and a new activity, fail-back of the changed
production data. This testing did not occur during 2009, but Disbursing
anticipates testing will occur in August 2010.
administrative offices
chief counsel for employment
The Office of the Senate Chief Counsel for Employment (SCCE) is a
non-partisan office established in 1993 at the direction of the Joint
Leadership 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), as amended, Senate
offices became subject to the requirements, responsibilities and
obligations of twelve employment laws. The CAA also established the
Office of Compliance (OC). Among other things, the OC accepts and
processes legislative employees' complaints that their employer has
violated the CAA.
The SCCE is charged with the legal defense of Senate offices in all
employment law cases at both the administrative and court levels. Also,
on a daily basis, the SCCE provides legal advice to Senate offices
about their obligations under employment laws. Accordingly, each Senate
office is an individual client of the SCCE, and each office maintains
an attorney-client relationship with the SCCE.
The areas of responsibilities of the SCCE can be divided into the
following categories:
--Litigation (defending Senate offices in courts and at
administrative hearings);
--Mediations to resolve lawsuits;
--Court-ordered alternative dispute resolutions;
--Union drives, negotiations, and unfair labor practice charges;
--Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) compliance;
--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 Senate employing offices 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.
Compliance with the OSHA and the ADA
The CAA mandates that, at least once each Congress, the OC shall
inspect each Senate office to determine whether each office is in
compliance with the OSHA and the public accommodation portion of the
ADA. The CAA authorizes the OC to issue a public citation to any office
that is not in compliance.
The SCCE provides legal assistance and advice to each Senate office
to ensure that it is complying with the OSHA and the ADA. The SCCE also
represents each Senate office during the OC inspections and advises and
represents each Senate office when a complaint of an OSHA or ADA
violation is filed against the office or when a citation is issued.
In 2009, the SCCE pre-inspected 4,976 Senate rooms to ensure that
Senate offices are complying with the ADA and the OSHA. Inspections
included all member offices in the Hart, Dirksen and Russell buildings,
and offices and work spaces of other buildings used by the Office of
the Sergeant At Arms and the Office of the Secretary of the Senate.
The SCCE is very proud of the safety record in the Senate offices.
During 2009, the enthusiasm and participation of Senate offices in
SCCE's safety pre-inspection program resulted in 64 Senators receiving
Safe Office Awards for perfect safety records. Other Senate offices had
no significant OSHA or ADA problems.
Management Training Regarding Legal Responsibilities
The SCCE regularly conducts legal seminars for the managers of
Senate offices to assist them in complying with employment laws,
thereby reducing their liability.
In 2009, the SCCE gave 90 legal seminars to Senate offices,
including, among others:
--The Congressional Accountability Act of 1995: Management's Rights
and Obligations;
--Laws You Must Follow When Setting Up and Managing Your Office;
--Understanding Sexual Harassment in the Workplace;
--Dealing with Harassment Complaints and Avoiding a Hostile Work
Environment;
--A Manager's Guide to Complying with the Family and Medical Leave
Act;
--Hiring the Right Employee: Advertising and Interviewing;
--Avoiding Legal Landmines in Your Office 2009; and
--Military Service Academies Interview Training.
The SCCE also conducted a series of monthly seminars covering all
major employment laws that govern Senate offices. The SCCE just
completed its second year of this widely-attended seminar series. The
purpose of the seminars is to educate all Senate management staff about
their responsibility to ensure that their respective offices comply
with the CAA. The series is open to all chiefs of staff, staff
directors, administrative directors, chief clerks and office managers.
Individuals who complete the series receive a certificate of completion
signed by the Secretary of the Senate. The following topics were
covered:
--An Overview of the Congressional Accountability Act;
--$1,000 Fine Per Employee: Is Your Office Meeting Its Legal
Obligations Under the I-9 & E-Verify Laws?;
--Overtime Pay: Who is Owed It, and How is It Calculated?;
--Diversity in the Workplace: Lessons Learned from Dunder Mifflin;
--He Interviewed So Well . . . And Then We Saw His Facebook Page: How
to Interview and Check the Backgrounds of Job Applicants;
--The Family and Medical Leave Act: When Do Employees Get FMLA Leave,
and How Much Do They Get?;
--Evaluating, Disciplining, and Firing Employees without Violating
the Law;
--The Americans with Disabilities Act: What Managers Must Know about
Complying with the Law;
--You Can't Act that Way in Our Office: Dealing with Harassment
Complaints and Avoiding a Hostile Work Environment; and
--Common Employment Law Mistakes Managers Make.
The SCCE, working with Chiefs of Staff and Administrative Directors
of member offices, created and added new content to its Web site
targeted exclusively to chiefs of staff, staff directors,
administrative directors and chief clerks of incoming members to
facilitate the opening of the new members' offices in compliance with
employment laws. The Web site was used extensively.
Legal Advice
The SCCE meets daily with members, chiefs of staff, administrative
directors, office managers, staff directors, chief clerks and counsel
at their request to provide legal advice. For example, on a daily
basis, the SCCE advises Senate offices on matters such as interviewing,
hiring, counseling, disciplining and terminating employees in
compliance with the law; handling and investigating sexual harassment
complaints; accommodating the disabled; determining wage law
requirements; meeting the requirements of the Family and Medical Leave
Act; management's rights and obligations under union laws and the OSHA;
and management's obligation to give leave to employees for military. In
2009, the SCCE had over 3,428 client legal advice meetings.
Also, the SCCE provides legal assistance to Senate offices to
ensure that their office policies, job descriptions, interviewing
guidelines and performance evaluation forms comply with the law. In
2009, the SCCE prepared or significantly revised 154 policy manuals for
member offices.
Union Drives, Negotiations and Unfair Labor Practice Charges
In 2009, the SCCE provided guidance to managers and supervisors
regarding their legal and contractual obligations under union
contracts.
Environmental, Cost and Space Savings
In 2001, the SCCE became the first Senate office to convert to a
``paperless'' office, which has greatly reduced paper usage by
minimizing the need for copying documents and storing hard copies. In
2009, the SCCE undertook a new project to further benefit the
environment, cut costs, and clear office space. This project involved
eliminating 50 percent of the office's hard copy legal books and
reference documents through a combination of scanning and converting to
electronic books. In addition to benefiting the environment, this
project resulted in a cost savings of over $6,000 annually and freed
129 square feet of valuable office space.
conservation and preservation
The Office of Conservation and Preservation develops and
coordinates programs directly related to the conservation and
preservation of Senate records and materials for which the Secretary of
the Senate has statutory authority. Initiatives include:
deacidification of paper and prints, phased conservation for books and
documents, collection surveys, exhibits, and matting and framing for
the Senate Leadership.
For the past 26 years the Office of Conservation and Preservation
has bound a copy of Washington's Farewell Address for the annual
Washington's Farewell Address ceremony. In 2009 a volume was bound and
read by Senator Mike Johanns.
Senate Library
As mandated in the 1990 Senate Library Collection Condition Survey,
the office continued to conduct an annual treatment of books identified
by the survey as needing conservation or repair. Conservation of a
7,000 volume collection of House hearings start that same year, and in
2009 conservation treatments were completed for 70 volumes of the
collection. 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 staff will continue preservation of the remaining
3,583 volumes.
The Office of Conservation and Preservation staff assists the
Senate Library with technical issues involving books being sent and
returned from the Government Printing Office's (GPO) Library Binding
section. The Senate Library sent 468 books to the Library Binding
section for binding. The GPO has been returning books to the Senate
Library on schedule.
Conservation and Preservation assisted the Senate Library with one
exhibit located in the Senate Russell building basement corridor. In
addition, the staff assisted the Curator's Office with preparing for
the installation of Henry Clay in the U.S. Senate in the East Brumidi
Stairway.
Preservation
The Office of Conservation and Preservation staff completed 173
volumes of House and Senate hearings and Congressional Records for the
Senate Library. These books were rebound with new end sheets and new
covers using the old spines when possible.
Objectives for 2010
Continue with the preservation work on the approximately 3,600
remaining volumes of the of House committee hearings collection in the
Senate Library. Monitor the temperature and humidity in the Senate
Library storage areas and other Senate collection storage areas.
Continue training six Senate Library staff members for repairing
Senate Library materials at the warehouse. The six Senate Library staff
are showing progress in book repair.
Begin work on fifteen old books in the Office of the Senate Curator
collection that require phased box conservation for storage.
Continue training the Assistant Conservator in conservation
techniques of books and paper. The Assistant Conservator is steadily
progressing in learning these conservation techniques.
Continue to update aging equipment in the office.
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 Curator collects, preserves, and
interprets the Senate's fine and decorative arts, historic objects, and
specific architectural features; and the Curator exercises supervisory
responsibility for the historic chambers in the Capitol under the
jurisdiction of the Commission. Through exhibitions, publications, and
other programs, the Curator educates the public about the Senate and
its collections.
Collections: Commissions, Acquisitions, and Management
A painting of Senator Trent Lott by artist Steven Polson was
unveiled in the Old Senate Chamber on September 16, 2009, as part of
the Senate Leadership Portrait Collection. A portrait of Senator Bill
Frist is underway and will be unveiled in 2010.
One hundred and four objects were accessioned this year into the
Senate collection, including four Senate Chamber gallery passes; 69
artifacts from the 2009 Presidential Inauguration; 15 examples of pins
from the Secretary of the Senate's Service Award program; tickets from
various Joint Sessions of Congress held during the 1st session of the
111th Congress; an envelope franked by Senator Charles Sumner; two
stereo views of the Supreme Court Chamber (when the Court met in what
is now the Old Senate Chamber); tickets from the Senate Nomination
Hearing for Sonia Sotomayor as Associate Justice of the Supreme Court
of the United States; and an historic porcelain shaving mug once used
by Senator Frederick George Payne of Maine in the Senate's barber shop.
Forty-one new foreign gifts were reported in 2009 to the Select
Committee on Ethics and deposited with the Curator on behalf of the
Secretary of the Senate. The Office maintains 240 foreign gifts, which
are catalogued and maintained by the office in accordance with the
Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act. Appropriate disposition of 38
foreign gifts was completed following established procedures.
Implementation of a plan to provide expert care for the Senate's
collection of historic clocks began in 2009. A clock expert conducted
on-site maintenance for the clocks, starting with those in greatest
need of care. By December 2009, all of the working clocks had received
general maintenance, except for two that received complete
conservation, and two others scheduled for conservation in 2010.
In 2008 the office conducted a comprehensive survey of original
Russell Senate Office Building furniture located in Senate spaces of
the Capitol and Senate office buildings. The survey resulted in the
identification and location of 1,133 furnishings made for the Senate's
first office building. Of particular interest to Senators and staff are
the flat-top desks, 60 of which are still in use today. In 2009 the
office launched a yearly desk survey program to document the occupant
of each desk. Results are recorded in a database and can be easily
queried for interested Senators and staff. In addition, the search for
Russell furniture located in private collections, museums, and
libraries continued: a total of 56 furnishings (18 more than last year)
were identified.
Following conservation treatment, nine Senate collection objects,
eight historic Russell furniture pieces, and the painting, Henry Clay
in the U.S. Senate, by Phineas Staunton, were professionally
photographed for documentation, disaster preparedness, use on
Senate.gov, and publications promoting the Senate's collections.
The last phase of an environmental monitoring program in the two
Curator storage rooms of the Capitol Visitor Center (CVC) was completed
with the addition of electronic monitors. The monitors record
temperature and relative humidity in the rooms and send alarms when the
environment exceeds the desired temperature and humidity ranges.
Environmental monitors are already present in the Curator spaces in the
Capitol and the Senate Support Facility. Unlike the old paper system of
recording temperature and humidity, these new monitors gather data
remotely and more frequently. In addition, the monitors send out alarms
to staff who can then immediately address the conditions or problems.
The environmental monitors are critical in protecting and preserving
the Senate's collections and maintaining proper storage environments.
The Curator's Office continued to work with CVC project staff and
Architect of the Capitol (AOC) representatives to resolve problems in
the new CVC storage spaces. In June, the AOC determined that the HVAC
equipment installed in the storage rooms was not capable of meeting
environmental requirements and needed replaced. The design for new
equipment is underway, and installation is expected to be completed by
summer 2010.
Keeping with scheduled 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 session), the office
submitted inventories of the art and historic furnishings in the Senate
to the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration. The inventories,
which are submitted every 6 months, are compiled by the Curator's
Office with assistance from the Senate Sergeant at Arms (SAA) and AOC's
Senate Superintendent.
The office focused attention on the protection of the Senate's
historic mirror collection. A plinth program was instituted, so now all
mantel mirrors de-installed for conservation are outfitted with a
protective plinth. By raising the mirrors from the mantels and creating
a larger footprint, the plinths shield the mirror frames from spills,
damage from objects displayed on the mantels, and routine dusting. To
date, 10 mirrors have been furnished with plinths that meet the new
design standard. The office also outlined display guidelines to better
protect the mirrors, and cleaned four mirrors.
The Curator's staff created a first-of-its-kind Senate fragment
collection. Examples of such objects being considered for the
collection include various carpet and curtain samples, fireplace
inserts and removed state seals from the Leadership suites, This new
collection preserves original, unique, significant, and informative
objects that are removed from the Capitol. The collection will serve as
a resource for future research, enhance knowledge of the Senate, and
heighten understanding of the architecture, ornamentation, and
decoration of the Capitol.
Conservation and Restoration
The complex conservation treatment required to restore the
monumental painting, Henry Clay in the U.S. Senate, by Phineas
Staunton, was completed in May 2009. The painting and frame were then
reassembled in the conservation studio for the first time in more than
50 years. Created in 1865 for a competition it did not win, the
portrait is one of three known paintings showing the Senate meeting in
the Old Senate Chamber. It subsequently fell into obscurity until 2006
when it was rediscovered in a New York historical society storage area
scheduled for renovation and then donated to the Senate. In order to
access the Capitol, the frame was disassembled and carried up the East
Front steps separately from the canvas. Final assembly took place on a
scaffold-supported platform in the East Brumidi stairwell, where the
painting is now prominently displayed. As part of the project, custom
lights were fabricated and installed in the stairwell to create optimum
viewing of the painting from the second floor landing.
In addition to the regular maintenance required to keep the
Senate's historic clocks working properly, conservation treatment is
occasionally necessary to thoroughly clean all working parts and
replace material that has worn away. A condition assessment completed
in 2008 identified those clocks in greatest need of treatment to
prevent serious damage from occurring. Two clocks, the Simon Willard
gallery clock purchased for the Supreme Court in 1837, and the mahogany
floor clock purchased for the President's Room in 1887, were conserved
in 2009. The Willard clock is particularly historic, and research into
the lore surrounding the clock's significance as a timepiece for the
justices is ongoing in the Curator's Office, to support its
interpretation for the public.
Continuing to address the most critical conditions in the 94
mirrors that compose the Senate's mirror collection, the office
completed conservation treatment of four mirrors. The frames required
comprehensive conservation: structural issues were repaired;
inappropriate previous work was removed; losses were filled; and the
gesso, a plasterlike substance used to prepare surfaces for coatings,
was cleaned, repaired, and gilded. In order to minimize the impact to
offices caused by sending mirrors out for conservation, the Curator's
Office acquired two suitable contemporary reproduction mirrors to fill
the voids. Senate offices appreciated this solution and it has helped
conservation scheduling.
Historic Preservation
The Senate's historic preservation program, established 10 years
ago, seeks to formulate a solid preservation policy reflective of the
Senate's interests and the need to preserve the Capitol's historic
fabric and historical artistic intent. Through various initiatives, the
preservation program has positioned itself as a valuable resource for
the Senate, ensuring that all projects are carefully considered and
weighed in light of sound preservation practices.
The Curator's Office continued to work closely with the AOC and the
SAA to review, comment, plan, and document Senate side construction
projects (many of which are long-term initiatives) that involve or
affect historic resources. Construction and conservation efforts that
required considerable review and assistance included: the Brumidi
corridor mural conservation and scagliola conservation. Through this
work, the Curator's Office was able to ensure that the highest
preservation standards possible were applied to all Capitol projects.
The staff also originated several building projects in order to
repair existing damage and minimize future loss. On the second floor,
the office worked with AOC craftsmen to repair areas of the historic
mosaic floor tile that were missing. The holes created by the missing
tiles resulted in a situation where tiles continued to become dislodged
by carts and other foot traffic at an alarming rate. The in-kind
replacement restored the aesthetic of the floor and stopped the loss of
significant building fabric. Similarly, the Curator's Office worked
with the AOC shops to construct a picture rail in the Strom Thurmond
Room in order to protect the Senate's last remaining example of a 1900
wall canvas. Prior to the installation of the picture rail, which was
custom designed to be minimally intrusive, the wall canvas was
routinely damaged by picture nails.
In response to longstanding concerns about the appearance of and
wear to public spaces and reception areas, Curator's Office formed a
working group to identify the causes of incidental damage and devise
workable solutions. The group is using the Lyndon B. Johnson Room as a
pilot space. The group is also looking at various utilitarian items in
public spaces in an attempt to refine the aesthetic of the building.
The challenging Senate Reception Room restoration and
rehabilitation project, developed by the Senate Curator and the AOC
Curator, has successfully moved forward. Following paint analysis,
large exposures of the original trompe l'oeil and Greek key patterns
were revealed in an effort to determine the extent of remaining
original paint, its condition, and the ability to remove the overpaint.
The Senate Reception Room Advisory Board met in July to consider the
issues and offer recommendations. During testing performed on the gold
elements in the room, the staff discovered that the decorative
plasterwork was originally gilded with brilliant, shiny gold leaf. The
gilded surfaces are undergoing treatment testing to determine the best
course of action. Aside from looking at the wall decoration, the
Curator considered the state of the Reception Room furniture. A
condition assessment of the eight historic benches purchased in 1899
for the room was completed, and the desk and cabinetry in the adjacent
stair landing are being redesigned to improve functionality and
appearance.
At the 2009 meeting of the Senate Curatorial Advisory Board, the
staff presented the panel with several restoration issues related to
the Old Senate Chamber. Board members responded with invaluable advice
on the historic nature of the room, and its importance as an historic
restoration and as a cultural icon for the American people and the U.S.
Senate. This feedback will provide a sound basis for the Curator to
develop long-term strategies and policies for the future
interpretation, preservation, and management of this historic space.
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. The office staff worked closely with the U.S.
Capitol Police to continue procedures developed to record the after-
hours access to the historic chambers by current members of Congress.
Fifty-eight requests were received from current members of Congress for
after-hours access to the Old Senate and Old Supreme Court Chambers.
By order of the U.S. Capitol Police, the Old Senate Chamber was
closed to visitors after September 11, 2001. However, in February 2009,
the Senate Leadership (as Leaders of the Senate Commission on Art)
approved the opening of the room to Capitol Guide and staff-led tours
during week days. For the last 7 years the Old Senate Chamber was only
open to the public when the Senate was in recess for a week or more.
The re-enactment swearing-in ceremonies for Senators elected during
the 111th Congress were of special significance in the Old Senate
Chamber. In addition, various filming occurred in the historic chambers
throughout the year for educational projects. Of particular interest
was the filming in the Old Supreme Court of certain scenes for the
Seventh Circuit Bar Association in Chicago, Illinois, for a symposium
titled Abraham Lincoln--His Legal Career and His Vision for America.
Chief Justice John Roberts provided the narration of the Supreme Court
case Lewis v. Lewis, which was argued in the room by Abraham Lincoln in
1849.
Loans To and From the Collection
A total of 57 historic objects and paintings are currently on loan
to the Curator's Office on behalf of Senate leadership and offices in
the Senate wing of the Capitol. The staff returned four loans,
coordinated 13 new loans, and renewed loan agreements for 37 other
objects. 19 loans are projected to be renewed next year.
For the 2009 Inaugural Luncheon, the Curator's office facilitated
the loan of the New-York Historical Society's painting by Thomas Hill,
entitled View of Yosemite Valley, to the Joint Congressional Committee
on Inaugural Ceremonies. The Curator's staff was also responsible for
coordinating the loan of the Lincoln Table from the Massachusetts
Historical Society, the Eagle Podium from the Daughters of the American
Revolution, and the Lincoln Bible from the Library of Congress for the
Inaugural Luncheon.
The official Senate chinaware was inventoried and used at 23
receptions for distinguished guests, both foreign and domestic. The
Secretary's china was inventoried and used at seven receptions. It was
used for the Inaugural luncheon.
Publications and Exhibitions
In March of 2009, offices of the Secretary of the Senate and AOC
came together to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the Richard B.
Russell Senate Office Building. Several initiatives planned for the
event were unveiled, including: the installation of informational
panels at locations throughout the building highlighting the social and
architectural history of various spaces; a publication and poster on
the historic furnishings; an exhibition in the Russell basement rotunda
showcasing nine restored original furnishings; various merchandise
available at the Senate Gift Shop; as well as lectures and tours. The
office also published an extensive exhibit on Senate.gov featuring
hundreds of historic images of the Russell building and its
construction from the collections of the AOC, Library of Congress, and
Senate Historical Office. The exhibit traces the construction progress
as documented by official photographers, and presents various aspects
of life in the building during its early years.
A second major Web exhibit educates the Senate community and the
public about the history, rediscovery, and conservation of the
monumental painting Henry Clay in the U.S. Senate by Phineas Staunton.
The Web site details the history of this significant portrait, and
contains interactive links to lead the viewer through the ``before''
and ``after'' phases of restoration as well as a thorough comparison of
``then'' and ``now'' images of the historic Old Senate Chamber, the
setting for the painting. The site also features a 20-minute video
documentary about the painting and its restoration, produced by the
Curator's Office in conjunction with the Senate Recording Studio and
Senate Photographic Studio.
The Curator's staff updated the Senate Chamber Desk Web site with
the new map for the first session of the 111th Congress, as well as
posting maps for all recently appointed Senators. In addition, 261
historic chamber seating maps (26th Congress to 106th Congress) from
the Congressional Directory were added to the site with the assistance
of the Senate Library; and two new stories were developed: A Record-
Setting Filibuster by Strom Thurmond, and Thomas Constantine,
Cabinetmaker.
Unveiling and artifact pages were created for the paintings of
Senators Daschle and Lott; an online exhibition was posted highlighting
the Senate's collection of 72 Senate Chamber gallery passes dating back
to 1890; a feature exhibit was completed on the Senate Leadership
Portrait Collection; and staff contributed to the Joint Congressional
Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies Web site by providing information on
the painting borrowed for the 2009 Inaugural Luncheon also on
Senate.gov.
The office staff worked with the Government Printing Office (GPO)
to develop a comprehensive series of exhibit signs for the Hart
Building atrium to interpret Alexander Calder's Mountains and Clouds.
The signs will be fabricated and installed in 2010.
Five brochures were updated and reprinted during 2009: The U.S.
Senate Appropriations Committee; The U.S. Senate Foreign Relations
Committee; The Old Senate Chamber, 1810-1859; The U.S. Senate
Republican Leader's Suite; and The Vice Presidential Bust Collection.
As part of an ongoing program to provide more information about the
Capitol and its spaces, GPO created digital files of the new
publications and added them to the Senate's Web site.
At the direction of the Committee on Rules and Administration, the
Curator's staff supervised the fabrication and installation of a bronze
plaque outside Room 713 of the Hart Senate Office Building, the former
office of Senator Barack Obama, commemorating his Senate service. This
plaque is similar to five other plaques previously placed in the
Russell Senate Office Building to identify the offices of Senators who
later became President. Also at the request of the Rules Committee, and
pursuant to S. Res. 53, the office commissioned a bronze plaque
honoring the work of African-American slaves in building the U.S.
Capitol. The plaque will be installed in the third floor east front
connecting corridor of the Senate wing, where a portion of the
Capitol's original 1800 exterior wall can be seen.
Collaborations, Educational Programs, and Events
The Curator's staff assisted the National Archives again this year
with two exhibits for display in the vault at the Center for
Legislative Archives. Several objects from past Presidential Inaugural
Luncheons were installed, and in July, objects related to the Senate
Chamber went on display in honor of the room's 150th anniversary.
The Curator and staff assisted with numerous CVC-related projects
throughout the year. The Curator, Associate Curator, and Administrator
provided support for the Congressional Historical Interpretation
Program (CHIP), attending planning meetings and presenting lectures to
congressional staff at the 1-day and 2-day programs; assisted with
brief question and answer sessions to the Capitol Guides to better
inform them on Senate art and history; contributed to the development
of the new e-learning program; and at the request of the CVC oversight
for the Senate, the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration,
continued to work closely with the House Curator and AOC Curator to
review products and publications for the CVC gift shop.
Other joint congressional projects included planning and review for
the Rosa Parks statue and participating in the Slave Labor Task Force
Working Group assigned to develop solutions to Congress' recommendation
to honor slave labor in the Capitol.
The Senate Curator and staff gave lectures on the Senate's art and
historical collections to various historical groups and art museums.
The staff also assisted with the Secretary's Senate staff lecture and
tour series and were regular contributors to Unum, the Secretary's
newsletter.
Office Administration and Automation
In the area of file management, the Curator's staff continued work
on the electronic files by applying a new file matrix organization and
file naming protocols. This standardization and consistent records
collation will greatly improve the usability of the office resources,
streamline office record keeping, and enhance research efforts. The
office reviewed the video media collection and developed a disposition
plan to convert essential footage to standard preservation medium.
Additionally, the collection database was reviewed and assessed by an
outside contractor which resulted in a reconfiguration of the artist
database, updates to loans and inscriptions, and the creation of an
object maintenance table. This work will allow more efficient searching
capabilities, a stable database, and an easier way of transferring
information into reports.
In the area of continuity of operations (COOP) planning, all new
loan agreements were digitized in PDF format for easy retrieval off-
site, and a map noting the current location of loaned objects was
created to allow quick identification of loans that may be affected in
an emergency situation. The Curator's Office also greatly increased its
COOP-readiness through the assignment of remote desktop access for all
staff members. The office also participated in the Secretary's pilot
pandemic response tests in preparation for the full implementation of
the plan. In conjunction with this and COOP preparedness, the office
conducted several table top and work-at-home exercises to test
readiness.
The Curator's Office, in conjunction with the Office of Web
Technology, posted the newly redesigned Senate Art Web site. Visitors
to the site may now explore the Senate's art and historical
collections, online exhibits, and publications using an interface that
is more intuitive and that allows better access to Senate art
resources. In addition to being more user-friendly, the new site's
information architecture has been reconfigured to enable easier updates
and expansion, permitting the addition of more categories and enhancing
the ability to feature specific subject-related aspects of the
collections. For the first time, the more than 1,000 graphic art images
in the Senate collection are now available online.
Staff from the Office of Police Operations, Security and Emergency
Preparedness provided the Curator's Office with nine personalized
emergency training classes this year. The training enhanced staff
emergency preparedness skills, awareness, and readiness. The office
emergency action plan was updated and processed into the new format
required by the SAA, and new emergency action plans were created for
the office's two collection storage rooms in the CVC.
The 111th Congress Senate Curatorial Advisory Board was empanelled.
Two new and 11 returning members were welcomed at the first meeting
held in November. Composed of respected scholars and curators, this 13-
member board provides expert advice to the Commission on Art regarding
the Senate's art and historic collections and preservation program and
assists in the acquisition and review of new objects for the
collection.
Objectives for 2010
The Curator's staff will continue to confer with the AOC regarding
preservation issues related to Senate restoration and remodeling
projects, disseminate project information to the Senate, develop
preservation projects at the request of the Senate, conduct condition
inspections, and arrange necessary maintenance. The bulk of the
office's project management will involve advancing the restoration and
rehabilitation of the Senate Reception Room. Specific efforts to be
addressed in 2010 include updating the Senate Reception Room Advisory
Board and the Senate community on the wall decoration and gilding
treatment studies; working with the AOC to outline and implement a
treatment approach and schedule for the walls (paint and gilding);
conserving eight historic benches; and testing the functionality of
different furnishings. The Curator's staff will also work with the AOC
to devise a restoration treatment plan and schedule for the murals and
historic wall canvas in the Strom Thurmond Room. The office has
monitored this highly significant space for many years and now has the
opportunity to study the materials and outline a thoughtful course of
action to restore this lone remaining example of artist Elmer Garnsey's
1900 work in the Capitol.
Regarding the historic chambers, the Curator's Office will
undertake a review of the 1970s restoration efforts in the Old Senate
and Old Supreme Court chambers, looking at the decisions made, the
research conducted, and the restoration justifications. The
investigative findings will be placed within the context of 1970s
preservation philosophy but will be critiqued by current preservation
standards. This research project will greatly expand the staff's
knowledge of the historic chambers and will highlight areas for further
study. In addition, it will provide the basis for much needed paint,
plaster, and drapery repairs, tentatively scheduled for 2011, and will
help determine if there are opportunities for improving the
interpretation of the room.
The conservation and preservation of the Senate's collection
continue to be a top priority, and several projects are planned for
2010. Two of the Senate's most historic clocks are scheduled for
conservation treatment. Both the case and the clock mechanism of the
``Ohio'' tall case clock, purchased by the Senate in 1816, have
significant condition problems that will be addressed by a furniture
conservator and a clock expert. The 1846 architectural shelf clock
located over the door in the Old Senate Chamber is also scheduled to
receive treatment to ensure its continued operation.
Plans are underway to professionally conserve the recent additions
to the Senate Leadership Portrait Collection. Within a year or so of
completion, each portrait is carefully examined and cleaned of surface
dust, then given a final protective coating of varnish. Additionally,
the office will address critical frame (mirror and painting)
conservation priorities, focusing on on-site treatments. Staff also
will review the mirror files and bring them in line with established
collection recordkeeping standards.
The office will move forward with conservation treatment for the
inkwells and sanders in each of the 100 Senate Chamber desks. These
delicate artifacts date to about 1930 and are starting to show their
age--hinges are loose or broken, glass is cracked, and metal parts have
varying states of patina. Staff also will work with the SAA Cabinet
Shop to survey the writing tops of the Chamber desks and develop a
comprehensive plan for their repair and ongoing maintenance.
In 2011 conservation is planned for two of the Senate's most iconic
works of art in the Old Senate Chamber: the Eagle and Shield sculpture
and the portrait George Washington (Patriae Pater), by Rembrandt Peale.
In preparation, a detailed review of past treatments and analyses will
be undertaken in 2010. The Curator's Office will assemble a panel of
experts to guide the development of treatment goals for the painting
and sculpture, based upon findings from analyses conducted in 1998 and
2004, and conditions noted during previous conservation treatments.
With regard to future preservation, the office will work toward
developing and instituting procedures and policies for the refinishing
and protection of the historic Russell Office Building furnishings.
Preservation priorities will be based on findings identified by the
conservator during the 2008 Russell furnishings survey. The office will
work closely with the Committee on Rules and Administration, the AOC,
and the SAA on this initiative.
The Curator will continue efforts to locate and recover objects
associated with the Senate, specifically Senate Chamber gallery passes,
tickets to past inaugural events, and historic furnishings. In
addition, staff will continue efforts to identify Russell flat-top
desks outside the Senate, and where possible, return the desks to the
Senate. New works of art for 2010 will include the portrait of Senator
Bill Frist for the Senate Leadership Portrait Collection.
In the area of collections management, the office will review
photographs in the collections database to ascertain that each object
has a documentation photograph and that it meets required size
parameters. Standardizing image sizes is important to ensure the
functionality of the database.
Several publications and exhibitions are scheduled for 2010.
According to its enabling legislation, the Senate Commission on Art is
required ``at least every 10 years'' to publish as a Senate document a
list of all works of art, historical objects, and exhibits currently
within the Senate wing of the Capitol and the Senate Office Buildings.
The Curator's staff will work with GPO to publish this document.
Encompassing over 4,000 works of art and artifacts, the inventory
records the growth of the Senate collection over the last 10 years;
demonstrates the office's concerted effort to acquire objects that
enhance the collection; and provides a list of the entire collection.
The Curator's staff will begin work on a supplement to the United
States Senate Catalogue of Fine Art, highlighting the art collected by
the Senate since the catalogue was published in 2002. Also, with the
upcoming Gold Medal ceremony in honor of Constantino Brumidi, the staff
will work closely with other offices to develop exhibits, publications,
oral histories, and various lectures and tours.
Several other exhibitions are also planned. A new exhibit will
feature the 150th anniversary of the Civil War and replace the
inaugural exhibit in the Senate wing's first floor connecting corridor.
The exhibit will highlight items from the Senate's collections
illustrating the war and its impact on the Senate and the Capitol. In
conjunction with the Senate Library and Senate Historical Office, staff
will complete two exhibits outside the newly remodeled Dirksen G-50
hearing room, as requested by the Committee on Rules and
Administration. The exhibits will be placed in the showcases built into
the walls of the room's vestibule. One case will highlight Senator
Everett Dirksen, for whom the building was named; the other case will
feature the building--its origins, construction, and architectural
details.
Educational efforts also will focus on Senate.gov. Staff will
develop a decorative art section. Decorative art slated for inclusion
in this pilot project include gilded mirrors, historic clocks, and
Russell Building furniture. In addition, an online exhibition featuring
artifacts related to funerals held in the Senate Chamber will be
posted, along with an online exhibit dispelling myths and rumors often
heard about Senate art. A new Web section titled, ``Curator's Picks''
will feature the Curator's favorite works in the Senate collection.
Additionally, staff will design and outline an historic spaces section
for the Web site. This section will guide visitors through such
treasures as the Old Senate and Old Supreme Court Chambers, the
President's Room, and other significant historic spaces.
The office will continue to prepare for emergency situations that
may affect the collection by identifying local disaster recovery
companies to assist in the recovery of collection objects, as well as
finalizing a binder with disaster recovery procedures. In the area of
COOP preparedness, the office will conduct its annual table top
exercise and will train staff to use remote desktop access through a
series of work-from-home exercises.
education and training
The Joint Office of Education and Training provides employee
training and development opportunities for all Senate staff in
Washington, DC and the states. There are three branches within the
office: Technical Training, Professional Training, and Health
Promotion. The Technical Training branch is responsible for providing
technical training support for approved software packages and equipment
used in either Washington, DC 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 blood drives
every year.
Training Classes
The Joint Office of Education and Training offered 1,225 classes
and events in 2009, drawing 13,178 participants. The registration desk
handled over 25,000 e-mail and phone requests for training and
documentation.
In the Technical Training area 300 classes were held with a total
attendance of 1,077 students. An additional 425 staff received coaching
in 273 sessions on various software packages and other computer-related
issues. In the Professional Development area 302 classes were held with
a total attendance of 3,738 students. The staff managed or assisted the
Employee Assistance Program; Police Operations, Security and Emergency
Preparedness; Disbursing; and Committee on Ethics with 110 training
classes for 1,369 students.
The Office of Education and Training staff is available to work
with teams on issues related to team performance, communication, or
conflict resolution. During 2009, Professional Development met over 160
requests for special training and team building for 1,038 staff.
In the Health Promotion area, 2,535 staff participated in 53 Health
Promotion activities throughout the year. These activities included:
lung function and kidney screenings, eight blood drives, the Health and
Fitness Day and seminars on health related topics and the Annual Senate
Health Fair.
The Office of Education and Training provides an annual Senate
Service Expo for Senate office staff. This year 35 presenters from the
offices of the Secretary of the Senate, the Sergeant at Arms, the
Architect of the Capitol, the U.S. Capitol Police and the Library of
Congress provided an overview of their services to 230 staff.
Working with Leadership, the Senate Committee on Rules and
Administration and the Executive Offices of the Sergeant at Arms and
Secretary of the Senate, the Office of Education and Training assisted
in coordinating orientation sessions for the new Senators and their
staff.
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 2009,
three sessions of this program were attended by 171 state staff. Fifty-
eight state administrative managers and directors attended the State
Directors Forum, while 55 state staff attended a Constituent Services
Forum.
In addition to classroom based learning, the ``Virtual Classroom,''
which is an Internet-based training library of 3,000+ courses, is
available to Senate staff. To date, 350 state office and Washington, DC
staff have registered and accessed a total of 1,142 different lessons
and publications using this training option. Additionally, the office
offered 24 video teleconferencing classes, which were attended by over
624 state staff. Education and Training also provides 51 Senate-
specific self-paced lessons that have been accessed by an estimated
1,000 staff.
gift shop
Since its establishment in 1992 (2 U.S.C. 121d), the Senate Gift
Shop has continued to provide outstanding service and products that
maintain the integrity of the Senate while increasing the public's
awareness of its mission and 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.
Facilities
In addition to three physical locations, the Gift Shop has an
online presence on Webster, the Senate's Intranet. The Web site
currently offers an increasing selection of products that can be
purchased by phone, e-mail, or by printing and faxing the order form
provided on the site. Along with offering over-the-counter sales, walk-
in sales and limited intranet services, the Gift Shop Administrative
Office provides mail order service via phone or fax and special order
and catalogue sales via in person visit, e-mail, phone or fax.
The Gift Shop maintains two warehouse facilities. The bulk of the
Gift Shop's stock is held in the Senate Storage Facility (SSF), an
offsite warehouse. While the Senate Sergeant at Arms (SAA) is in charge
of the overall management of the SSF, 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.
The second Gift Shop warehouse is maintained in the Hart Building.
This facility serves as the point of distribution to the Gift Shop
store and the Capitol Gift Shop counter, both of which have limited
storage space. The Hart warehouse accommodates the Gift Shop's
receiving, shipping, and engraving departments, and also supplies the
inventory sold through the administrative and special order office.
Sales Activities
Sales recorded for fiscal year 2009 were $1,694,967.39. Cost of
goods sold during this same period was $1,278,890.29, accounting for a
gross profit on sales of $416,077.10.
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, 2009, the balance in the revolving fund was
$2,782,416.14. The inventory purchased for resale was valued at
$2,904,681.69.
Additional Activity
The Gift Shop participated in the 2009 U. S. Senate Environmental
and Energy Fair sponsored by the Architect of the Capitol (AOC).
Environmentally friendly products that were displayed included wooden
flag and desk boxes, wooden pens, custom designed wrapping paper
produced from recycled paper, biodegradable travel mugs and a travel
mug produced from 100 percent U.S. natural corn products.
In addition, the AOC installed energy efficient lighting in the
Dirksen store. The lights in both the ceiling fixtures and product
showcases were switched over to ``LED'' style bulbs.
Select Accomplishments in Fiscal Year 2009
Official Congressional Holiday Ornaments
This year marked the 16th year of the Congressional Holiday
ornament. Each ornament in the 2006-2009 series of unique collectables
depicts an image celebrating the day-to-day activities taking place on
the Capitol grounds. The four images of the series are based on
original oil paintings commissioned by the Gift Shop.
Sales of the 2009 holiday ornament exceeded 29,000 ornaments, of
which more than 5,606 were personalized with engravings designed,
proofed, and etched by Gift Shop staff. This highly successful effort
was made possible by the combined efforts of our administrative,
engraving, and store staff members.
Webster Intranet Site
The Gift Shop Web site was completely redesigned this year to
improve readability and to provide a more intuitive shopping
experience. The Web site continues to expand with the addition of new
merchandise which is professionally photographed by the Senate
Photography Studio. Product descriptions are written inhouse.
The Gift Shop staff contributes an article to each issue of the
Secretary's UNUM newsletter highlighting Gift Shop products. In turn,
the Web site links to the electronic version of the UNUM. This practice
has increased traffic to the site and may be responsible for an
increase in the use of the Gift Shop services by state offices.
Projects Recently Produced and New Initiatives for 2010
Bookmarks
Bookmarks depicting the art and architecture of the Old Senate
Chamber, Old Supreme Court Chamber and Ohio Clock were introduced in
2009. These historically significant bookmarks are fabricated in gold
plated metal and are embellished in enameled colors closely resembling
the authentic elements of each featured subject. The individual
packaging contains text highlighting the significant, historical and
architectural features of each bookmark.
Capitol Visitor Center
The Gift Shop provided the Capitol Visitor Center gift shops with a
wide variety of inventory, offered service when needed, and guided the
stores' management through the purchase order and invoice process. The
Gift Shops plans to continue providing the CVC with products that have
proven to be popular with their clientele.
Congressional Plate Series
The release of the 111th Congressional Plate in 2009 completes the
most recent four-plate Congressional series. Plans and specific designs
for a new 8 year, four-plate series of the 112th, 113th, 114th and
115th Congress are well under way. This new series will once again be
designed and produced by Tiffany and Company. The designs for the new
series will depict art and architecture from four of the most
historically significant rooms in the Capitol. The spaces include the
Senate Appropriations Room, Old Senate Chamber, Old Supreme Court
Chamber and President's Room.
Wilton Armetale
As a complement to the original metal service pieces created with
Wilton Armetale Company of Columbia, Pennsylvania, the Gift Shop has
added a new four compartment tray. This piece, as well as the rest of
the set, is decorated with the ``Brumidi Rinceau'' pattern replicating
the borders of a series of vignettes decorating the ceiling of the
Capitol's North Brumidi Corridor.
Russell Building ``Centennial'' Product
In conjunction with the Centennial Commemoration of the Russell
Senate Office Building, several new products with unique designs were
introduced. Ties depicting architectural shapes found in the lattice
and rosette patterns throughout the building, as well as a scarf
depicting the elegance of the sophisticated Beaux-arts style designs
have been introduced. The ties and scarf, both of which are 100 percent
silk, are exclusive to the United States Senate. In addition to the
ties and scarf, a series of small magnets and photo note cards were
produced, both containing images highlighting some of the more unique
interior and exterior design elements of the building.
President's Room Oblong Scarf and LBJ Room Square Scarf
Working with Echo Design Company of New Jersey, two new scarves
depicting art of the President's Room and LBJ Room were completed and
delivered. The President's Room scarf is an oblong shape and is adorned
with a fresco image detailing one of the many paneled walls of the
room. The LBJ scarf is square and depicts the entire ceiling fresco as
well as the unique architectural shape of the curved ceiling.
Senate Donkey and Elephant Ties
New Senate ties depicting whimsical donkey and elephant images were
designed and produced just in time for the 2009 holiday sales season.
The packaging includes a brief brochure which provides information
regarding the origins of the political donkey and elephant images.
Musical Jewel Box
The Gift Shop worked with the Splendid Music Box Company of New
York in 2009 to create a beautiful Senate music box depicting a highly
detailed image of the Capitol West Laylight. The laylight, designed by
the Philadelphia architect Thomas U. Walter, is located in the ceiling
of the grand staircase in the Senate wing of the Capitol. Designs for a
second, smaller box are in developmental stages and should be completed
sometime in 2010. The smaller box will depict a historical cutaway
architectural drawing of the Capitol.
Stemware
New designs of stemware etched with the were incorporated into our
crystal line in 2009. The three styles of glasses are unique and
environmentally friendly, as they are produced lead free and have
shatter-resistant properties.
Hand Towels
Working with Creative Arts Company of Idaho, the staff produced
high quality paper hand towels depicting images from the Brumidi art in
the Capitol. The towels are packaged in quantities of sixteen and
depict six panels of beautifully reproduced butterfly or bird frescos
that are part of the Brumidi corridors on the Senate side of the
Capitol.
Additional Products and Projects
Additional products that were either worked on or delivered in 2009
include new porcelain trays, night lights with Brumidi fresco designed
shades, table linens and napkins with Capitol art, two styles of Minton
tile boarder mirrors, children's activity books, puzzles for children
depicting images from the frieze of the Capitol, two new Tiffany
scarves, and a pocket map of the Capitol complex.
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 staff 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 historians keep extensive biographical,
bibliographical, photographic, and archival information on the more
than 1,900 former and current Senators. The staff 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 nearly all
former Senators. The Office staff develops and maintains all historical
material on the Senate Web site, Senate.gov.
Editorial Projects
Revised Senate Chamber Brochure
The Historical Office staff revised and redesigned the guide that
is given to visitors to the Senate Chamber. Previously, the booklet was
published each Congress and included the seating chart and committee
rosters, which increasingly resulted in publication delays. The seating
chart and committee rosters were removed, making the 16-page brochure a
timeless publication that can be distributed throughout each Congress.
The text has been updated, with new images added, including a labeled
photograph of the Senate floor that identifies the floor leaders,
officers, and staff at the dais. This effort will result in significant
savings, since print runs can be larger, at a lower price per copy, and
copies will no longer need to be discarded at the end of each Congress.
``Documentary Histories of the U.S. Senate''
In 2009, the Historical Office developed a new online documentary
history series that would include case studies and primary-source
documentation for all contested Senate elections, censure and expulsion
cases, impeachment trials, and major investigations. Intended for use
within the Senate and by the general public, these documentary
histories will be particularly valuable for teachers who seek to
include primary-source documents in their lesson plans. This project
also allows the Historical Office to update case studies of past
events, and to add new case studies as needed, eliminating the need for
new print editions of past publications, reducing costs and paper use.
Three parts of this five-stage project have been completed.
``States in the Senate''
In this collaborative project, staff historians have created
timelines and compiled selected illustrative images for each of the
fifty states. The ``States in the Senate'' will highlight persons and
events in the state's history that relate to the U.S. Senate to be
featured on Senate.gov, which informs senators, staff, and constituents
alike. A Web design for the project has been created that will provide
an interactive timeline for each state, with links to relevant
documentary and visual material.
Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies
The Historical Office staff assisted the Joint Congressional
Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies (JCCIC) in preparation of printed
materials, including the platform program, luncheon program, and the
commemorative edition of Inaugural Addresses of the Presidents of the
United States, for the presidential inauguration on January 20, 2009.
Historical Office staff researched precedents and compiled historical
data on previous inaugurations in response to queries by the JCCIC, the
media, and the public.
Administrative History of the Senate
The associate historian continued to prepare a historical account
of the Senate's administrative evolution since 1789. This study traces
the development of the offices of the Secretary of the Senate and
Sergeant at Arms, considers 19th- and 20th-century reforms that
resulted in reorganization and professionalization of Senate staff, and
looks at how the Senate's administrative structure has grown and
diversified.
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 staff, 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, the Office's goal is to
show how--and why--the Senate's current rules have evolved from earlier
versions. The Senate's historian emeritus has continued work on this
project, which will contain eight narrative chapters outlining key
debates and reasons for significant changes. Appendices will include
the original text of all standing rules and, for the first time in one
publication, all changes adopted between each codification.
Biographical Directory of the U.S. Congress, 1774-present
Since publication of the 2005 print edition of The Biographical
Directory of the United States Congress, the Historical Office has
added new biographical sketches and bibliographical citations that
incorporate recent scholarship to the online database (http://
bioguide.congress.gov). The associate historian and historical writer
continue to work closely with the staff of the House of Representatives
Office of History and Preservation to maintain accuracy and consistency
in this joint Senate-House database, and to promote this valuable
resource among historians, teachers, students and the public. Senate
and House historians and technical staff for the House of
Representatives have cooperated in an ongoing effort to update the
online site in appearance and functionality. Over the past year, the
Historical Office also began selecting printed obituaries for 19th-
century Senators for inclusion in their online profile.
Party Conference Minutes, 1965-1977
In 1998 and 1999 the Historical Office staff edited, indexed, and
published the Minutes of the Senate Democratic and Republican
Conferences covering the years prior to 1964. The Historical Office is
currently preparing a similar volume for the Democratic Conference
including its minutes from 1965 to 1977. After January 1973, verbatim
transcripts were prepared for each Conference meeting, considerably
enlarging the documentation. This project has involved scanning and
editing 2,869 pages of transcripts for 102 meetings of the Conference
and inclusion of explanatory annotations. With the approval of the
Conference, the minutes will be published, and a similar editorial
project will be proposed for the Republican Conference minutes for this
time period.
Everett Dirksen and the Dirksen Senate Office Building
Exhibits
The remodeling of the auditorium in the Dirksen Senate Office
Building into a hearing room also created two large exhibit cases at
its entrance. Working with the staff of the Senate Curator and the
Senate Library, the Historical Office has been preparing exhibits on
the life and career of Senator Everett M. Dirksen, Senate Republican
leader from 1959 to 1969, and on the design and functioning of the
office building named in his memory.
Oral History Program
The Historical Office staff conducts a series of oral history
interviews to record personal recollections of various Senate careers.
Interviews were conducted with former Senator Charles McCurdy ``Mac''
Mathias (R-Maryland); Charles Ferris, former director of the Senate
Democratic Policy Committee; two former Democratic secretaries, Martin
Parone and Robert G. Baker; and W. Lee Rawls, the former staff director
to Senators Pete Domenici and Bill Frist. The office has also continued
to seek and conduct interviews with current and former Senate spouses,
and expanded on its collection of interviews highlighting the role of
women on Capitol Hill. The complete transcripts of 30 interviews
conducted since the 1970s have been posted on Senate.gov. Each month,
that site features a different oral history interview series, including
digital audio-clips along with the interview transcripts. The
Historical Office has worked with the National Archives to digitize
past oral history interviews, which had been archived on magnetic tape,
for preservation purposes. Digitization also allows for inclusion of
short audio segments on Senate.gov. For Unum, the Secretary of the
Senate's newsletter, the staff has created a regular series entitled
``Senate Voices,'' which includes excerpts from the oral histories with
a contextual introduction.
Member Services
Educational Outreach: ``Senate Historical Minutes''
The historian and associate historian deliver a series of ``Senate
Historical Minutes'' at the weekly Democratic and Republican Conference
luncheons. These ``minutes'' highlight significant events and
personalities associated with the Senate's institutional development.
Many of them are now included on Senate.gov as ``Historical Minute
Essays.''
Members' Records Management and Disposition Assistance
The Senate archivist assisted members' offices with planning for
the preservation of their permanently valuable records, stressing the
importance of managing electronic records and eventually transferring
valuable records to a home-state repository with a digital asset
management system. Special attention was devoted to ensuring the
preservation of the entire collections of Senators Barack Obama and
Joseph Biden and overseeing the completion of comprehensive inventories
because the collections were being stored at the National Archives
Center for Legislative Archives. The archivist also worked closely with
the National Archives and the Sergeant at Arms to ensure complete
archiving of Vice President Richard Cheney's office.
Senator Edward M. Kennedy's death brought challenges for ensuring
that his personal office records and committee records were archived in
the proper places. The archivist revised the Handbook for Closing a
Senator's Office and met with personal office and committee staff to
meet these needs. As a result of particularly close work with the
Biden, Cheney, Clinton, and Obama offices, the archivist perceived a
need for enhanced education of all office staff with regard to managing
and archiving their electronic records. To meet this need, the office
staff developed archiving ``Quick Cards'' that are available on the
Secretary's Webster site. The three basic cards include ``Is it a
Historical Record?'' (a series of questions that train staff on how to
recognize a historical record) and two related cards, ``Archiving
Electronic Records'' and ``Archiving Paper Records.'' These cards
promote best practices at all staff levels.
To meet the electronic records management challenges as offices
transition to all electronic recordkeeping, the archivist worked with
the Sergeant at Arms staff to have ``V'' drives established in all new
Senate offices and made available on request for older offices. These
drives are for placement of electronic records that have been tagged
for the archives.
Brown-bag lunch discussions continued with one focusing on the
topic: ``What Can an Archivist Do for You?'' Material gathered for this
session was used to create a PowerPoint presentation aimed at
persuading offices to either hire an archivist or train a staffer to
perform the duties of an archivist. Archivists increase Senate office
efficiency and ensure that staff members have the information they need
when they need it, and are key to preserving electronic records since
they are able to arrange, describe and document electronic records for
the long term.
The Archivists Listserv has been used effectively for training and
information updates about matters of records management and historical
interest. A video seminar, first created in 2008, was re-worked and
made available to members' state offices. The Senate archivist
continued to work with staff from all repositories receiving senatorial
collections to ensure the adequacy of documentation and the transfer of
appropriate records with adequate finding aids. The archivist created a
special in-depth records management seminar for Senate offices for the
Modern Archives Institute, which is now available for Senate staff on
demand.
Committee Records Management and Disposition Assistance
The Senate archivist provided each Senate 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 archivist surveyed all committee chief clerks and systems
administrators to ascertain the status of their electronic archiving,
and discovered that many committees have voluminous electronic record
backlogs requiring review for archiving. These backlogs fall into three
categories: files of committee staff who have departed the committee;
files of share drives, some going back for many years; and
accumulations of e-mail. She distributed information on best practices
for managing electronic records and encouraged committee chief clerks,
systems administrators, staff directors, and chief counsels to consider
hiring archivists to focus on electronic archiving. As a result, three
committees each hired an archivist. The Senate archivist oversaw the
transfer to the Archives of 691 accessions of Senate records totaling
3,350.5 cubic feet of textual records and 7.2 terabytes of electronic
records. The archivist has noticed a growing gap between the
documentary quality of records being archived from committees with
archivists and those without archivists.
To further assist committee clerks with their responsibilities for
maintaining committee records, the archivist devised three basic Quick
Cards similar to those for members' staff. These cards supplement the
Guidelines for Committee Staff pamphlet that is updated annually. The
cards went to all staff directors, chief clerks, and systems
administrators, with a request that they be distributed to all staff. A
records-preservation PowerPoint briefing was also distributed to all
staff directors and chief clerks and is available on the Secretary's
Webster site. While this material has helped communicate the importance
of record keeping to committee staff, it does not replace the
effectiveness of a trained archivist being added to the staff to focus
on archiving electronic records and adequacy of documentation for
significant legislation. Training sessions were conducted for those
Senate interns tasked with archiving committee records. The archivist
and deputy archivist responded to 214 requests for loans of records
back to committees, totaling nearly 1,544 boxes.
A project is underway to scan committee record transfer sheets to
the National Archives, dating from 1982 through 2004, into the OnBase
document management system supported by the Sergeant at Arms. To date,
records of the Committees on Agriculture, Appropriations, Armed
Services, Banking, Budget, Energy, Environment and Public Works,
Finance, Foreign Relations, HELP, Homeland Security, and Judiciary have
been processed. The Center for Legislative Archives has received this
information on CD-ROM both as a security measure and to enhance future
researcher access to the records as they become open for research. The
archivist and deputy archivist have participated in the task force
established by the Advisory Committee on the Records of Congress to
develop criteria to improve the finding aids for the Senate's archival
records. They have commenced work on improving the level of description
of records that committees send to the archives and devising an
electronic form to help standardize this data.
Advisory Committee on the Records of Congress
This eleven-member permanent committee, established in 1990 by
Public Law 101-509, meets semiannually 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 membership
representing the Senate includes the Secretary of the Senate, who
chaired the panel during the 110th Congress; the Senate historian; and
appointees of the secretary and the majority and minority leaders. The
Historical Office furnishes support services for the advisory
committee's regular meetings.
Educational Outreach
The Historical Office's correspondence with the general public has
increasingly taken place through Senate.gov. The historians maintain
and frequently update the Web site with timely reference and historical
information, and each month select related material to be featured on
the site. In 2009, the Office responded to more than 1,200 inquiries
from the public, the news media, students, family genealogists,
congressional staffers, and academics, through the public e-mail
address listed on Senate.gov. The diverse nature of their questions
reflected varying levels of interest in Senate operations,
institutional history, and former members. Research assistance from the
Historical Office was enhanced by the comprehensive scanning of the
Office subject files into the OnBase document management system,
allowing staff to search the full text of these files electronically.
Working with the Web team, the historians have added to Senate.gov
such items as fourteen featured biographies; four front-page features
on the Constitution, Photographs of Senate Life, the Russell Building
Centennial, and the 150th Anniversary of the Senate Chamber; a special
feature commemorating the 40th anniversary of the first moon walk; and
added transcripts of four oral history interviews and digital audio
clips for six interviews.
The historians also met with the Senate webmaster to plan a new
feature for Senate.gov, ``Learn about the Senate.'' This feature is
specifically being designed to serve the educational needs of teachers
and students at various grade levels. A reference page has been
developed, using a list of frequently-asked questions to guide visitors
to relevant information already available on the site.
Staff presented seminars on the general history of the Senate,
Senate committees, women Senators, Senate floor leadership, relations
between the press and the Senate, and the U.S. Constitution. The
historians also participated in Senate staff seminars and members'
office retreats, and conducted dozens of briefings for specially
scheduled groups. The associate historian participated in the Dirksen
Congressional Center's annual ``Congress in the Classroom'' conference,
where she presented the ``Ten Top Questions to Ask Students about the
Senate,'' and collaborated with secondary school teachers from nearly
every state in coordinating classroom activities to promote a better
understanding of Congress.
Photographic Collections
The Senate photo historian continued to ensure history-focused
photographic coverage of the contemporary Senate by photographing
Senate committees, collecting formal photo portraits of new Senators,
and capturing significant Senate events in cooperation with the Senate
Photographic Studio. She continued to provide timely photographic
reference service by phone and e-mail, while cataloging, digitizing,
relocating, and expanding the Office's 40,000-item image collection. As
a member of the Russell Building Centennial committee, the photo
historian was actively involved in the events surrounding the
centennial of the building in March, working with the Government
Printing Office to design and print tent cards and bookmarks for the
centennial. She collaborated with the historical editor to redesign and
publish the new Senate Chamber brochure. The photo historian oversaw
the move of the entire photograph collection to a larger space mid-
year. In conjunction with this move, she performed increased collection
maintenance, including creating an inventory of the image collection.
She completed cataloging the images of hundreds of Senators, collected
in the early 1900s by John Pappas, which were donated to the Senate,
and which have now been transferred to the National Archives. She
assisted more than a dozen Senate offices in creating collages of all
the Senators who previously served in that seat. She worked with
Conservation and Preservation and the Senate Curator to replace the
images in the Arthur Scott photographic exhibit on the third floor of
the Capitol, provided poster-size enlargements of more than thirty
historical prints from the collection to the Senate Recording Studio
for the walls of their new office, and worked with the Senate Press
Gallery to select images for their walls. The photo historian also
assisted the Capitol Police in arranging their photographic negatives
for eventual transfer to the National Archives.
Continuity of Operations (COOP)
As the Historical Office's COOP Action Officer and Emergency
Coordinator, the photo historian completed the transfer of the Office's
COOP plan into the LDRPS system. She created an extensive pandemic plan
for the Office to ensure the ability of staff to maintain essential
functions in the event of a pandemic situation and made back-ups of the
office's vital electronic records to store off-site. She trained new
staff members in the Office's emergency evacuation procedures.
Capitol Visitor Center
The historians continued to supply information and guidance to the
staff of the Capitol Visitor Center (CVC) related to the educational
component of the exhibition gallery. They have participated in the
training program for staff-led tours, and provided text and images for
a new Web-based training program for staff and tour guides. They made
regular presentations on the history of the Senate in training seminars
for Senate staff and interns, and gave morning ``briefings'' to the
Capitol Guide Service. They contributed to the training of visitor
assistants who guide visitors through the exhibition gallery, worked
with exhibit staff to plan rotations of documents and images, and
advised the CVC staff on its educational outreach programs.
human resources
The Office of Human Resources was established in June 1995 by the
Secretary 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 fulfill the legal requirements of the workplace and complement the
organization's strategic goals and values.
These responsibilities include 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 staff administers the following programs for
the Secretary's employees: the Public Transportation Subsidy program,
Student Loan Repayment Program, FMLA program, parking allocations, and
the summer intern program that offers college and other post-graduate
students the opportunity to gain valuable skills and experience in a
variety of Senate support offices. Human Resources staff has completed
migration of eligible commuters to the Smart Benefits Program, which is
operated by the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority.
Recruitment and Retention of Staff
Human Resources staff have the ongoing task of advertising new
vacancies or positions, screening applicants, interviewing candidates,
and assisting with all phases of the hiring process. Human Resources
staff coordinate with the Sergeant at Arms (SAA) Human Resources
Department to post all SAA and Secretary vacancies on the Senate
intranet, Webster, so that the larger Senate community may access the
posting from their own offices. In an effort to reach a larger and more
diverse applicant pool, the department uses multiple posting forums to
reach potential applicants for employment. As a result, the Human
Resources Department processed more than 4,000 applications for
vacancies in the Secretary's Office, including review of applications,
coordinating scheduling of candidates for interview, sending out
notices to both successful and unsuccessful candidates, and finalizing
new hire paperwork. All new hires also receive orientation from the
Human Resources staff when they come on board.
Training
In conjunction with the Senate Chief Counsel for Employment, staff
continue to develop and deliver training for department heads and
staff. Training topics include sexual harassment, interviewing skills,
Family Medical Leave Act administration, and an overview of the
Congressional Accountability Act. Human Resources staff also works with
different department employees on topics specific to their group in
outreach efforts to enhance teamwork in the workplace.
Interns and Fellows
Human Resources staff manage the Secretary's internship program.
From posting vacancies, conducting needs analyses, communicating,
screening, placing and following up with all interns, the staff 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
The office has again taken an active role in the Combined Federal
Campaign (CFC) for the Senate community at-large. The office staff
serve as co-directors of the program. The staff participates in kick-
off meetings, identifies key workers in each office, and disseminates
and collects necessary information and paperwork.
interparliamentary services
The Office of Interparliamentary Services (IPS) has completed its
28th year of operation as a department of the Secretary of the Senate.
IPS staff is responsible for administrative, financial, and protocol
functions for all interparliamentary conferences in which the Senate
participates by statute, for interparliamentary conferences in which
the Senate participates on an ad hoc basis, and for special delegations
authorized by the Majority and/or Minority Leaders. The office also
provides appropriate assistance as requested by other Senate
delegations.
The statutory interparliamentary conferences are:
--NATO Parliamentary Assembly;
--Mexico-United States Interparliamentary Group;
--Canada-United States Interparliamentary Group;
--British-American Interparliamentary Group;
--United States-Russia Interparliamentary Group;
--United States-China Interparliamentary Group; and
--United States-Japan Interparliamentary Group.
In May, the 50th Annual Meeting of the Canada-U.S.
Interparliamentary Group was held in Canada. In June, the 48th Annual
Meeting of the Mexico-U.S. Interparliamentary Group was held in
Seattle, Washington. In September, the British-American Parliamentary
Group was held in the United Kingdom. The U.S.-China Interparliamentary
Group also met in China. IPS staff handled arrangements for these
events.
As in previous years, 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 continue to call upon this office for assistance
with passports, visas, travel arrangements, and reporting requirements.
IPS receives and prepares for printing the quarterly financial
reports for foreign travel from all committees in the Senate. In
addition to preparing the quarterly reports for the Majority Leader and
the Minority Leader, IPS assists staff members of Senators and
committees in filling out the required reports.
IPS maintains regular contact with the Department of State and
foreign Embassy officials. The office staff frequently organizes visits
for official foreign visitors and assists them in setting up meetings
with leadership offices. The staff continues to work closely with other
offices of the Secretary of the Senate and the Sergeant at Arms in
arranging programs for foreign visitors. In addition, IPS is frequently
consulted by individual Senators' staffs on a broad range of protocol
questions. Occasionally state officials or the general public contact
IPS 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 IPS.
Continuity of Operations (COOP) Planning
The Office of Interparliamentary Services created a Pandemic
Preparedness Plan this year and continues to fine tune its continuity
of operations plan each year.
legislative information system (lis) project
The Legislative Information System (LIS) is a mandated system
(Section 8 of the 1997 Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2 U.S.C.
123e) that provides desktop access to the content and status of
legislative information and supporting documents. The 1997 Legislative
Branch Appropriations Act (2 U.S.C. 181) also established a program for
providing the widest possible exchange of information among legislative
branch agencies. The long-range goal of the LIS Project is to provide a
``comprehensive Senate Legislative Information System'' to capture,
store, manage, and distribute Senate documents. Several components of
the LIS have been implemented, and the project is currently focused on
a Senate-wide implementation and transition to a standard system for
the authoring and exchange of legislative documents that will greatly
enhance the availability and re-use of legislative documents within the
Senate and with other legislative branch agencies. The LIS Project
Office manages the project.
Background: 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
Legislative Information System (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 continued development and
implementation of the XML authoring system for legislative documents
produced by the Office of the Senate Legislative Counsel (SLC), the
Office of the Enrolling Clerk, the Committee on Appropriations, and the
Government Printing Office (GPO). 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 tags
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, the Enrolling Clerk, and the editorial and
printing staff of the Committee on Appropriations to create an
application that meets the needs for legislative drafting.
LISAP: 2009
In early 2009, LIS staff trained the editorial and printing staff
of the Appropriations Committee on using LEXA to produce appropriations
bills in XML. The two groups also worked with House and GPO staff to
convert prior year appropriation bills and text from the Budget
Appendix to XML to be used as the basis for the 2010 fiscal year bills.
The Committee staff provided feedback on their production requirements,
and the LIS staff added or altered features in LEXA to make the
drafting process faster, more efficient, and more consistent. By the
end of the year, all thirteen Senate Appropriations bills, amendments,
and conference report documents had been prepared in XML.
The LIS staff also worked with staff from GPO and the Committee on
Armed Services to prepare and include military data and information in
XML tables in the National Defense Authorization bill. The data was
prepared in Excel spreadsheets by the Committee, and GPO staff imported
the data into LEXA into XML table structures so that the tables could
be printed as part of the introduced and engrossed versions of the
Senate bill. The House Committee was able to use many of the tables and
the same processes to produce the tables in the enrolled bill.
The LIS Project Office continued to provide support to the Senate
Enrolling Clerks and the Senate Legislative Counsel in their use of
LEXA for drafting. Several new features and fixes were added in LEXA
releases to improve the process, including upgrading the underlying
software, Xmetal, for the customized LEXA application. Xmetal 5.5 is a
Vista-compatible version of the software, and the upgrade project
required extensive testing of LEXA on both an XP platform and a Vista
platform. GPO testers assisted with the testing.
The XML versions of Senate measures were made available on LIS and
Thomas starting with the 111th Congress. The HTML version produced from
the XML data more closely resembles the printed document. This improved
HTML format will eventually replace the HTML version currently
available on the Web.
LIS staff also worked on internal projects to make the office more
efficient. These included implementing new defect tracking software
called OnTime. This software provides a means to collect defects and
new feature requests, record help call incidents, and manage releases.
The staff also worked on developing a Sharepoint repository to organize
documentation, requirements documents, test cases, and test documents.
LISAP: 2010
The LIS Project Office staff will continue to work with and support
all the offices now using LEXA to produce legislative documents.
Enhancements to LEXA make the process more efficient and consistent so
that most all of the legislative measures produced by those offices
will be created as XML documents.
The LIS Project Office staff 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
staff will work with the SLC and their House counterpart office to
implement new functionality for maintaining and printing the
compilations of existing law in XML. A Windows 7 version of Xmetal will
be available in the second quarter, and the LIS Project Office will
build and test all LEXA functions on this platform in anticipation of
offices moving to a Windows 7 operating system in the future.
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 document type definitions 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 staff 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.
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; a popular collection of audio books;
and a wide array of online resources. The Library also authors content
for three Web sites--LIS.gov; Senate.gov, the Senate's public Web site;
and Webster, the Senate's intranet.
Management transition of the Senate Information Services program
from the Senate Sergeant at Arms (SAA) to the Library continued as the
Library designed and conducted an online survey of the Senate user
community in November 2009. The survey of Senators' state and
Washington, DC offices, Senate committees, and support offices
requested feedback about current program offerings and training, and
sought suggestions for change. Analysis of the results will form the
basis for further program content review.
The Library's creation of new Web-based content, advanced and fine-
tuned online resources, expanded outreach and training opportunities,
and use of technology to support alternative means for information
delivery continue to meet the Senate's increasing demand for
information.
Notable Achievements
The Senate Library increased its service statistics in 2009,
serving every member and committee office. Including Web-based
inquiries, there was an 8 percent increase from 2008.
Two new tables were added to the Library's Virtual Reference Desk
on Senate.gov, Senate Action on Cloture Motions and Summary of Bills
Vetoed, 1789-present. This table is also published on Webster.
All printed House hearings in the Library's collection are
completely searchable in the Library catalog. This retrospective
project has taken 26 years to complete and is a testament to the hard
work and dedication of Senate Library catalogers.
Four informational display cases, a special issue of Unum,
bookmarks, and restaurant table cards were created to mark the Russell
Senate Office Building centennial in March.
Design and implementation of a new online book request form in the
Library catalog and increased exposure of online book lists resulted in
a 47 percent increase in online book requests over 2008 levels.
Focus on new and more frequent Library instructional classes
resulted in a 48 percent increase in Library instructional offerings in
2009.
An emphasis on careful negotiation or renegotiation of vendor
contracts and purchases has already saved over $55,831 in database
expenses over the next 4 years.
Senate Library Inquiries and Online Book Requests
The rise in electronic requests for materials, the availability of
new and enhanced electronic database offerings, and the expanded
availability of resources on the Web combined with efficient content
management have dramatically increased the demand for Library
resources. Inquiries for 2009 increased 8 percent from 2008.
SENATE LIBRARY INQUIRIES
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Web Page Visits Change From
--------------------------------------- Prior Year
Year Traditional Total (in
Webster LIS Senate.gov percent)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2009.............................. 27,318 70,461 21,092 2,612,897 2,731,768 +8
2008.............................. 27,283 51,048 29,468 2,429,380 2,537,179 +67
2007.............................. 26,309 65,793 32,121 1,392,947 1,517,170 -10
2006.............................. 31,032 80,375 20,156 1,561,138 1,692,701 +88
2005.............................. 33,080 57,608 26,775 782,588 900,051 +42
2004.............................. 33,750 ( \1\ ) 20,749 581,487 635,986 +61
2003.............................. 46,234 ( \1\ ) 18,871 329,327 394,432 \2\ +751
2002.............................. 40,359 ( \1\ ) 6,009 ( \1\ ) 46,368 ( \3\ )
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Not available.
\2\ Web inquiry statistics, first available in 2003, increased the total from the previous year by 751 percent.
\3\ Baseline.
A 47 percent increase in online book requests for 2009 can be
attributed not only to the continued popularity of audio books, but
also because the Library links the online bibliographies for audio
books, new books, and travel books to the catalog and the online
request form.
Senate Library Content Creation
Two new tables were added in July to the Virtual Reference Desk on
Senate.gov. Summary of Bills Vetoed, 1789-present lists the President,
coinciding Congresses, type of veto, the total number of vetoes, and
whether a veto was overridden by Congress. The table is also published
on Webster. Senate Action on Cloture Motions lists the Congress,
coinciding years, motions filed, votes on cloture, and the number of
times cloture was invoked for all cloture motions since the 66th
Congress (1919-1920).
Senate Knowledge Base
Projects to publish authoritative, standardized Senate data sources
for multipurpose use continue to be a Library priority, ensuring
accurate and timely dissemination of Senate information. The Senate
knowledge base is an institutional repository for data to support these
projects: the newly modernized Webster site, the Senate Library Webster
site, and a senator biography database.
Webster Modernization
A greatly enhanced version of Webster was launched in September.
The launch was a culmination of a multi-year collaborative effort of
Webster's four stakeholders: the Secretary of the Senate, the SAA, the
Senate Chaplain, and the Committee on Rules and Administration. The
Senate Library and the Web Technology department represent the
Secretary on the Webster Advisory Group (WAG), which oversees site
management.
Since its debut in 1995, Webster has been the most-visited site for
Senate staff seeking information about internal operations, support
services, and employee benefits. The large-scale redesign initiative,
launched by the WAG last fall, was intended to help staff easily
navigate the ever-expanding volume of online information and to locate
the resources staff need to do their jobs.
The improved Webster enterprise-level search functionality is
popular with staff: there were 123,339 searches in 2009. Librarians
improve search results by analyzing monthly statistics and matching
popular search terms with topically relevant pages or search engine
``key matches.'' During 2009, 346 ``key matches'' were established. To
date, 969 document records and 1,393 term records in the Senate
knowledge base are supporting the Webster search and taxonomy projects.
Web page visits for the five taxonomy-based indexes totaled 10,499
since their deployment in October 2008 as part of the Webster
modernization project.
WEBSTER TAXONOMY USAGE STATISTICS, 2009
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Taxonomy Page Visits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Services................................................ 1,875
Leadership.............................................. 681
Legislative............................................. 1,357
News & Research......................................... 835
About the Senate........................................ 1,380
---------------
Total Taxonomy Usage.............................. 6,128
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate Library Webster Site
All existing Web files and images that supported both the Library
Webster site and the catalog were moved to a content management system
(CMS) in December with the assistance of the Office of Web Technology.
The move enhanced the portability of the content and facilitated the
upgrade of the CMS. CMS-published data is repurposed for Senate.gov,
further economizing staff time and labor. The Senate Library Webster
site is a research service and information portal for Senate staff. An
intra-departmental team has continued to revise and update both the
design and functionality of the site, improving the computer intern
account registration pages and the ``Library Class and Seminars'' page.
New interactive features were added to allow scheduling of online book
pickups and fillable PDF registration forms for Library computer
accounts. Work on the site will continue into 2010.
Instruction and Professional Outreach
The experienced and knowledgeable reference team from Information
Services also teaches. A renamed class, ``Research Tools on Your
Desktop,'' joined the Library's instructional offerings, thus targeting
need. Increasing the number of sessions taught allowed the Librarians
to teach to smaller groups, increasing interaction and retention.
SENATE LIBRARY CLASSES, 2009
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject Students Classes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Insider's Guide to Webster........................ 25 8
LIS Savvy......................................... 228 39
Research Tips and Tricks.......................... 34 8
Research Tools on Your Desktop.................... 108 29
Services of the Senate Library and Got Questions 259 33
Tours............................................
---------------------
Totals...................................... 654 117
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The number of classes taught and the number of sessions taught
increased by 48 percent in 2009. However, attendance at those classes
decreased 16 percent, resulting in fewer Senate staff trained in 2009.
Because the Senate schedule and staff workload affect staff
availability for training, the Library plans to schedule classes during
Senate recess periods as well.
SENATE LIBRARY CLASSES BY CALENDAR YEAR
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Change from Change from
Year Attendees Prior Year Classes Prior Year
Total (percent) Total (percent)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2009........................................................ 654 -16 117 +48
2008........................................................ 782 +2 79 +23
2007........................................................ 770 +49 64 +7
2006........................................................ 518 +25 60 +114
2005........................................................ 416 ( \1\ ) 28 ( \1\ )
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Baseline.
The Library also gave tours to Senate groups and to outside library
professionals. These tours ranged from an introduction to each
semester's Senate Page School class to hosting librarians from the
National Library of China and the Law Library Association of Maryland.
The Library also participated in the Senate Services Fair and in giving
tours for National Library Week. The Library continued its
participation in the Federal Library Institute, which introduces
interested library school graduate students to Federal libraries,
resources, and career opportunities.
Collection Development
Audio Books Program
The Library acquired 44 new audio book titles in 2009. Designed to
assist users with diverse needs, including those who may be visually
challenged, as well as to draw patrons into the Library, the program
remains popular with patrons whose 606 loans were equivalent to
circulating each item in the collection six times over. An online
bibliography highlights the collection with links to the catalog and
the online book request form.
New Digital Resources
The Library provides a number of digital resources to the Senate.
New in 2009, and acquired with negotiation to reduce purchase and
subscription costs, are the Hein Online Congressional Documents
Library, the Gale Encyclopedia of Governmental Advisory Organizations,
and A-Z Maps Online from World Trade Press. The Encyclopedia of
Governmental Advisory Organizations and A-Z Maps Online are available
to the Senate community through links on Webster.
The Library maintains an A-Z journal title index on Webster that
lists electronic full-text journal titles available to the Senate. The
Library has continued efforts to customize and refine the database
content lists and to allow easier access to LexisNexis content, which
has increased usage by 167 percent from 2008.
Expansion of Special Collections
As a participant in the Government Printing Office's (GPO) Federal
Depository Library Program (FDLP), the Library receives selected
categories of legislative, executive, and judicial branch publications.
The Library received 9,683 government publications in 2009. In response
to the trend of issuing government documents in electronic format,
2,962 links were added to the Library catalog, bringing the total to
more than 28,938. The links provide Senate staff desktop access to the
full text of each document.
ACQUISITIONS, 2009
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category Total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Congressional Documents................................. 7,566
Executive Branch Publications........................... 2,117
Books (including Audio and E-books)..................... 832
Electronic Links........................................ 2,962
---------------
Total Acquisitions................................ 13,477
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Legislative Validation
The Library's Legislative Validation Clerk verifies and edits the
accuracy and consistency of data and legislative information published
by Secretary of the Senate staff via the Legislative Information System
(LIS), the Document Management System (DMS), the Congressional Record,
Senate.gov, and Webster. The clerk's work also requires the
verification of selected Congressional Record Index entries (print and
electronic), and includes comparing electronic entries made by
legislative staff or data entry clerks from various agencies with the
printed Congressional Record Index and notifying the offices of
discrepancies.
Between January and December 2009, the Legislative Validation Clerk
submitted 290 corrections.
Cataloging
The Library's productive cataloging staff draws on years of
experience to produce and maintain a catalog of more than 208,000
bibliographic items. During 2009, 6,791 new titles were added to the
catalog. The catalog is updated nightly to ensure that Senate staff
will retrieve accurate and current information on Library holdings. The
addition of nearly 300 book jacket images for the new titles enhanced
visual appeal and utility.
All printed House hearings in the Library's collection can now be
found in the Library catalog. This project, completed in August 2009,
has taken 26 years to complete and is a testament to the hard work and
dedication of many present and former staff.
Catalogers created 816 bibliographic records for Senate hearings
not yet printed from information in the Congressional Record Daily
Digest and the combined hearings schedule on Webster. This includes
field hearings that are not listed in the Daily Digest. These records
remain in the catalog until the printed hearing is received and
cataloged.
A new electronic resources page was added to the catalog home page
in June with the goal of creating a comprehensive list of resources by
category. Senate staff increasingly use the Library catalog as an
information resource, accounting for 6,585 visits in 2009.
INFORMATION SERVICE SUPPORT ACTIVITIES
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category Total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Circulation:
Document Deliveries................................. 4,371
Item Loans.......................................... 3,118
Pages Printed:
Microform Pages Printed............................. 1,378
Photocopies......................................... 71,756
---------------
Document Delivery Total........................... 80,623
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Library Automation
Library staff were provided with additional access to tools to
facilitate remote access to their e-mail accounts and, where needed,
secure access to the Senate network. Remote access was successfully
tested on routine tasks to simulate a continuity of operations event
and for pandemic flu planning.
Self-paced online database training was provided to staff working
on the Senate Knowledge Base through the Office of Education and
Training. These modules provide an introduction to client software.
Preservation, Binding, and Collection Maintenance
Technical Services staff and summer interns completed the shifting
necessary to yield 10 years of growth for book collection shelving
space in the Russell Senate Office Building. Judicious collection
management will help to ensure that the Library's collections are
focused on the needs of the Senate community.
Technical Services staff continued to participate in book repair
training sessions led by the director of the Office of Conservation and
Preservation. Trainees repaired 190 historic volumes, an increase of 24
percent from 2008, making significant progress in the preservation of
the Library's bound book collection.
The Library worked with GPO to secure binding for rare and fragile
materials. The first shipment of 11 volumes was completed in December
with excellent results.
Budget
In addition to the substantial savings in purchasing new databases,
budget savings from price reductions in 2009 subscriptions totaled
$55,831 over the next 4 years; and, after 12 years of budget
monitoring, savings total $136,908. 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.
Special Projects
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 news in the Office of
the Secretary of the Senate. The newsletter is distributed throughout
the Senate. Highlights from the 2009 Unum issues include a special
issue on the Russell Senate Office Building centennial, covering the
architecture and history of the building and special publications
produced by Secretary offices; excerpts of Secretary Nancy Erickson's
legislative branch appropriations testimony; an article on the 150th
anniversary of the Senate Chamber that also featured a booklet issued
by the Historical Office; an article on the Senate's role in the
presidential inaugural ceremonies; features on the Trent Lott
Leadership Portrait and the acquisition of a painting of Henry Clay;
and the continuation of the ``Senate Voices'' series prepared by the
Historical Office that contains excerpts of oral histories of former
staffers.
National Library Week
The National Library Week events were well attended, with about 100
people attending the Library's reception. The Library made a special
effort to invite staff from offices of new Senators. The talk by
Senator George S. McGovern on his book, Abraham Lincoln, drew a
standing room only crowd of 85 attendees.
Cooperative Projects
Working in cooperation with the Senate Historical Office and the
Curator's office, Library staff completed the digitization of available
Senate seating charts. The charts are now available on Senate.gov to
enhance historical information about the Senate Chamber. Work continues
on a printed compilation of the charts.
Library staff made significant contributions to the 2009 Russell
Senate Office Building Centennial celebration. Four display cases were
installed in March 2009 to highlight the Caucus Room, the Russell
Building's architectural features, a historical chronology of events
that have taken place in the building, and a look back at office life
in the oldest Senate office building. A special Unum issue on the
Russell Building's centennial was published. The Library worked with
the Senate Historical Office, the Senate Curator, Printing and Document
Services, and GPO to design a logo for use in all publications created
for the event, and to create a set of table cards used in the Senate
Restaurants as well as two versions of a commemorative bookmark. The
bookmarks were a popular souvenir with staff.
Hearing URL data from the Library catalog is exported weekly to
provide LIS and THOMAS with full-text links to Senate hearings for the
111th Congress. The Library contributed 702 new Senate hearing links to
the LIS database during 2009.
The Library's Cataloging Supervisor worked with Joint Committee on
Taxation staff on a project to supply bibliographic records for a set
of committee documents submitted for scanning at the Federal Scanning
Center at the Library of Congress. The cataloging portion of the
project began in July and has added 580 titles to the catalog and
contributed an additional 1,000 records for documents to be scanned.
The scanning center will extract the data needed to enhance retrieval
of the scanned documents on its public digital archive site.
Major Library Goals for 2010
Complete the assumption of eco-direction of the Senate Information
Services Program in preparation for transition to full direction at the
end of 2010;
Complete the analysis of the Senate Information Services survey
results and seek additional user input regarding the program services;
Begin work on enhancements to the Senate Knowledge Base to
streamline maintenance of the Webster taxonomy and improve search
results;
Continue work on the redesign of the Library's Webster site;
Establish an outreach program for Senate office staff; and
Expand training opportunities to staff.
SENATE LIBRARY ACQUISITIONS FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2009
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Books Government Documents Congressional Publications
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reports/ Total
Ordered Received Paper Fiche Hearings Prints Bylaw Docs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
January.............................................. 36 58 434 26 242 7 101 220 1,088
February............................................. 23 52 110 ......... 324 16 79 102 683
March................................................ 15 53 89 11 330 40 114 221 858
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1st Quarter.................................... 74 163 633 37 896 63 294 543 2,629
==================================================================================================
April................................................ 27 48 104 84 295 31 124 164 850
May.................................................. 16 106 35 6 193 16 113 227 696
June................................................. 24 86 120 50 256 16 99 317 944
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2nd Quarter.................................... 67 240 259 140 744 63 336 708 2,490
==================================================================================================
July................................................. 21 42 135 30 429 11 119 292 1,058
August............................................... 21 58 140 92 334 12 30 188 854
September............................................ 73 82 85 24 359 15 82 114 761
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3rd Quarter.................................... 115 182 360 146 1,122 38 231 594 2,673
==================================================================================================
October.............................................. 17 136 106 67 386 16 99 243 1,053
November............................................. 30 53 61 16 352 13 93 241 829
December............................................. 11 57 234 58 160 11 109 211 840
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4th Quarter.................................... 58 246 401 141 898 40 301 695 2,722
==================================================================================================
2009 Total........................................... 314 831 1,653 464 3,660 204 1,162 2,540 10,514
2008 Total........................................... 331 901 2,200 797 3,631 129 829 3,645 12,132
Percent Change....................................... -5.14 -7.77 -24.86 -41.78 +0.80 +58.14 +40.17 -30.32 -13.34
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE LIBRARY CATALOGING STATISTICS FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2009
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bibliographic Records Cataloged
S. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hearing Books Government Documents Congressional Publications Total
Numbers ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Records
Added to Docs./ Cataloged
LIS Paper Audio/E- Paper Fiche Electronic Hearings Prints Pubs./
Books Reports
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
January.................................. 5 173 3 12 ......... 18 222 55 1 484
February................................. ......... 111 4 6 12 28 307 16 3 487
March.................................... 80 81 2 26 1 11 458 33 17 629
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1st Quarter........................ 85 365 9 44 13 57 987 104 21 1,600
==============================================================================================================
April.................................... 52 51 6 5 ......... 45 461 6 25 599
May...................................... 7 19 9 8 13 10 635 26 21 741
June..................................... 37 24 8 3 ......... 6 342 92 13 488
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2nd Quarter........................ 96 94 23 16 13 61 1,438 124 59 1,828
==============================================================================================================
July..................................... 83 15 14 5 ......... 7 247 552 21 861
August................................... 15 32 43 9 49 1 316 161 4 615
September................................ 8 46 49 7 95 7 302 141 34 681
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3rd Quarter........................ 106 93 106 21 144 15 865 854 59 2,157
==============================================================================================================
October.................................. 19 69 12 7 40 5 234 43 10 420
November................................. 14 44 4 9 46 8 232 42 80 465
December................................. 11 12 1 10 61 7 120 18 92 321
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4th Quarter........................ 44 125 17 26 147 20 586 103 182 1,206
==============================================================================================================
2009 Total............................... 331 677 155 107 317 153 3,876 1,185 321 6,791
2008 Total............................... 271 591 64 155 14 214 6,332 56 170 7,596
Percent Change........................... +22.1 +14.6 +142.2 -31.0 +2164.3 -28.5 -38.8 +2016.1 +88.8 -10.6
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE LIBRARY DOCUMENT DELIVERY FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2009
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Micrographics Photocopiers
Volumes Materials Facsimiles Center Pages Pages
Loaned Delivered Printed Printed
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
January........................................ 330 298 18 26 5,543
February....................................... 208 287 23 37 5,626
March.......................................... 234 308 14 21 5,042
----------------------------------------------------------------
1st Quarter.............................. 772 893 55 84 16,211
================================================================
April.......................................... 254 361 13 13 7,131
May............................................ 178 309 12 66 4,807
June........................................... 276 359 24 395 6,821
----------------------------------------------------------------
2nd Quarter.............................. 708 1,029 49 474 18,759
================================================================
July........................................... 379 424 22 207 7,346
August......................................... 257 354 15 171 7,344
September...................................... 202 356 17 88 13,843
----------------------------------------------------------------
3rd Quarter.............................. 838 1,134 54 466 28,533
================================================================
October........................................ 263 338 23 72 4,137
November....................................... 323 501 11 102 4,116
December....................................... 214 264 20 180 ............
----------------------------------------------------------------
4th Quarter.............................. 800 1,103 54 354 8,253
================================================================
2009 Total..................................... 3,118 4,159 212 1,378 71,756
2008 Total..................................... 4,337 3,405 258 3,513 100,266
Percent Change................................. -28.11 +22.14 -17.83 -60.77 -28.43
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
Accreditation by the Middle States Commission on Secondary Schools
continues through April, 2013.
Two page classes successfully completed their semester curriculum.
Closing ceremonies were conducted on June 5, 2009, and January 22,
2010, the last day of school for each semester.
Orientation and course scheduling for the Spring 2009 and Fall 2009
pages were successfully completed. Needs of incoming students
determined the semester schedules.
English usage pre- and post-tests were administered to students
each semester, and the results were reviewed by faculty to determine
what usage instruction or remediation was needed.
Study skills sessions were provided to identified students in need
of training.
Faculty and staff provided extended educational experiences to
pages, including 23 field trips, two guest speakers, opportunities to
play musical instruments and vocalize, and foreign language study with
the aid of tutors. Eight field trips to educational sites were provided
for summer pages as an extension of the page experience.
National tests were administered for qualification in scholarship
programs. Seventeen pages took 28t Advanced Placement exams in nine
subjects.
The evacuation plan and COOP have been reviewed and updated. Pages
and staff continue to practice evacuating to primary and secondary
sites.
Staff and pages participated in escape hood training, and staff
continues certification in CPR/AED procedures.
Staff attended continuing education seminars.
Staff computers were upgraded by Computer Services to include
Microsoft 2007.
Tutors and the substitute teacher completed training in evacuation
procedures.
Communication among the Sergeant at Arms, Secretary of the Senate,
party secretaries, the Page Program, and the Page School is ongoing.
Summary of Plans
Our goals include:
--Teachers will continue to offer individualized small group
instruction and tutoring on an as-needed basis, as well as
optional academic support for students preparing to take AP
tests.
--Foreign language tutors will provide assistance to students, and a
foreign language seminar on basic grammar terminology will be
offered on a trial basis in the fall of 2010.
--The focus of field trips will be sites of historic, political, and
scientific importance which complement the curriculum.
--English Usage pre- and post-tests will be administered to students
each semester to assist faculty in determining needs of
students for usage instruction.
--Staff development options include attendance at seminars conducted
by Joint Office of Education and Training and subject matter
and/or educational issue conferences conducted by national
organizations.
--The community service project will continue.
printing and document services
The Office of Printing and Document Services (OPDS) serves as
liaison to the Government Printing Office (GPO) for the Senate's
official printing, ensuring that all Senate printing is in compliance
with Title 44, U.S. Code as it relates to Senate documents, hearings,
committee prints and other official publications. The office staff
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 staff 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 2009, OPDS prepared 4,395 requisitions
authorizing GPO to print and bind the Senate's work, exclusive of
legislation and the Congressional Record, an 11 percent increase over
the previous year. Since the requisitioning done by OPDS is central to
the Senate's printing, the office is responsible for reviewing invoices
and bids for Senate print jobs.
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. OPDS also
coordinates a number of publications for other Senate offices, such as
the Curator, Historian, Disbursing, Legislative Clerk, and Senate
Library, as well as the U.S. Botanic Garden, U.S. Capitol Police,
Architect of the Capitol, and the U.S. Capitol Visitor Center. These
tasks include providing guidance for design, paper selection, print
specifications, monitoring print quality and distribution. Last year's
major printing projects included:
--Semi-Annual Report of the Secretary of the Senate;
--Tributes to Retiring Senators;
--U.S. Senate Leadership Portrait Collection brochure;
--U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee brochure;
--U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee brochure;
--U.S. Senate Republican and Democratic Leader's Suite brochures;
--2009 Senate Telephone Directory;
--Senate gallery passes and visitor badges; and
--Capitol Visitor Center tour tickets and informational brochures.
Hearing Billing Verification
Senate committees often use outside reporting companies to
transcribe their hearings, both in-house and in the field. OPDS
processes billing verifications for these transcription services
ensuring that costs billed to the Senate are accurate. OPDS utilizes a
program developed in conjunction with the Sergeant at Arms Computer
Division that provides greater billing accuracy and 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 2009,
OPDS provided commercial reporting companies and corresponding Senate
committees a total of 1,136 billing verifications of Senate hearings
and business meetings, a 33 percent increase over the previous year.
Over 83,000 transcribed pages were processed at a total billing cost of
$652,412.
The software program used to process the hearing verifications
required by Senate Disbursing to pay vendors for transcription services
was completely updated in 2008. OPDS worked with the Senate Committee
on Rules and Administration to draft updated regulations governing the
production and reimbursement of transcripts. In addition, input was
solicited from vendors and committee clerks to ensure consideration of
current transcription practices and costs. The new software program was
fully tested by all current Senate transcription vendors and is now
fully implemented.
During 2009, the office continued processing all file transfers,
and billing verifications, between committees and reporting companies
electronically ensuring efficiency and accuracy.
Secretary of the Senate Service Center
The Service Center within OPDS is staffed by experienced GPO
detailees who provide Senate committees and the Secretary of the
Senate's office with complete publishing services for hearings,
committee prints, and the preparation of the Congressional Record.
These services include keyboarding, proofreading, scanning, and
composition. This allows committees to decrease, or eliminate,
additional overtime costs associated with the preparation of hearings,
improving the management of Congressional Printing and Binding funds.
Additionally, the Service Center provides work for GPO detailees
assigned to legislative offices during Senate recesses.
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 10,875 distinct legislative items during the
first Session of the 111th Congress, including Senate and House bills,
resolutions, committee and conference reports, executive documents, and
public laws.
The demand for online access to legislative information continues
to be strong. Before Senate legislation can be posted online, it must
be received in the Senate through 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 OPDS is to provide services to the
Senate. However, the responsibility and this office's dedication and
assistance to the general public, the press, and other government
agencies are virtually indistinguishable from the services provided to
the Senate. During 2009, over 15,000 requests for legislative material
were received at the walk-in counter, through the mail, by fax, and
electronically. Online ordering of legislative documents and 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 and document requests. Orders received by recorded
messages, fax, and e-mail are processed as they are received, as are
mail requests.
On-Demand Publication
The office supplements depleted legislation where needed by
producing additional copies in the DocuTech Service Center, staffed by
experienced GPO detailees who 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 OPDS to print necessary legislation for the
Senate floor, and other offices, in the event of GPO experiences a
continuity of operations situation.
Accomplishments & Future Goals
Over the past year, OPDS has provided new services for customers
and improving existing ones. Of particular note is the office's
commitment to help ``green'' the Senate. During 2009 Senate offices
ordered over 4.5 million sheets of 100 percent recycled paper, a 57
percent increase over 2008.. The office works diligently to track
document requirements, monitoring print quantities, and reducing waste
and associated costs. Over 400 new and revised print jobs were routed
electronically for customer approval, improving turnaround time and
efficiency. Additionally, blank paper orders, now transmitted
electronically to GPO as they are processed, save time and move toward
the office's goal of paperless ordering.
The office's future goals include working with GPO on their Federal
Digital and Microcomp Replacement Systems to improve efficiency and
help answer the evolving needs of the Senate. Focus on continuity of
operations planning and the offices emergency preparedness will
continue. 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.
public records
The Office of Public Records receives, processes, and maintains
records, reports, and other documents filed with the Secretary of the
Senate that involve the Federal Election Campaign Act, as amended; the
Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995, as amended; 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 publication of
these documents. From October 2008 through September 2009, the Public
Records office staff assisted more than 2,000 individuals seeking
information from reports filed with the office. This figure does not
include assistance provided by telephone or e-mail, nor help given to
lobbyists attempting to comply with the provisions of the Lobbying
Disclosure Act of 1995, as amended (collectively, the ``LDA''). A total
of 77,702 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 2009 Accomplishments
The office continued to implement S. 1, the Honest Leadership and
Open Government Act (HLOGA), which amended the LDA and the Senate Code
of Conduct. The office posted two guidance updates and concentrated on
compliance issues, referring close to 4,400 cases of potential non-
compliance to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia. The
Senate Office of Public Records conducted a continuity of operations
(COOP) exercise in August which required half of the staff to work from
a remote location in preparation for a potential H1N1 pandemic.
Plans for Fiscal Year 2011
The Public Records office will assess the need to update the LDA
guidance semiannually and will continue to concentrate on LDA
compliance issues.
Automation Activities
During fiscal year 2009, the Senate Office of Public Records worked
with the Sergeant at Arms to enhance the lobbying database performance
in terms of public query programs for Senate.gov, and to create an
internal compliance monitoring application.
Federal Election Campaign Act, as Amended
The Act requires Senate candidates to file quarterly and pre- and
post-election reports. Filings totaled 4,298 documents containing
292,496 pages.
Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995, as amended
The LDA requires semi-annual financial and lobbying activity
reports. As of September 30, 2009, there were 5,700 registrants
representing 20,007 clients. The total number of individual lobbyists
disclosed on 2009 registrations and reports was 14,847. The total
number of lobbying registrations and reports processed was 134,925.
Public Financial Disclosure
The filing date for Public Financial Disclosure Reports was May 15,
2009. The reports were made available to the public and press by June
12, 2009. Public Records staff provided copies to the Select Committee
on Ethics and the appropriate state officials. A total of 3,137 reports
and amendments were filed containing 18,528 pages. There were 253
requests to review or receive copies of the documents.
Senate Rule 35 (Gift Rule)
The Senate Office of Public Records received 214 reports during
fiscal year 2009.
Registration of Mass Mailing
Senators are required to file mass mailings on a quarterly basis.
The number of pages was 487.
stationery room
The United States Senate Stationery Room is the provider of office
and administrative supplies, personalized stationery and special order
items for official government business. We serve all Members, support
offices, and other authorized people and organizations.
The Stationery Room fulfills its mission by:
--Utilizing open market, competitive bid, statutorily required and/or
GSA schedules for supply procurement.
--Maintaining sufficient in-stock quantities of select merchandise in
order to best meet the immediate needs of the Senate community.
--Developing and maintaining productive business relationships with a
wide variety of vendors to ensure sufficient breadth and
availability of merchandise.
--Maintaining expense accounts for all authorized customers and
preparing monthly activity statements.
--Managing all accounts receivable and accounts payable
reimbursement.
--Ensuring the integrity of all funds and other government assets
under our control.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal Year 2009 Fiscal Year 2008
Statistics Statistics
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gross Sales......................... $3,594,733.94 $4,547,289.64
Sales Transactions.................. 47,459 41,704
Purchase Orders Issued.............. 6,586 6,224
Vouchers Processed.................. 7,073 6,832
Office Deliveries................... 5,661 6,985
Number of Items Delivered........... 134,191 160,538
Number of Items Sold................ 439,042 503,238
Full time Employees (FTE)........... 14 ................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal Year 2009 Overview
Sales Comparison Analysis
While sales for fiscal year 2009 appear to reflect a decrease of
$952,555.70 when compared to fiscal year 2008, it should be noted that
the Stationery Room discontinued sales of the Metro Transit Subsidy
Media in September of 2008. When taking Metro sales out of the
equation, fiscal year 2009 sales ($3,594,733.94) increased $811,828.01
or approximately 29 percent, over fiscal year 2008 ($2,782,905.93). The
Stationery Room experienced increases of 3 percent to 13 percent in
such areas as total sales transactions, purchase orders issued, and
vouchers processed.
``Suggestion Box''
With the assistance of the Office of Web Technology, the Stationery
Room introduced an electronic ``suggestion box'' accessible to Senate
employees from various areas on Webster. Linked to a Stationery e-mail
address, the ``suggestion box'' is intended to request ideas for
products customers would like to see available for purchase with
official funds. Suggestions are collected and evaluated for
appropriateness and usefulness and acted upon accordingly.
E-Commerce
Also with the assistance of the Office of Web Technology,
Stationery staff began work on an expanded electronic commerce site
available to authorized customers within the framework of the Senate
intranet. Still in the development phase, the site will allow customers
the ability to purchase in-stock items from Stationery online, request
delivery to the office and charge the transaction to their account.
Some initial features include product thumbnails and a shopping cart.
The new system is expected to launch in June.
Electronic Document Delivery
Stationery sends hardcopies of sales receipts and office account
statements daily through inside mail. Often those mailings number in
the hundreds. Because of the volume of consumption of paper supplies
(envelopes, receipt paper) and the impact on staff time and resources,
the Stationery Room began to e-mail the documents instead.
Administrative personnel set up and maintain distribution lists for
each office account, convert each paper document to digital and then e-
mail it to those on the appropriate distribution list. The program has
eased the workload for staff and helped to ensure more secure delivery
of documents to the offices served. Additionally, through the
implementation of this program, Stationery staff has been able to
substantially reduce its use of paper and envelopes.
Efforts to Green the Senate
The Stationery Room carries a wide variety of environmentally
friendly options: recycled copy paper and toner cartridges; binders,
pencils and pens made with recycled components; and custom printed
options on recycled stock with soy based inks. Additionally, Stationery
has partnered with the Senate Superintendent as a repository for
battery recycling and in 2009 helped the Senate recycle 2,300 pounds of
alkaline and rechargeable batteries.
Continuity of Operations (COOP)
Opening an office after an emergency relocation is of paramount
importance to the Senate Stationery Room. To allow for quicker response
and decreased office down-time, Stationery has packed 200 COOP boxes
with a selection of basic office supplies. Staged offsite, they are
available for immediate distribution if the need arises.
web technology
The Department of Web Technology is responsible for the Web sites
that fall under the purview of the Secretary of the Senate:
--the Senate Web site (Senate.gov)--available to the world;
--the Secretary's internal Web site (Webster.senate.gov/secretary)--
available to the Senate Staff;
--the central portion of Senate Intranet (Webster.senate.gov)--
available to all Senate Staff; and
--the Senate Legislative Branch Web site (Legbranch.senate.gov)--
available to the Senate, House of Representatives, Library of
Congress (LOC), Architect of the Capitol (AOC), Government
Accountability Office (GAO), Government Printing Office (GPO),
Congressional Budget Office (CBO), and U.S. Capitol Police
(USCP).
The Senate Web Site--Senate.gov
The Senate Web site content is maintained by over 30 contributors
from seven departments of the Secretary's office and three departments
of the Sergeant at Arms (SAA). Content team leaders meet regularly to
share ideas and coordinate the posting of new content. All content is
controlled through the Secretary's Web Content Management System (CMS)
managed by the Department of Web Technology.
Major Additions to the Site in 2009
--Roll Call Votes in XML http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/
roll_call_lists/vote_menu_111_2.xml
--Published all roll call votes in XML back to the 1st Session of
the 101st Congress and created a system to have future roll
call votes automatically display in close to real time.
Providing this data in a raw form enables greater access to
this sought information. The project was realized through
interactions with the Senate Committee on Rules and
Administration and member offices. The posting of XML votes
did not require any changes in the clerks' established work
processes nor result in any system downtime.
--Russell Senate Office Building Bicentennial standalone Web site
http://www.senate.gov/RSOB/
--Worked with the Historical Office, Curator's Office, and the GPO
to design, create, implement, enhance, and maintain a
photographic history of the Russell Senate Office Building,
meeting firm deadlines and accessibility requirements.
While the site looks entirely different than other portions
of Senate.gov, it is fully implemented through the content
management system to allow for further modifications and
additions by content experts.
--Henry Clay in the U.S. Senate standalone Web site http://
www.senate.gov/Clay1851
--Designed, built, enhanced, delivered and maintained a new
standalone Web site that details the history and
restoration of a portrait of Henry Clay hung in the East
Brumidi Stairway during the spring of 2009. Many multimedia
and interactive features exist in the site making for an
interesting and educational visitor experience applicable
to a wide range of audiences. Capitalizing on advances in
the Senate's information technology infrastructure, such as
streaming flash video, greatly enhances the user's
experience.
--Art Section Overhaul http://www.senate.gov/art
--Completely revamped the art section of Senate.gov, exposing more
content in a much more visually appealing, organized, and
useful manner. Created and implemented multiple advanced
slideshow applications and new layout concepts to
compliment the sections new information architecture and
collection spotlights. The pages highlight the over 1,000
objects now published online. While creating a much richer
user experience through utilizing thumbnails, subject-based
collection lists, Web slideshows, and an art specific
search, the Curator's office was also able to gain greater
control over this content through implementing everything
through the content management system in conjunction with
the office's maintained object database.
--Contested Senate Elections http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/
history/common/contested_elections/intro.htm
--Historic exhibit delineating 56 past contested elections in the
United States Senate. In-depth information provided for
each instance including background information, facts
relating to each case, response of the Senate, conclusions,
and Committee reports.
--Expulsion and Censure http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/
common/briefing/Expulsion_Censure.htm
--Developed and launched exhibit on expulsion and censure in the
United States Senate in conjunction with the Historical
Office. The exhibit offers a wealth of information
regarding cases of expulsion and censure and the
individuals involved. Thirty-one expulsion cases are
described and details of eight censure instances are
explained.
--Senate Impeachment Trials http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/
history/common/briefing/Senate_Impeachment_Role.htm#4
--Enhanced the online report regarding impeachments with a complete
listing of all impeachment trials in the Senate. Great
detail given in several of the cases with more to be added
in the future.
--Gallery Passes http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/art/common/
slideshow/Gallerypass/GalleryPass_Intro.htm
--Drawing from many previously created features, designs,
slideshows, and layouts this exhibit contains gallery
passes dating back to the 51st Congress. Relevant
information regarding the galleries and their histories is
interwoven, leveraging great content from multiple parts of
the Web site.
--Placement Office Job Postings http://www.senate.gov/reference/
Index/Employment.htm
--Implemented a completely new system for the Placement Office of
the SAA to post and manage their job listings. Content is
now delivered in a format that aligns with the one used
throughout the Secretary's content management system.
Besides providing a much more useful and searchable display
to users and a more efficient system from the Placement
Office, this also allows all job postings listed on
Senate.gov to be combined on a single page.
--Sergeant at Arms Job Postings http://www.senate.gov/employment/saa/
positions.htm
--Developed a system to allow the Human Resources Department of the
SAA to begin posting job openings. This new system is
coupled with their existing content management system to
streamline workflow. SAA job openings now simultaneously
appear on Senate.gov in conjunction with http://SAANET.
--Capitol Camera http://www.senate.gov/general/capcam.htm
--Takes advantage of the new flash streaming video servers to
display a constant feed of the Capitol Dome from the
Russell Building. The template originally created for this
page has been reused many times as more video is added to
the Web site.
--Senate Chamber Maps http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/art/
special/Desks/earlychambermaps.cfm
--Historic maps added to interactive Desks site dating back to 1840.
--Fourteen Featured Biographies http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/
history/one_item_and_teasers/featured_biographies.htm
--Six Audio Clips http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/
oral_history/AudioClipsList.htm
and
--Four Oral Histories http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/history/
g_three_sections_with_teasers/oralhistory.htm
Homepage feature articles were published on the following
topics:
--The Senate Chamber: 1859-2009;
--Russell Senate Office Building: First Century, 1909-2009;
--Celebrate National Library Week: Browse Senate Art Publications;
--Moments in Senate History: Photographs of Senate Life;
--An Historic Painting, Rediscovered: Henry Clay in the U.S. Senate;
and
--Focus on the Constitution: Advice & Consent of the Senate.
Secretary's Intranet--Webster.senate.gov/secretary
The new Secretary of the Senate intranet (http://
Webster.senate.gov/secretary) grew considerably during its first full
year online. An electronic newsletter managed by the Executive office
was created and implemented, proving information specific to the
Secretary's office. Web-based order forms were created and enhanced for
use in requesting specific legislative documents, class registration,
blank paper, room reservations, and stationery product suggestions.
Web Technology worked with the SAA and the Senate Archivist to
establish a Web page (http://Webster.senate.gov/secretary/departments/
Historical_office/Archiving/archiving_services.htm) to house
information on archive management. Additionally, the office devised
displays and organization for the information set.
A catalog-based ordering system is being developed for the
Stationery Room, which will enable staff to order online. The new
system will be managed with the content directly from the Stationery
Room's existing retail management system. The ordering system is
intended to be especially helpful to state offices. The new system is
expected to launch in June.
A new virtual server was created to host the Secretary's content
separate from the other officers on Webster. To facilitate this
transition, legacy content was either deleted from the existing Webster
server or migrated into the Secretary's content management system.
Isolating Secretary's content onto a virtual machine leverages some of
the newest technology offerings from the SAA, is more environmentally
friendly as it replaces multiple physical servers, is easily recovered
in emergency instances, and makes all systems involved operate more
efficiently.
Webster Central Web Site--Webster.senate.gov
In conjunction with the SAA, Chaplain, and Senate Committee on
Rules and Administration, Web Technology continued administering,
managing, and enhancing the central section of Webster. As part of the
Webster Advisory Group (WAG), Web Technology collaborated on the
creation, distribution, and interpretation of a Webster user survey.
Based on the feedback, WAG implemented changes to enhance users'
experiences and increase ease of use of the site.
To streamline the management of content on the central site we
repurposed many files that are already updated through existing systems
on Senate.gov. The expansion of repurposing data has reduced
duplicative efforts, increased consistency, relevancy, and timeliness
of data displayed on Webster. Standardizing XML across both sites and
having it integrated to Web Technology's content management system was
essential to making this possible.
Another heavily utilized content system for the central portion of
Webster is the Senate Library's taxonomy system, which generates the
content used to produce the hierarchical data used in the ``Service,''
``Legislative,'' ``News & Research,'' and ``About the Senate'' tabs
accessible from all Webster pages. The system is also used to direct
suggested matches based on keywords or phrases. Web Technology and the
Senate Library work closely to ensure timely updates in an efficient
and user-friendly matter, as well as to modify the displays based on
the desires and needs of Senate Staff, and offer continued support of
the various systems and their integrations.
Senate Legislative Branch Web site (Legbranch.senate.gov)
The Legbranch server is accessible by the Senate, House of
Representatives, LOC, AOC, GAO, GPO, CBO, and USCP. The Department of
Web Technology maintains a basic Web site for a Capitol Hill e-mail
messaging working group managed by the SAA. In the future the server
will be used to share more information with other Capitol Hill
entities.
Accomplishments of the Office of Web Technology in 2009
Began the upgrade of the content management system upgrade. Planned
completion date of the upgrade project is the beginning of April when
new hardware will host the most currently released versions of the
software that comprises our content management system.
Audited the Senate.gov Web pages regularly, updating, enhancing,
and correcting pages; verifying content; and reviewing individual page
designs throughout Senate.gov for accessibility and usability.
Constantly monitored data feeds from the LIS/DMS system, ensuring
content on Senate.gov was current and all processes were functioning
properly. This is of vital importance, particularly regarding committee
hearing schedules, vote data, and member contact information.
Worked with new Senate offices to establish and maintain temporary
Web pages including a picture, biography, and contact information until
they were able to get permanent Web sites established.
Responded to approximately 2,000 e-mails from the general public
regarding Senate.gov sites. Worked with various content providers, Web
support groups, the SAA, member, and committee offices to make
suggestions and resolve issues.
Continually reviewed and adjusted search operations and canned
matches for both Senate.gov and Webster.senate.gov based on user
tendencies and requests.
Conducted user testing with Senate staff and interns to increase
understanding of current Web site interactions, desires, and best
practices.
Participated in Capitol Hill working group determining ideal manner
of providing public legislative data in a secure, downloadable, and
searchable format. Other entities involved in this project are the
House of Representative, GPO, and the LOC.
Helped organize Capitol Hill wide Webmaster meetings, where best
practices were shared across entities. Regularly gave presentations and
facilitated conversations during meetings. Led a separate discussion
relating to content management systems which had representatives from
Republican Conference, DLC, SDMC, LOC, CRS, House Chief Administrative
Officer, House Clerk, AOC, Capitol Visitor Centerm and CBO.
Continually trained and practiced working from remote locations to
be prepared should the need arise. All staff are now fully capable of
accomplishing their job functions from any location with Internet
access. This was accomplished largely through configuring virtual
machines that mimic workstations on office laptops.
Bibliography production greatly simplified for both Senate.gov and
Webster. To enable Senate users to directly borrow books from
bibliographies separate versions for Webster are implemented, and, when
applicable, the data is drawn from Senate.gov bibliographies. This
aligns the data between two sites, while displaying the appropriate
options to the two separate audiences. The new system tremendously
simplifies the process for creating and updating bibliographies in both
sites.
Aided the Senate Library in aspects of Senate Information Services
transition. Worked closely with the SAA to offer a variety of Web-based
survey options for the Library to select from. Customized survey to
meet the Senate Library's data collection and reporting requirements.
Published XML data for individual roll call votes and votes lists
from the present back to the 101st Congress, 1st Session. Enacted and
implemented a system to publish future roll call votes in XML format in
addition to the already existing HTML renditions.
Worked extensively with the Senate Library in the continual
development, implementation, and maintenance of taxonomies.
Participated in the planning and approach to including the ``Red Book''
data to be integrated in the knowledge base.
Knowledge base data is now published directly to Senate.gov.
Through modifications in the content management system, Web Technology
has established a system with the Senate Library to allow for the
direct export of reports to display as Web pages on Senate.gov and
Webster, decreasing the need for human interaction and increasing
efficiency.
Implemented algorithms to tally vital statistical calculations
related to cloture and veto counts, streamlining the process and
reducing the chance of errors.
Created virtualized production server for the Secretary's intranet.
Cleaned legacy data from legacy physical server and migrated
appropriate content into the content management system.
Worked with the Historical Office and GPO in the design of a new
standalone site for states.
Worked with the Curator's Office to reorganize their content within
the Art and History bucket. Instituted new information architecture for
the artifact pages making editing much more efficient. Designed new
layout concepts for the Curator's Office areas of focus. Built subject-
based collection lists, initially organizing art objects by sitters,
which was then expanded to other subject areas, all drawn from the
Curator's maintained object database.
Maintained and continued to implement the use of handles
established by the LOC for legislation, ensuring functional links to
pieces of legislation regardless of changes to other systems. Handles
are now used on the many different statistical tables maintained by the
Senate Library reflecting information on currently active legislation,
cloture motions, nominations, and vetoes. Also, summary tables were
created for the various data sets to further ensure the accuracy and
usability of data reported.
Expanded a system established for the Senate Placement Office to
post employment offerings publically on Senate.gov, to include job
openings from SAA Human Resources Department. Collaborated with the SAA
in integrating the data across two separate content management systems.
Having both sets of data in XML allows for the integration of all job
postings from the SAA and the Placement Office into one comprehensive,
searchable list.
Helped maintain back-up server for the CMS at the Alternate
Computer Facility (ACF) with the SAA, ensuring our continuity of
operations plan. The ACF server is an exact replica of the production
system and is continually tested to serve as a real time replacement
should the production server become inoperable.
Senate.gov Usage Statistics
In 2009 an average of over 350,000 visits occurred per day on the
Senate.gov domain. Twenty-six percent of them entered through the main
Senate homepage while the majority came to the site through a
bookmarked page or to a specific page from search results; this
indicates a slight rise in visitors entering through the homepage of
Senate.gov from the previous year.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2008-2009
Title of Web Page 2008 Visits/ 2009 Visits/ Percent
Month Month Increase
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Visits--Entire Site............................................. 8,521,779 10,754,581 +26
Senate Homepage................................................. 1,704,697 2,526,741 +48
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reviewing statistics on Web page usage helps the content providers
better understand what information the public is seeking and how best
to improve the presentation of that data. Visitors are drawn to the
following content items, listed in order of popularity.
MOST VISITED PAGES IN 2009
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2008 Visits/ 2009 Visits/
Top Pages Month Month Percent Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senators Contact Info List...................................... 546,847 698,084 +27
Roll Call Votes................................................. 182,691 169,276 -7
Committees...................................................... 78,810 94,446 +20
Legislation & Records........................................... 64,010 91,689 +43
Active Legislation.............................................. 37,860 74,199 +96
Votes........................................................... 58,277 57,463 -1
Senate Leadership............................................... 19,981 20,663 +3
Committee Hearings Scheduled.................................... 16,668 21,726 +3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By a huge margin, the most popular page on the main Senate Web site
is the list of Senators with links to their Web sites and comment
forms. Visitors also continue to be interested in legislative matters
in 2009 with Roll Call Vote Tallies, the Active Legislation table,
Committee assignments and schedules being particularly popular. The
visits per month did decrease across some of the most visited pages on
the site. The decrease is most likely attributed to the information on
the pages being consumed by other Web sites and then being redisplayed.
Additionally, some of the most sought information began being offered
in XML, Roll Call Votes, in 2009 making the consumption and
dissemination faster and easier. Thus, although the actual visits to
Senate.gov decreased on some pages more people are utilizing the
information being provided across the site.
Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper
STATEMENT OF HON. TERRANCE W. GAINER, SENATE SERGEANT
AT ARMS
Senator Nelson. Mr. Gainer.
Mr. Gainer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and ranking member and
Senator Pryor. I appreciate the opportunity this afternoon to
discuss the work we have been doing in our budget for the
upcoming fiscal year. I, too, ask that my written report be
submitted and made part of the record.
Senator Nelson. It will. Thank you.
Mr. Gainer. The budget request I have submitted, as you
indicated, requests a 7 percent increase, just over $15 million
more than fiscal year 2010, a total of nearly $240 million.
Last year we requested a 10.5 percent increase; the year
before, 11.5 percent; 13.9 in 2008; and 12.8 in 2007. So we
thought we were heading in the right direction.
I was on the floor last year when you sought the
approximately 3 percent increase in the legislative branch, and
as your opening remarks indicated, it was not well received
again, even though all of us thought we were getting where we
needed to be. I was also on the floor when there was an attempt
to take a couple hundred million dollars from all of us, and we
appreciate your defense of our budgets because it was so very
important. But these events highlight the difficulty we all
have in this.
We work together, the Secretary of the Senate, the Capitol
Police, the Architect of the Capitol (AOC), and the Rules
Committee, providing quality service to the Senate. Our SAA
team does great work. They are industrious, honest, and very
self-actualized. They are guided by leaders like my deputy,
Drew Willison; Bret Swanson in operations; Chris Dey, our CFO;
Pat Murphy in HR; Kim Winn, the Chief Information Officer;
Christie Preach, who serves the entire Senate in the EAP
program; Peggy Greenberg, who does so much training here and
throughout the Nation; Mike Heidingsfield in Police Operations;
Becky Daugherty, our Protocol Officer; Rick Edwards, on all
issues related to the floor; Dave Bass in the Recording Studio;
Joe Collins, the Postmaster. These are a few of the people who
contribute.
Our services are not only in the D.C. area, but also in the
454 offices throughout the Nation.
My submitted 40-plus pages of testimony covers the
accomplishments so that you and your staff know how hard we
work for you. Allow me to mention a few highlights.
For instance, in IT, we have a 96 percent rating of
satisfactory or better for help desk calls. You and your staff
know how important that is. We have a 99 percent or better on-
time arrival for IT installation. We processed some 247 million
Internet messages last year. We have established the online
purchasing of your office technology needs. A recent example of
how IT continues to adjust to the workload of the Senate;
recently we helped process 800,000 e-mails sent by one Senator
in a single day. Your expectations of IT are very high.
From a security standpoint, every day we are monitoring
what goes on in the IT area, and daily we deal with about 13.9
million network security events.
As the Secretary of the Senate indicated, we have opened
the Senate galleries for the first time since 9/11.
Our cabinet shop has seen a 130 percent increase in repair
and refurnishing of over 200 pieces of furniture.
Our printing and graphics, direct mail (PGDM) produced 7
million letters for you last year. They work in a space of
about 30,000 square foot in the basement of the Postal Square,
when every expert says they should be operating in an area of
at least 50,000 square feet. In this past year in that
particular unit, they suffered two massive floods of raw
sewerage that they contended with themselves, while they kept
up their work.
Our recording studio doubled the number of TV productions
to 2,700 this past year. Live broadcasts were increased 44
percent.
In the customer support area, the 15 new Senators--we
helped them set up their offices.
We negotiated leases on 171 State offices.
We increased the number of parking spaces, alleviating a
problem.
For the duration of the snowstorm, several of the Capitol
operators never went home. They slept on cots and couches in
order to make sure the telephones were answered.
Capitol facilities reduced the number of employees by five
over the year and kept up the workload that has increased in
the Capitol Visitor Center (CVC).
Through process improvements, our post office reduced their
head count by four FTEs which we moved over into the CVC to
support the appointments desk. They processed 14.4 million
pieces of mail. That is a 50 percent increase.
The expectations of you and your office administrators are
very high. They are very demanding for you and for the
constituents.
Having said that, I am truly well aware of the financial
impact. As a small anecdote, I ran my budget by so many people
in my own office, but spent some time with a good friend of
mine in Chicago. We grew up together: grade school, high
school, college roommates. He went off in the Navy as an
aviator. I went off in the Navy in surface warfare. He runs two
businesses in Chicago and is a part of a bank. Ron Fisher of
Thompson Stainless Steel Polishing and Finished Metals.
When I talked to him about our budget and how he was
working through this and what he expected of what we are doing,
Ron related that the family has been in this business over 60
years. His dad started it. He has 35 employees. They are in
their third year of no raises for those employees. They are in
their third quarter of 32-hour work weeks in order to keep the
people employed with health benefits. He indicates he pays
about $20 an hour, plus benefits for work in this area. Work
that could be done in China for 20 cents an hour.
So, I understand how he is struggling. And he wants to know
how we are doing; what steps the elected officials are taking,
and how I am going to run my office? He readily admits he does
not have the answers to all the problems, but he believes like
you that Government needs to be somewhat reduced.
Our budget is very real. This is the 17th budget I have
participated in as the head of an agency, 7 or 8 years as the
director of the Illinois State Police, running our Capitol
Police, as Phil did, the Metropolitan Police Department, the
Chicago Police Department, and this agency. I do understand the
budget process. Our budget is transparent, and it is our
professional recommendation how best to serve the Senate.
Having said that, I believe we can make changes. I believe
we can deliver the same level of today's service for one more
year at our current expense level. I believe that we can zero
out the $7.7 million that we have requested in non-salary
areas. We can sustain our existing technology and provide for
current services. I do believe, though, that given the demands
placed on us, it will be much more difficult to upgrade
existing technology, to acquire new technologies which improve
existing services, or introduce new services. That is where we
would tighten our belt.
We have already put a freeze on the 19 vacancies we have
currently. In our budget, we asked for five people. I would
withdraw that and not ask to hire anybody. I would respectfully
ask that our unobligated balance funds of $13.9 million that we
have accumulated over the last couple of years, remain under
our control. We would work with you over the year to reprogram
as needed. So I am very much supportive of moving us to a flat
budget.
Now, in the area of the cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs),
and the merit increases, and the other adjustments, I will have
to admit that is a bit more confusing. Our COLA increase of
$1.1 million seems insignificant when compared to the overall
budget of the legislative branch or the deficit, but I do
believe that we should work with you to figure out whether this
is a year for COLAs for us or not. Now, I say that not wanting
to destroy the very morale of the people who have served all of
us so ably, but again, reflecting back as you have on your
constituents, on what is going on in the business world, I do
have a personal, ethical problem with awarding ourselves the
cost-of-living increases. By the same token, I certainly do not
want to be the only organization on the Hill that asks our 959
employees not to take a raise that they fully deserve. The
adjustments of some $4.4 million account for the people we have
hired thus far through the year. So we would need to work very
closely with you on how to ensure that we can maintain the
level of services, keep the people on board, and exceed the
expectations you have for us.
As I mentioned, the Senators and your staff are very
demanding. For instance, I was down in the Hart subway today
and people tried to come through on their way to the Capitol.
The police officers, as we have instructed them to do, turned
them around and told them to head to Russell. And I know how
frustrating that is. Working with the Rules Committee and
yourselves, you have said you want a way to get from the Hart
building where so many of you work, to the Capitol building. So
we have been working over the past year on how to develop that.
It would require putting additional police officers in Hart,
additional magnetometers in Hart, and additional people from
our staff to direct visitors to where they want to go. That is
the type of thing we do and costs money that you have
requested.
So assuming we zero out our budget as close as possible, it
really means your staffs must have a different expectation. The
Secretary mentioned the Senate payroll system. One of the items
that I would suggest we would not fund is the Senate office
personnel system, highly sought by your office administrators
in the Rules Committee. The two systems are related. The
personnel system probably would not be turned on if we
installed it until after the Senate payroll system is done, but
in order to be ready to flip that switch, we would have to
begin on that now. If we delay that now, and in 18 months, as
the Secretary indicates, the Senate payroll system conversion
is complete, someone is going to be standing on that side of
the desk wanting to know why we are not flipping on the Senate
office personnel system. So, when we work on our budget and
reduce it, we have to have a multiyear approach on what that
impact will be.
PREPARED STATEMENT
And let me conclude with this, if I might, and put on my
police board hat for a second. I sat in Chief Morse's chair and
our Police Board strongly supports what he is doing. We are as
disappointed, probably less so than Phil is, on the missteps in
his budget. But I think Phil Morse and his team are putting the
department in the right direction, and we can get through this
error. I stand and the Police Board stands firmly behind Phil.
I look forward to your questions. Thank you.
Senator Nelson. Thank you. I will do what I can to get my
colleagues to be less demanding.
Remember, my name is Benjamin not Merlin.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Terrance W. Gainer
introduction
Mr. 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 2011, the Sergeant at Arms respectfully requests a
total budget of $239,286,000--an increase of $15,685,000 (or 7 percent)
over the fiscal year 2010 budget. This request will allow us to
maintain and improve the level of service we provide to the Senate
community. It will also fund the development and maintenance of
business and network security applications, among other support
services. The Appendix accompanying this testimony elaborates on the
specific components of our fiscal year 2011 budget request.
In developing this budget and our operating plans, we are guided by
priorities framed in our Strategic Plan to include ensuring the United
States Senate is as secure and prepared for an emergency as possible
and providing the Senate with outstanding service and support,
including the enhanced use of technology.
Our accomplishments in the areas of security and preparedness,
information technology, and operations are impressive. This year, I am
pleased to highlight some of this office's activities, to include the
furtherance of our efforts toward enhanced systems for better
communication across the Hill during emergencies; added training
courses and instruction on emergency preparedness, including personal
preparedness at home; updated pandemic plans; and exercises to test our
abilities to work remotely. Our IT successes included a 99 percent and
better on-time arrival for our IT installation team and customer
surveys that revealed a 96 percent rating of satisfactory or excellent
in resolution of our Help Desk calls. We expect this level of
performance to continue through fiscal year 2011 and always strive for
perfection. Our robust messaging infrastructure processed approximately
247 million e-mail messages during the past calendar year. We also
supported and enhanced the Senate's video conferencing capability. We
enhanced security technology for devices used during international
travel, enhanced secure video conferencing, and continued to test our
ability to support mission-essential systems under adverse conditions.
In other services, our Cabinet Shop repaired and refinished nearly 200
pieces of furniture--a 130 percent increase from the previous year--and
designed, built, and installed 129 pieces of furniture, a 42 percent
increase. Our Printing, Graphics and Direct Mail branch utilized the
latest technology in digital printing to produce 6.7 million letters,
an increase of 36 percent. In 2009, PGDM printed 9,434 posters for use
on the Floor during debate.
My organization continues to be a good steward of taxpayers'
dollars as we continue to elevate our performance. Our productivity
increased to unprecedented levels, exemplified by the Senate Post
Office processing the most mail in over a decade with four fewer
people. With the Senate being in session for more days during 2009 than
any year since 1995, our Senate Recording Studio, Doorkeepers,
Appointment Desks and Media Galleries generated more broadcasts,
assisted more visitors and facilitated more media than at any time in
the Senate's history. Last year, for example, Senate Floor proceedings
telecasts increased by 44 percent; the number of Senate television
productions doubled to 2,749, radio productions increased by 38 percent
and Senate committee hearing broadcasts increased by 21 percent. We
accomplished this increase in our efficiency through our dedicated
staff improving processes, using improved technology, and leveraging
existing resources--not by increasing staff. Our customer satisfaction
and employee morale levels have never been higher. All of this is to
say that the Sergeant at Arms Team is working toward the vision of our
Strategic Plan: Exceptional Public Service . . . Exceeding the
Expected.
Assisting with all of the efforts of the Office of the Sergeant at
Arms is an outstanding senior management team including Drew Willison,
who serves as my Deputy; Administrative Assistant Rick Edwards;
Republican Liaison Mason Wiggins; General Counsel Joseph Haughey;
Senior Assistant Sergeant at Arms for Police Operations, Security and
Emergency Preparedness Michael Heidingsfield; Assistant Sergeant at
Arms and Chief Information Officer Kimball Winn; Chief Financial
Officer Christopher Dey; and Assistant Sergeant at Arms for Operations
Bret Swanson. The many goals and 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 (AOC),
the Office of the Attending Physician, and the United States Capitol
Police (USCP). When appropriate, we coordinate our efforts with the
United States House of Representatives and the agencies of the
Executive and Judicial Branches. I am impressed by the people with whom
we work and pleased with the quality of the relationships we have built
together.
I am very proud of all the men and women of the Sergeant at Arms
team who help keep the Senate running. While serving as Sergeant at
Arms, I have seen their great work and devotion to this institution.
The employees of the Office of the Sergeant at Arms are among the most
committed and creative in government.
As always, my staff and I are grateful for the support and guidance
of your subcommittee, the full Committee and also the Senate Committee
on Rules and Administration.
police operations, security, and emergency preparedness
The Police Operations, Security, and Emergency Preparedness (POSEP)
division of the Office of the Sergeant at Arms represents the
integrated plans and programs for:
--Successful execution of law enforcement support and coordination,
--Security of the Senate as both an institutional body and a campus,
--Protection of Members and staff in the District of Columbia and
respective state offices,
--Counterterrorism measures taken to physically guard against attack,
--Continuous Senate operations during minor or major disruptions, and
--Necessary testing, training, and exercising in preparation for any
catastrophic event.
Contingency and Emergency Preparedness Operations
Emergency Communications and Accountability
The Senate collaborated with the House Sergeant at Arms' Office of
Emergency Management to jointly procure and install the WebFusion
software application for use in our emergency operations centers. The
Senate and House are the first Federal entities to connect their WebEOC
(Web Emergency Operations Center) applications using WebFusion within
and between their departments. As a result, the Senate, House, and
Government Accountability Office can now seamlessly share information
during special events and emergency incidents.
The ability to account for Senators and staff remains a priority in
all emergency plans and evacuation drills. Several years ago, we began
to improve procedures for offices to report accountability information
to the USCP and SAA quickly and accurately using proximity card-enabled
laptops and a BlackBerry-based application that allows office emergency
coordinators to account for staff remotely. The backbone of this
capability is the Accountability and Emergency Roster System (ALERTS),
which allows each office to manage staff rosters and designate
individuals receiving e-mail and phone alerts. Senate staff and USCP
personnel are trained to use ALERTS during personalized and classroom
sessions.
We continued to improve notification and communication programs
this year to ensure devices and systems are ready to support the Senate
during local or large-scale emergencies. The primary alert and
notification system for Senate ALERTS provides a single interface for
delivering emergency e-mail, Personal Identification Numbers (PIN), and
voice messages to the Senate population. AIRCON procedures for the
fourth floor of the Capitol were improved.
In conjunction with the USCP, Secretary of the Senate, party
secretaries, and other stakeholders, we conduct monthly Senate ALERTS
tests for staff and biannual tests for Senators. These tests are
designed to ensure our emergency messaging system is reaching all
intended recipients and transmitted through e-mail, PIN, voice,
annunciator, and public address systems. Additional capabilities to be
implemented this year include an emergency alert system that will
provide a text and/or voice messaging service broadcast over existing
and new Senate cable television network channels. The system's capacity
was recently demonstrated to the Committee on Rules and Administration
to finalize standard operating procedures prior to use.
Training and Equipment
Three distinct areas serve as the foundation of our training
program and provide essential knowledge regarding office emergency
coordinator responsibilities, emergency preparedness basics, and
emergency equipment use. Additional training courses focus on the
specialized features of emergency preparedness on the Capitol campus.
Our staff conducts personalized training covering such topics as
accountability, shelter-in-place, evacuations, and internal relocation.
One hundred sixty training sessions were conducted in 2009 to train
5,300 staff. We also recognize staff commitment though our newly-
established Office Emergency Coordinator Certificate Program. Staff
awareness and personal preparedness outside the workplace has been an
equally important goal for which the Personal Preparedness Plan
Tutorial was refined to provide step-by-step planning instructions that
allows staff to create customized preparedness plans. We released an
updated version of the Roadmap to Readiness in 2009 and included an
Emergency Response Guide--a condensed, portable version of critical
emergency information.
Each office receives an array of emergency equipment that is
distributed, inventoried, and maintained by emergency preparedness
staff annually. The caches include escape hoods, Victim Rescue Units,
Wireless Emergency Annunciators, and emergency supply kits. Equipment
accountability and functionality is ensured through testing and
replacement of expired items such as batteries, food, and water. Over
18,800 escape hoods are currently deployed throughout the Senate. This
number includes both adult and baby escape hoods located in Senate
offices and public caches. Additionally, we positioned 1,229 Victim
Rescue Units alongside escape hood bags and in emergency supply kits.
Nearly 1,600 Wireless Emergency Annunciators are deployed
throughout the Senate complex. These devices allow the USCP to provide
verbal instructions to staff during emergencies and other significant
events and to provide periodic updates. A squelch issue reported by
numerous Senate offices was resolved through software and charger base
upgrades completed by January 2010 under warranty at no cost to the
Senate and with limited interruption to offices. This solution has
improved overall system functionality (reception, audibility) and
customer satisfaction throughout Senate office buildings.
Emergency Plans, Operations, and Facilities
Emergency plans emphasizing life safety and continuity of
operations after a disaster continue to be strengthened and fortified.
All new Member offices will receive assistance in developing emergency
action procedures, taking into account that many of these offices will
initially be assigned temporary office spaces. When completed, each new
office will have a functional emergency action plan, established
primary and secondary evacuation routes, mobility-impaired evacuation
procedures, and a complete collection of emergency contact records.
Senate SAA and House planners joined forces with the U.S. Capitol
Police's Emergency Management Division and the AOC to establish
procedures in response to respiratory threats requiring the use of
internal relocation sites. Select facilities throughout the Capitol
complex have been structurally improved and modified to allow for short
term (2-3 hour) sheltering. Fifty-eight Senate office internal
relocation plans were updated with general information and an
additional 65 offices received internal relocation assignments. All
Senate offices now have plans in place. Signage and increased training
have improved awareness of internal relocation sites and procedures.
We developed a new Continuity of Operations (COOP) planning
template for committees in addition to a new program to review existing
Senate office plans that are more than 2 years old. This initiative has
resulted in more than 80 percent of D.C. Member offices being equipped
with updated COOP plans that will allow operations to continue in the
event of relocation. A program has also been implemented to provide
assistance in developing and executing tabletop exercises for D.C.
Member offices to test their published plans. This capability allows
offices to discuss individual roles and responsibilities that must be
performed in order to continue legislative and constituent operations
offsite. The Living Disaster Recovery Planning System is a new software
tool that is being tested and piloted. It will allow Senate offices to
quickly develop COOP plans that denote essential functions and vital
records needed during a COOP incident and store them electronically.
Exercises
A comprehensive exercise program is structured to ensure Senate
plans are practiced and validated regularly. The Sergeant at Arms and
Secretary of the Senate conduct several joint exercises annually with
the USCP, AOC, Office of Attending Physician, party secretaries, and
other key Congressional stakeholders. A new exercise support contract
was successfully put into place with no interruption to existing
services. This year's exercise plan is designed to maintain and
strengthen existing capabilities while addressing emerging needs and
solutions. A total of eight Senate-wide exercises, four tabletops or
guided discussion exercises, and four functional exercises were
completed in 2009. Additionally, a Special Events Planning Guide and
professional development and training program for security,
contingency, and emergency preparedness staff have been developed for
implementation in 2010. We successfully executed a telecontingency
exercise for Pandemic (H1N1) 2009 and updated pandemic plans to reflect
lessons learned from the spring 2009 outbreak. Additionally, we
distributed pandemic health kits and telecommuting guidelines to
facilitate preparation.
The office conducted ``no-notice'' exercises to test select
preparedness functions at various locations in partnership with the
USCP, Office of Attending Physician, Secretary of the Senate, AOC,
Committee on Rules and Administration, and several entities within the
U.S. House of Representatives. The general exercise format included
functional capabilities demonstrations and tabletop scenarios designed
to test the Senate's ability to function during an event that requires
relocating to alternate facilities or contingency sites. After-action
reports were generated after each exercise to document lessons learned
for future plan improvement.
Law Enforcement and Security Operations
Congressional Delegations
Law Enforcement and Security Operations supports Senators and their
staff as they travel overseas to conduct Senate business by providing
security consultation services to prospective travelers in
collaboration with the U.S. Department of State, USCP, and Secretary of
the Senate. Actual budgetary requirements remain relatively low in this
area but must be included in annual requests to support the security
responsibility vested in the SAA organization.
State Office Security and Preparedness Programs
State office programs provide a level of security and preparedness
in participating state offices similar to D.C. offices. There are over
400 state offices, varying from single to multiple staff offices,
located everywhere from commercial storefronts to Federal courthouses.
Several violent incidents in and around Federal buildings and offices
and numerous high-profile and contentious issues arose in 2009, making
these programs critical even with their voluntary implementation
status. To combat these threats, offices receive equipment, training,
and consulting for secure reception areas, access control, and duress
and burglar alarms.
One hundred and one Senate state offices received assistance in
completing a Comprehensive Emergency Plan (CEP) in 2009. The plan
combines security, emergency preparedness, and continuity of government
processes into one document that meets the requirements of the
Congressional Accountability Act. Additionally, all new state offices
received program briefings and emergency equipment and supplies similar
to D.C. offices. Pandemic (H1N1) 2009 information was promptly
disseminated to state offices and approval from the Committee on Rules
and Administration allowed state offices to procure supplies to combat
the spread of the virus. The focus will turn to providing an improved
online software tool for creating CEPs and offering additional
preparedness classes online in 2010.
The State Office Security Enhancement Program provided security
enhancements in 65 Senate state offices in 2009. These enhancements
included building secure reception areas where visitors can be screened
for signs of hostility, intoxication, etc., before allowing them into
the work space; duress buttons; closed-circuit cameras with digital
video recorders; burglar alarms; and other items which provide
increased security. To date, the program has provided security
enhancements in 77 percent of offices located in commercial space and
58 percent of offices located in Federal buildings. Additionally, over
300 state office alarm systems were tested and inspected. The focus
will turn to utilizing a new all-hazard risk assessment to survey all
state offices and offer security enhancements to non-participating
offices in 2010. Collaboration with representatives from the USCP,
General Services Administration, Federal Protective Service, and the
U.S. Marshals Service will continue as will onsite visits.
Senate Campus Access Accommodations
During 2009, we collaborated with the USCP to coordinate and
approve over 259 requests for vehicles requiring special access to the
Senate campus. This total does not include the military and government
arrivals that were also organized. Requests for access continue to grow
with the opening of the Capitol Visitor Center (CVC). Our organization
works closely with our House counterparts to coordinate access on both
sides of Capitol Hill for groups with special needs. This service
involves working directly with Member offices and their constituents to
help resolve accessibility issues and create memorable, meaningful, and
safe trips to the Hill without compromising security. The program's
webpage was recently updated to better facilitate accessibility
requests from Senate offices.
USCP Command Center Support
To refine communication between the USCP and the Senate community
during critical incidents, POSEP staff monitor and support the SAA
Command Center Duty Desk while the Senate is in session.
Campus Security Vulnerabilities
The SAA, USCP, U.S. Secret Service and the Defense Threat Reduction
Agency continue to identify and mitigate security vulnerabilities
throughout the Senate complex. Area-specific security experts are
dedicated to identifying vulnerabilities and implementing solutions.
The Senate's physical presence extends well beyond Capitol Hill and
into Senate state offices across the country.
information technology
Enhancing Service, Security and Stewardship
We continue to provide a wide range of effective information
technology solutions to facilitate the Senate's ability to perform its
legislative, constituent service, and administrative duties; to
safeguard the information and systems the Senate relies upon; and to be
ready to respond to emergencies and disruptions. As in our other areas,
we also emphasize stewardship--the careful use of all our resources,
including the funding we are provided, our personnel and the external
resources that we consume--in all aspects of our information technology
operation.
As we do each year, we have updated and are performing under our 2-
year Information Technology Strategic Plan. The current revision, under
which we will be operating in fiscal year 2011, continues to emphasize
our five strategic information technology goals and the supporting
objectives that drive our information technology programmatic and
budgetary decisions:
--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.
Our fourth information technology strategic goal--``Accessible,
Flexible & Reliable''--may have the most impact of the five goals. The
other goals might be considered self-evident, and we certainly spend a
great deal of effort on them, but this fourth goal undergirds
everything we do from a technology standpoint. We must ensure that
almost every system and every service we deploy can withstand
disruptions to our operating environment; can be reconfigured, if
necessary, to cope with disruptions; and can be used regardless of
whether the person trying to use it is located within one of our spaces
or elsewhere. We continuously re-evaluate existing services and systems
to identify areas for improvement and make those improvements as soon
as we can, in an effort to ensure the Senate can continue to do its
work under any circumstances.
From a budgetary standpoint, more than half of the Chief
Information Officer (CIO) organization's fiscal year 2011 request will
go to direct support of offices through economic allocations,
installing and supporting the equipment they acquire through the
economic allocation, and for other programs that benefit offices
directly. Another third will be devoted to providing services at the
enterprise level, such as information security, the Senate data
network, electronic mail infrastructure, and telephone systems. The
remainder is almost equally divided between supporting the Secretary of
the Senate with payroll, financial management, legislative information,
and disclosure systems and our own administrative and management
systems.
Enhancing Service to the Senate
Customer Service, Satisfaction, and Communication
Our information technology strategic plan stresses customer service
as a top priority, and we actively solicit feedback. We solicit
customer feedback for every Help Desk ticket opened. In major contracts
that affect our customers, we include strict service levels that are
tied to the contractors' compensation--if they do well, they get paid
more; if they do poorly, they get paid less. For instance, during the
past year, the percentage of on-time arrivals for the IT installation
team never dropped below 99 percent. The percentage of IT Help Desk
calls that were resolved during the initial call averaged 54 percent,
and 96 percent of customer surveys rated the IT Help Desk and
installation services as either very satisfactory or excellent. We
expect this excellent level of performance to continue through fiscal
year 2011.
Also in fiscal year 2011, we will continue to communicate
effectively with our customers through a well-developed outreach
program that includes information technology newsletters; periodic
project status reviews; encouraging customer participation in
information technology working groups; weekly technology and business
process review meetings with customers; and joint monthly project and
policy meetings with the Committee on Rules and Administration, the
Senate Systems Administrators Association, and the Administrative
Managers' Steering Group.
Robust, Reliable and Modern Communications
We provide modern, robust, and reliable data network and network-
based services that the Senate relies upon to communicate
electronically within and among D.C. and state offices, to and from
other Legislative Branch agencies, and through the Internet to the
public, other agencies and organizations.
We spent a good portion of this past year enhancing the data
network and the services it delivers in a number of ways to ensure they
do, and will continue to, meet the evolving and increasing needs of the
Senate. We will maintain these efforts in fiscal year 2011 and beyond.
We made several upgrades to our network on Capitol Hill to improve
reliability and respond to the growing demands posed by the
proliferation of multimedia network traffic. We have tripled the amount
of Internet bandwidth available to the Senate and, through the use of
new contracts, are saving approximately $350,000 per year. We expect
that bandwidth demands will continue to grow in fiscal year 2011 and
that we will be able to meet them.
As part of our ongoing effort to improve the ability of state
office staff to work more effectively, we awarded a new contract for
the wide-area network services that support them, and began the
installation of optimization equipment, which compresses and caches
data packets to deliver faster response to state office staff. The new
services contract has lower costs for the existing services, the
savings from which we will use to improve network speeds to those state
offices that have the greatest requirement for them. In fiscal year
2009, we invested $664,000 in the optimization technology, which we are
installing initially in approximately 100 state offices. Our fiscal
year 2010 budget includes funding for an additional 100 units, the
locations of which will be determined by identifying the sites most
likely to benefit from performance gains. We expect these investments
to yield savings through cost containment in fiscal year 2011 and
beyond by reducing the demand for increased bandwidth through the use
of optimization, and by reducing the cost of increased bandwidth
through the terms of the new contract.
We are working with other Legislative Branch agencies to improve
interagency communication technology by implementing and securing an
upgraded Capnet network that connects all the agencies, with the goal
of making this network the preferred path for all interagency
communication.
In addition to our robust messaging infrastructure that processed
approximately 247 million Internet e-mail messages during the past
calendar year, we also support effective communication through the use
of video conferencing. During the last and current fiscal years, we
enhanced our video conferencing infrastructure to allow participation
in a high-definition video conference from virtually anywhere in the
world using an inexpensive Web camera and the Internet. We also
developed capabilities for offices to easily create video content for
their websites or approved external sites using the video
teleconferencing equipment they own.
We continue to make progress toward modernizing the Senate's entire
telecommunications infrastructure to provide improved reliability and
redundancy in support of daily and emergency operations, and a more
flexible and robust infrastructure by taking advantage of technological
advances. We will be replacing systems such as the voice messaging,
group alert, and operational support and billing systems over the
coming year, while we continue to move forward with the replacement of
the main telephone switch.
Web-Based and Customer-Focused Business Applications
As in past years, we continue to add functionality to TranSAAct,
which is our platform for moving business online. Based on the business
requirements of offices and the Committee on Rules and Administration,
we continue to develop TranSAAct to eliminate paper-based manual
processes and move them to the Web. Because it is built on an
extensible modern database framework, TranSAAct allows indefinite
expansion as new requirements are identified and fulfilled. We look
forward over the coming months and years to moving additional business
process to the Web, delivering increasing functionality to office
administrative staff, and reducing the time, paper and errors
associated with the current manual processes.
Showcasing and Promoting Modern Information Technology in
the Senate
We will continue to highlight new technologies in the Information
Technology Demonstration Center through our well-attended demo days,
which feature live demonstrations of new and emerging technologies.
After products are tested and validated in our technology assessment
laboratory, they are then available for offices to try in the demo
center.
In order to perform technology assessments, feasibility analyses,
and proof of concept studies, and to ensure we are considering
technologies that will directly support the Senate's mission, we
continue to improve the capabilities in our 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 we focus on the most relevant technologies and
solutions, the Technology Advisory Group, consisting of CIO staff and
our customers, performs high-level requirements analysis and
prioritizes new technologies and solutions for possible deployment in
the Senate. Among the technologies that we look forward to supporting
over the next few months are the Apple iPhone and a means of
transferring large files outside of the e-mail system. Software is
becoming available that will allow us to support the Apple iPhone with
the security, reliability and performance that our customers expect.
Providing a solution to the problem of transferring large files will
allow media-based and other large files to be moved in a secure and
reliable fashion.
We will continue or intensify these efforts in fiscal year 2011 to
ensure that the Senate is always well-equipped to perform its
functions. To keep our customers informed of our efforts, we publish
the results of our studies on the emerging technology page of the CIO's
area on Webster.
Enhancing Security with Accessible, Flexible and Reliable
Systems
As previously mentioned, we build security, accessibility,
flexibility and reliability into every system and service. In addition
to those efforts, there are two projects to specifically mention.
This past year, we expanded the BlackBerry scanning program
designed to detect security intrusions on wireless devices used during
international travel. By increasing our education efforts, we found
potential security compromises on BlackBerry devices that were taken to
foreign countries. Our strong partnership with the National Security
Agency helped mitigate the risk to the Senate once the discrepancies
were found. We also installed a secure voice conferencing system that
allows up to 20 participants using secure telephone equipment to join
in a secure conference call. We plan to expand the system in the coming
fiscal year to allow up to 60 participants.
Alternate Sites and Information Replication
We continue to test our technology in scenarios in which we are
unable to access our primary infrastructure and primary work locations.
This includes the simulated loss of our primary data and network
facilities, as well as staff work space. All mission-essential Senate
enterprise information systems continue to be replicated at our
Alternate Computing Facility, using our upgraded optical network and
storage area network technology. We conduct a variety of exercises to
ensure we are prepared to cope with events ranging from a burst water
pipe, to a pandemic, to an evacuation of Capitol Hill. In August, we
conducted an unprecedented exercise by shutting down most of the
Senate's mission-critical systems at our primary site, letting them
fail over to or bringing them up at our alternate site, and running
them at the alternate site for a week before reversing the process.
These exercises demonstrate our ability to support mission-essential
systems under adverse conditions and the ability to support substantial
numbers of people working remotely.
We also will continue to invest in storage systems that
automatically replicate information from our primary site to our
alternate site. These storage systems support our mission-critical
systems as well as individual offices.
Securing our Information Infrastructure
As a result of the information security initiatives that we
completed during fiscal year 2009, and were described in last year's
testimony, and continuing information sharing relationships we have
with other government agencies, we improved our insight into the
sources and the dynamic nature of global cyber threats. This improved
insight, combined with the flexible technologies we use in our
information security operations centers, allows us to monitor and
quickly respond to changes in the level of operational risk present in
our information technology environment.
We continue to improve our active prevention and detection
capabilities by deploying technologies and processes that help detect
and prevent most malware infections and attempts to exploit
vulnerabilities. This capability to detect and prevent attacks in real
time is crucial in light of attacks targeting previously unknown
vulnerabilities (``zero-day attacks''). These processes and
technologies shield information technology assets from attack, thereby
reducing the operational impact of downtime on offices and lowering
remediation costs.
Similar to security in the physical world, protecting information
and technology resources requires vigilance and the capability to
detect and deter attacks. We operate in an escalating attack
environment in which the threats to our information infrastructure are
increasing in both frequency and sophistication. This is not just our
own assessment based on our direct experience but also that of the
Director of National Intelligence, who, in his testimony before the
Senate Select Committee on Intelligence on February 2, 2010, stated:
``Malicious cyber activity is occurring on an unprecedented scale
with extraordinary sophistication. While both the threats and
technologies associated with cyberspace are dynamic, the existing
balance in network technology favors malicious actors, and is likely to
continue to do so for the foreseeable future. Sensitive information is
stolen daily from both government and private sector networks,
undermining confidence in our information systems, and in the very
information these systems were intended to convey. We often find
persistent, unauthorized, and at times, un-attributable presences on
exploited networks, the hallmark of an unknown adversary intending to
do far more than merely demonstrate skill or mock a vulnerability. We
cannot be certain that our cyberspace infrastructure will remain
available and reliable during a time of crisis. Within this dynamic
environment, we are confronting threats that are both more targeted and
more serious. New cyber security approaches must continually be
developed, tested, and implemented to respond to new threat
technologies and strategies.''
Our raw numbers bear this out, so we must remain on guard. In 2008,
we averaged 8 million network security events per month; in 2009, 1.6
billion per month; and so far in 2010, 1.8 billion per month.
Fortunately, automated systems detect and defend against the vast
majority of those events.
The threats we face include exposure to attacks that continuously
target vulnerabilities using a variety of malware infection vectors,
including viruses, worms, trojan horses, spyware, spybots, adware,
keyloggers, and rootkits. During the last calendar year, this general
threat environment shifted in focus toward application software that is
vulnerable without the latest patches. Over the course of the year,
vulnerabilities in products as diverse as Adobe Acrobat, Oracle Java,
Microsoft Office, and Internet Explorer were increasingly targeted by
varied means of infection. Many such attacks were facilitated by social
engineering. As we are one of our nation's core government
institutions, we continue to see not only general attacks that affect
all Internet-connected organizations, but also sophisticated and
targeted attacks originating from numerous foreign and domestic
sources.
Last year, the Senate experienced an increase in spear-phishing
attacks. These attacks used socially engineered e-mail messages to
invite specifically-targeted Senate staff members to open malicious
attachments or links. We began detailed tracking of this trend in
August 2009 and through December saw an average of 18 attacks per
month, of which approximately 4 per month resulted in successful
delivery of malicious content. The attacks were widespread during this
period and included the offices of 87 Senators, 13 committees, and 7
others.
Countering the risks inherent in this evolving threat environment
requires situational awareness and robust processes, as well as
continual research, testing and deployment of emerging security
technologies. Recent infections have been highly virulent in nature and
difficult to detect because they exploit newly-identified or
previously-unknown vulnerabilities. These attacks are probably launched
by determined and sophisticated adversaries, and we have very little
advance notice of new types of attacks. Responding to these attacks
requires significant investment in flexible security control structures
and processes that can be rapidly revised and adjusted in response. As
part of this effort, we strengthened our external relationships and use
of external sources to improve our overall threat awareness.
As the global threat environment shifts and intensifies, we
continually modify our processes and technologies to better protect the
Senate's information and IT infrastructure. We also continue to reach
out to Senators and staff to educate them as to securing their
information and avoiding exploitation.
Enhancing Stewardship through Fiscal and Environmental
Responsibility
Stewardship of our resources is intertwined in everything we do, as
well as being a driving force for some of our activities. We continue
to look for ways to improve our processes or technologies to save time,
money, electricity, paper, or other resources. Our CIO organization
consistently and continuously improves the services offered to our
customers while seeking only modest increases in funding. Many
initiatives save offices hundreds or thousands of dollars in costs that
would otherwise be borne out of their official accounts. As most of
these initiatives save money due to a reduction in the purchase of some
commodity, they also fit in with our efforts toward environmental
stewardship. Some examples of our efforts to enhance fiscal and
environmental stewardship are:
--Continuation of our virtualization efforts, where we now reduce
energy and maintenance and support costs by running more than
170 of our servers in a virtual environment. We will continue
an aggressive campaign to virtualize servers until every server
that can be virtualized is.
--Offices, especially those of the new Senators, have taken great
advantage of our virtual machine infrastructure to centrally
host their file and application servers on shared hardware at
our primary and alternate facilities, which greatly increases
server hardware efficiency, and through system duplication and
data replication, offers enterprise class data redundancy and
recovery in the event of a critical local failure or crisis.
The virtual solution also relieves offices of considerable
noise, excess heat, and will increase usable office working
areas for staff. It removes the single point of failure from
existing office servers and meets continuity of operations and
data replication requirements for approximately half the cost
of existing solutions. To date, we are hosting 44 Senate office
file servers on our virtual infrastructure. Virtual servers
running in the data center consume only 15 percent of the
energy of a comparable number of physical servers, reducing
power consumption and air conditioning requirements and saving
Senate funds while enhancing our ability to provide reliable
and redundant services. Fewer servers used by the Senate also
means fewer servers will need to be manufactured and,
therefore, fewer servers will have to be disposed of at their
end of life, which is greening on a national scale.
--We used our catalog to highlight the energy-efficient aspects of
our supported information technology and general office
equipment, and we conducted ``green'' demo days where vendors
could answer questions about their products' environmental
friendliness.
--We continue our efforts to dispose of surplus electronic equipment
through such programs as the Computers for Schools program.
Last year we fulfilled 28 Member office requests and packed and
shipped 345 surplus computers to eligible public schools. We
send other surplus equipment to the General Services
Administration for redistribution or resale.
--We also ensure that the devices we recommend to the Senate meet the
applicable EnergyStar guidelines and, where feasible, the
guidelines for the responsible manufacture of information
technology equipment.
operations
Capitol Facilities
SAA Capitol Facilities serves the Senate community by providing a
clean and professional work environment through its Environmental
Services Division. This division moves Capitol furniture, provides
special event setups in the Capitol--including the ten event spaces in
the Senate expansion space of the CVC--and completes other service
requests. Given the cyclical nature of requests for event setups and
furniture movement, Capitol Facilities was able to improve labor cost
efficiency by supplementing our full-time work force with contracted
labor to meet customer demands during peak request periods. This
resulted in eliminating five vacant full-time positions in the
Environmental Services Division, realizing a first-year cost savings of
approximately $150,000.
In addition to supporting the administrative needs of Capitol
Facilities, the Administrative Division provides event planning
services to the Senate community and their constituents. During the
past year, they assisted in planning 1,188 events in the newly-opened
Senate expansion space of the CVC, in addition to the 2,057 events in
the Capitol event spaces. They also coordinated the 111th Congress
Congressional tag distribution.
The Furnishing Division provides framing services to all Senators
and committees, custom cabinets and other high quality furniture,
carpeting and draperies. Demand for framing services increased by 9
percent over the previous year, while the response time from initial
request to delivery decreased from an average of 6 weeks to 4 weeks in
fiscal year 2009. Recycling furniture is being emphasized. The
Furnishing Division also installed carpeting in 36 offices, including
14 offices created due to expansion to the CVC. The renovation of the
Senate Dining Room was a substantial project and included procurement
of dining chairs, carpeting, draperies, and anteroom furniture, as well
as the design and construction of five cabinets and a Victorian
armoire, completed prior to the Presidential Inauguration.
Printing, Graphics, and Direct Mail
The Printing, Graphics, and Direct Mail (PGDM) branch provides
high-level, direct customer support to the Senate community in
photocopying, graphic design, printing, mailing, archiving, logistics,
and security. During fiscal year 2009, PGDM met a growing demand for
Constituent Services System imaging by scanning, digitizing, and
electronically transferring 1.4 million pages of constituent mail
responses, an increase of 197 percent over fiscal year 2008. The
production of charts was another area with a high interest during
fiscal year 2009; PGDM handled this increase by utilizing upgraded
equipment that eliminated multiple production steps that were required
in the past. In fiscal year 2009, PGDM produced 8,052 charts, an
increase of 20 percent over fiscal year 2008.
PGDM is customer-focused and achieved high levels of customer
satisfaction through maintaining reliable, easy-to-use copiers in
convenient satellite copy centers, which produced over 7.7 million
copies in fiscal year 2009. PGDM also maintained a high level of color
printing, producing over 21.1 million color pages utilizing traditional
offset printing and digital printing. Of the 21.1 million color pages,
2 million were produced digitally, an increase of 33 percent over
fiscal year 2008.
PGDM saved the Senate over $2.2 million in postage costs by
presorting 11.1 million pieces of Senate franked mail, a 2 percent
increase over fiscal year 2008. PGDM continually reviews operations to
ensure the most efficient use of Senate resources and to provide
postage savings to Senate offices. To validate, correct, or remove bad
addresses prior to mailing, new software systems were integrated in a
number of processes. Addresses on constituent letters are validated or
corrected before printing, mass mail address files are validated or
corrected before addressing, and addresses are validated or corrected a
final time while mail is being sorted and discounted. PGDM is testing a
system to provide address correction and validation, and delivery
tracking for shipping of constituent flag requests. PGDM's commitment
to teamwork and excellent customer service extends to our Senate
partners as well. The department's collaborative work with the
Architect of the Capitol fulfilled 70,614 flag requests during fiscal
year 2009 and, in tandem with the Government Printing Office, delivered
over 2.5 million documents (Pocket Constitutions, Our Flag, Our
American Government, etc.) to requestors.
Through effective communication and teamwork, PGDM's Senate Support
Facility upheld the SAA mission for operational security in fiscal year
2009 by receiving 67,740 items from the USCP off-site inspection
facility and transferring them to the Senate Support Facility. This
eliminated 628 truck deliveries to the Capitol complex, while reducing
traffic and allowing the USCP to focus on other safety aspects.
As fiscal year 2009 was an election year, PGDM's ability to
maintain a flexible and responsive organization enabled us to provide
additional support for a variety of essential services. After the
elections, PGDM's Logistics and Operations section assisted with 14
office closings and relocated 4,169 pieces of office equipment. In
addition, PGDM managed logistics for 12 repository shipments consisting
of 10,180 boxes of documents. This repository shipping provided by the
SAA resulted in a savings of $92,979 to Senate offices. PGDM's Printing
and Mailing section shredded 3,705 boxes of documents, an increase of
35 percent over fiscal year 2008.
PGDM's contributions to a successful fiscal year 2009 Presidential
Inauguration included printing, logistics, and security support. PGDM
printed 9,000 letters for the Joint Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies
to be included with Inauguration Invitation packets, which PGDM
addressed and mailed at a discounted rate, saving $1,500 in postage.
PGDM produced 237 signs or banners and 54 charts for a variety of uses
from ceremony planning to crowd control. In support of security
operations for the Inauguration, PGDM produced 200 Presidential
Inauguration booklets for SAA Law Enforcement and Security Operations,
4,000 Threat Assessment action plans and 5,000 vehicle security
placards with reflective labels for the USCP. PGDM's Logistics and
Operations section provided support by assembling and disassembling 31
viewing sites throughout the Capitol, setting up equipment for the
Office of the Attending Physician on the west front of the Capitol, and
receiving and delivering 50,000 invitations.
Central Operations
Smart Card Programs--ID Office
The implementation of Homeland Security Presidential Directive
(HSPD) 12--Policy for a Common Identification Standard for Federal
Employees and Contractors will significantly impact Senators and their
staff whose offices are located in Federal buildings across the
country. While Legislative Branch adoption of HSPD-12 is optional,
compliance will allow Members and staff unhindered access to work
freely within these facilities. We are currently collaborating with our
Executive Branch counterparts to implement compatible access cards to
paid staff beginning with the 112th Congress.
Although a substantial cost is associated with system architecture,
we continue to explore the advantages of Smart Card deployment.
Sophisticated Smart Card credentials can provide multiple functions
beyond current ``flash pass'' identification badges. While maintaining
the proximity technology used in the USCP's current physical access
control system, digital certificates placed on the cards may be used
for encryption of personally-identifiable information exchanged with
Executive Branch agencies in the processing of constituent casework.
Within the Senate community, digital certificates may be used as
digital signatures for financial documents and to facilitate secure,
single network sign-on.
The First Responder Authentication Credential system launched under
the auspices of the Department of Homeland Security outlines issuing
cards to individuals who require access to controlled areas during
emergencies. We envision limited Senate staff receiving these badges at
the beginning of the 112th Congress and are working with our
Legislative Branch partners and other program administrators within the
National Capital Region to determine the Senate's involvement in this
program.
Transportation and Fleet Operations
Transportation and Fleet Operations safely and securely procures,
manages, maintains and disposes of SAA vehicles; provides
transportation and logistics solutions for offices; manages the Senate
Parking Shuttle Service; and operates the parking sticker booth located
in the Russell Garage. The SAA fleet, numbering 57 vehicles in fiscal
year 2009, includes trucks, vans, buses and SUVs used to support the
Senate community. Senate leadership vehicles are leased and
administered by Fleet Operations under the Executive Lease Plan on a
biannual basis. Transportation and Fleet Operations is responsible for
completing work orders, equipment installations, tag/registration
renewals and vehicle inspections for all fleet vehicles, performing
over 400 of these services in fiscal year 2009. Fleet staff scheduled
over 300 transportation requests and transported over 16,000 passengers
through the SAA parking shuttle service in fiscal year 2009, while
issuing over 8,500 permanent and temporary parking permits.
We added 18 additional motorcycle parking spaces to the Thurgood
Marshall Garage, Lot 12 and North East Drive. By altering existing
parking spaces on First Street, NE (north of C Street), from parallel
to angled spaces, we created eight additional parking for visiting
government agency vehicles without negatively affecting available
spaces for First Street permit holders.
Transportation and Fleet Operations is a leader in ``Go Green''
initiatives with 24 flex E-85 fuel vehicles, two hybrids, and one
electric vehicle. Fleet Operations will continue to explore use of
alternative fuel vehicles and currently plans to purchase additional
hybrid and all-electric vehicles in fiscal year 2010.
To further the Senate's ``Go Green'' initiative by reducing fuel
usage and harmful emissions, three electric Segways were purchased for
parking enforcement. Representatives of the Segway Corporation and the
D.C. Metropolitan Police Department trained and certified Parking and
Fleet Operations employees in safe Segway operation. Use of Segways for
parking enforcement resulted in an initial increase of over 25 percent
in the number of parking violations issued. The number is now trending
downwards as more and more drivers are ``taking heed'' and parking off
campus or, if staff, in their assigned areas.
Senate Parking Office
The 31 Senate Parking Office employees are responsible for managing
parking for over 2,500 parking spaces in 28 parking areas, maintaining
accurate records for over 5,700 active permit holders, and providing
transportation needs for Hill staffers, while insuring safety and
security of the Senate campus. With no disruption in service to the
Senate community, the Senate Parking Office relocated seamlessly in
November 2009. To better serve the Senate community during morning and
evening rush hours and to help accommodate the 100 non-reserved permit
holders displaced by the AOC's closure of Lot 575, SAA parking shuttle
service expanded to include extended hours and additional stops. These
steps contributed to a 16 percent increase in ridership during the
first full month of operation. Due to traffic restraints placed during
the 2009 Inauguration, Fleet management organized bus transportation
for Senate staffers to offer an alternative to taking Metro and
driving.
Photography Studio
The Photography Studio provides photography and imaging services
for Senate offices, capturing more than 83,000 photo images and
producing more than 100,000 photo prints in fiscal year 2009. The
Studio's popular image archiving service was used to scan, organize,
and transfer more than 128,000 photo images for archiving purposes in
fiscal year 2009. The Photography Studio is currently replacing the
Photo Browser application with a fully supported digital asset
management product that is well-architected and meets all modern, open
architecture programming standards. Vendors are working with
Photography Studio staff to finalize the configuration and
customization of the Order Fulfillment Module and plan to pilot to
Senate offices by March 2010.
Senate Hair Care
Senate Hair Care serves our customers by offering the latest trends
in hair styling to Senators and thousands of customers, including staff
and the general public. In fiscal year 2009, revenue increased by
$25,290 (5.6 percent), the highest in 10 years. Continuing to build on
the diverse customer base and supplying additional retail products and
services, Senate Hair Care will remain a profitable and indispensable
service offered by the SAA.
Office Support Services
During the past year, Customer Support assisted nine newly-elected
and six appointed Senators in setting up their offices. Additionally,
support of the Hart renovation project continued, as well preparations
for the renovation of the Democratic Policy Committee Studio. The State
Office Liaison negotiated 171 leases for state Senate offices,
including 104 in new commercial space, 32 in new Federal buildings, and
35 renewals. Both Customer Support and the State Office Liaison have
begun preparations for the upcoming elections by ensuring that all
documentation and procedures are current.
Mail Processing
Mail remains a primary medium for constituents to communicate with
Senators and their staff. During 2009, the total volume of mail was
significant, representing the most mail that the Senate has received
and processed in over a decade. Our Senate Post Office received,
tested, and delivered 20,853,000 safe items to Senate offices,
including 14,400,000 pieces of United States Postal Service (USPS)
mail; over 6,000,000 pieces of internal mail that were routed within
the Senate or to or from other government agencies; 95,000 packages;
and 277,000 courier items. Total mail and packages processed increased
by 35 percent and the USPS delivered over 50 percent more mail to the
Senate during 2009 than in 2008.
Protecting the Senate and its staff is the SAA's highest priority.
We work collaboratively with this Committee, the Committee on Rules and
Administration, our science advisors, the USCP, USPS, the White House
Office of Science and Technology Policy, and the Department of Homeland
Security to develop safe and secure mail protocols, and created two of
the best mail processing facilities of this type in the world.
All mail and packages addressed to the Senate's Washington, D.C.
offices are tested and delivered by Senate Post Office employees. The
organizations that know the most about mail safety cite our highly-
trained staff and the Senate mail facilities as among the most
efficient and secure in existence. We have been asked to demonstrate
our procedures and showcase our facilities to other government
agencies, including the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security.
In many ways, our facilities have become the model for others.
We also worked with this Committee and the Committee on Rules and
Administration to build and operate one of the best facilities within
the government to process time-sensitive documents that are delivered
to the Senate. Our Courier Acceptance Site ensures that all same-day
documents are X-rayed, opened, tested, and safe for delivery to Senate
offices. The 277,000 items we processed during 2009 represented a 113
percent increase as compared to the total items processed during 2008.
This also represented the most documents processed at this facility
since it opened in August 2006. We were able to absorb this additional
volume through cross-training our existing staff and by instituting
process improvements rather than increasing our workforce.
Additionally, our organization worked collaboratively with our
science advisors to introduce the first device designed to provide
Senate staff who work in state offices a level of protection when
handling mail. Our science advisors believe that the Postal Sentry, if
used properly, provides the best level of protection to state offices
and their staff should they receive mail containing a potentially
harmful substance. I have requested that all Senate state staff utilize
the Postal Sentry mail processing system whenever mail is opened in
their offices.
Despite the expansion of our capability and the significant
increases in mail volume, we continue to be good stewards of taxpayer
dollars. This is best evidenced by the initiatives we took in 2009 to
further reduce our costs. During 2009, we implemented a technology
solution to replace the manual ``clip and jog'' process that had been
employed for the past 8 years. We worked with our science advisors to
create a solution that would be less damaging to letter mail, without
compromising safety to Senate offices. This process improvement enabled
our Senate Post Office to reduce our full-time employees by four,
without compromising safety or customer service.
We compared our costs to other agencies and discovered that we have
one of the most efficient and cost-effective operations of this type. A
comparative analysis with similar organizations that contract out mail
processing found that the Senate is able to process its mail for up to
62 percent less costs than others.
Capitol Visitor Center
Calendar year 2009 marked the first full year that the Capitol
Visitor Center was open. Many SAA departments were impacted as our
volume of tasks escalated. And, despite the wide variance as to what to
expect, I am pleased to report that all of the SAA departments involved
with the CVC completed all of their tasks on time and within budget.
Our office has been involved with the CVC since its inception. We
worked collaboratively with others, including representatives of this
Committee, to ensure that many of the operational aspects of the
facility achieve desired results. Our participation and the challenges
presented have been vast and varied, including, but not limited to
security, hours of operation, transitioning the Capitol Guide Service,
emergency preparedness, information technology, furnishings for the
Senate side of the CVC, Senate Meeting Rooms setup and maintenance, bus
routes, Capitol tour routes, coat checks, official appointments,
accommodating visitors to the Senate Gallery, broadcast media
infrastructure, ATM service, telephone service and other communications
infrastructure.
Over 2.3 million visitors experienced the CVC during 2009, more
than doubling the number of visitors to the Capitol during 2008, and
represented the most visitors in the Capitol in a decade. Feedback from
our guests has been extremely positive. Each of our departments
affected by the CVC adjusted its processes when this magnificent
addition to the Capitol opened. The impacts to their operations were
significant, yet by maximizing our resources, we were able to achieve
desired results.
Senate Appointment Desks
To improve security and the flow of visitors to the Capitol, we
expanded the Senate Appointment Desks by 100 percent by adding two
desks in the CVC, one located near the main entrance and the other
located outside of the Senate Meeting Rooms on the lower level. These
two additions required four additional FTEs to staff the desks.
Improved technology and process improvements achieved by the Senate
Post Office enabled the transfer of four FTEs from the Senate Post
Office to the Senate Appointment Desks in the CVC. This is another
example where my office exercised fiscal responsibility by finding
resources within our organization rather than increasing costs by
adding to the compliment of employees assigned to the Sergeant at Arms
organization.
Our four Senate Appointment Desks collectively processed 174,484
guests during 2009. The total badges issued were the most in a given
year since the Appointment Desks were created over 25 years ago and
represented a 135 percent increase in guests over 2008. Nearly 55,600
guests entered through the CVC with its state-of-the-art security
features and accommodations. Without the CVC, these guests would have
entered through the North Door of the Capitol, waiting in line, and
baring the elements. 70,099 guests entered via the Russell Appointment
Desk, including 60,994 who were destined for the CVC. This represented
a 912 percent increase over 2008 in the number of badges issued by the
Russell Appointment Desk.
Improving security by reducing the number of guests who enter
through the Capitol's North Door was one of the goals for opening the
CVC. The Capitol Appointment Desk reduced its number of guests by 28
percent, as compared to 2008, to 48,787. This reduction of guests in
the Capitol reduced wait time for entrance through the North Door of
the Capitol, improved visitor flow, and reduced congestion within the
Capitol proper.
Senate Gallery Visitors
We improved the visitor experience for those who want to witness
Senate proceedings from the Gallery. We now process these guests
through the CVC rather than through the Capitol's North Door. This
process enhancement improved security by eliminating the long lines and
congestion that had been commonplace throughout the Capitol. Our Senate
Doorkeepers manage a staging room in the CVC that facilitates the
collection of Gallery prohibited items and the movement of people in a
secure and efficient manner.
The number of visitors to the Senate Gallery increased to 226,690
during 2009. Beginning in August 2009, our Senate Gallery remained
opened during scheduled recesses for the first time since September 11,
2001. 21,359 people visited the Senate Gallery during these recesses
during the latter half of 2009. Our Gallery remains open during
scheduled recesses for 2010.
Even with the increase in visitors, the feedback has been extremely
positive. Senate Gallery visitors have complimented our processes,
including the elimination of long lines, waiting in the elements, the
speed of gaining access to the Gallery, and the educational
opportunities afforded by the CVC.
Doorkeepers
In addition to their work in processing visitors to the Senate
Gallery, our Doorkeepers play an important role in supporting the
Senate. This group of dedicated professionals remains on call to assist
the Senate when needed. A primary role of our Doorkeepers is to support
the Senate Chamber by providing access to those with Senate Floor
privileges and enforcing the rules of the Senate. Additionally, our
Doorkeeper team facilitates the needs of Senators, Senate Floor staff,
and Pages. Despite the fact that our Doorkeepers' footprint of
responsibility increased by over 70 percent, we were able to improve
our performance by utilizing existing resources and by refining
Doorkeepers' job descriptions. This was another opportunity where our
team was able to make significant improvements without adding FTEs.
The year 2009 proved to be one of the busiest and most demanding
years in the history of the Senate Doorkeepers. Our Doorkeepers' work
is yet another example where our process improvements and solid
management principles have enabled us to expand our capability without
adding FTEs. The Senate was in session for 191 days during 2009,
including five Saturdays and four Sundays. This represents the most
days that the Senate was in session for the past 15 years.
Additionally, the Senate was in session for 25 consecutive days from
November 30 through December 24, 2009. This consecutive day streak was
the second longest in Senate history, superseded only in 1917.
The past 3 years have been extraordinary in that the Senate has
been in session an average of 188 days from 2007 through 2009. This
represents a 25 percent increase to the 150 average numbers of days the
Senate was in session from 1996 through 2006. The year 2009 was not
only busy but also an extraordinary and historical year. Our
Doorkeepers provided exceptional support for special events including
the 56th Presidential Inauguration; the swearing-in of Senators elected
during 2008; the swearing-in of new Senators who replaced Members who
left office during 2009; the confirmation of Supreme Court Justice
Sonia Sotomayor; and the impeachment of Samuel Kent.
Our Doorkeepers facilitate the movement and seating of Senators
during Joint Sessions of Congress conducted in the House of
Representatives. During 2009 there were five Joint Sessions, including
the counting of electoral ballots for the 2008 election; the
President's initial address to Congress; the German Prime Minister's
address to Congress; the British Prime Minister's address to Congress;
and the President's address on healthcare.
Congressional tributes and Congressional Gold Medal ceremonies
require the services of Doorkeepers. During 2009, Doorkeepers
facilitated the seating of Members and guests for President Lincoln's
200th birthday; Days of Remembrance; unveiling of the bust of Sojourner
Truth; the President Reagan statue dedication; 9/11 ceremony; the Helen
Keller statue dedication; and the Senator Edward Brooke Congressional
Gold Medal ceremony.
Recording Studio
Our Senate Recording Studio was one of the first departments to
move into the CVC. Our facility has received accolades from guests
since its opening, including Senate Leadership, Senators and their
staff. The convenience of the Studio's location and proximity to the
Senate Floor and Senate subway system please Senators and staff. The
Studio is responsible for providing gavel-to-gavel coverage of Senate
Floor proceedings, broadcasting Senate committee hearings, and
providing radio and television production studios and equipment for
Senators' use.
The year 2009 represented one of the busiest years in the Recording
Studio's history. Senate Floor proceedings telecasts increased by 44
percent; the number of Senate television productions doubled to 2,749;
radio productions increased by 38 percent; and Senate committee hearing
broadcasts increased by 21 percent. Additionally, our Recording Studio
produced Democratic Media Center and Republican Conference shows while
their studios were being renovated. During this 2-week period, the
Recording Studio produced 250 shows, representing a 635 percent
increase from the Senate Recording Studio norm.
The Committee Hearing Room Upgrade Project continued during 2009.
Demand for additional committee broadcasts has been ever increasing,
evidenced by a 21 percent increase in committee hearing broadcasts
during 2009. In 2003, we began working with this Committee and the
Committee on Rules and Administration to upgrade and install multimedia
equipment in Senate rooms. The project includes digital signal
processing audio systems and broadcast-quality robotic camera systems.
To date, we have completed 28 rooms. Room enhancements include
improved speech intelligibility and software-based systems that we can
configure based on individual committee needs. The system is networked,
giving committee staff the ability 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, we installed technologies in our new CVC
Recording Studio to enhance our ability to provide broadcast coverage
of more hearings simultaneously without adding staff. For example, the
Committee Hearing Room Upgrade Project allows 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, has enabled us to increase our simultaneous
broadcast coverage of committee hearings from five to as many as
twelve.
Our Senate Recording Studio is another shining example of where we
have increased productivity by utilizing process improvements and
technology rather than adding FTEs.
Media Galleries
The four Senate Media Galleries are comprised of the Senate Daily
Press Gallery, the Senate Periodical Press Gallery, the Press
Photographers' Gallery and the Senate Radio and Television Press
Gallery. The unique structure of the four Media Galleries requires them
to work closely with their respective Standing and Executive
Correspondent's Committees, our organization, the USCP and the Senate
Committee on Rules and Administration in order to facilitate media
arrangements and credentials for the over 7,000 credentialed media
covering Senators, Senate committees and related media events.
While the media industry has recently seen historic shifts in
formats and structures of media outlets which appear to have caused a
general decline in revenue and circulation for traditional media, the
Media Galleries have seen a burgeoning population of new and emerging
media. The staff of the Media Galleries have diligently worked to
accommodate this new population through the current credentialing
process.
In the past year and a half, the Media Galleries handled record
numbers of media credential applications for the 2008 Presidential
Conventions and the 2009 Inauguration. The vast number of national and
international media outlets interested in covering the Presidential
Conventions and Inauguration forced the Media Galleries and their small
staffs to innovate the way we process credential applications, assign
media workspace, and distribute press passes, using cutting-edge
technology as a guide. The Media Galleries worked closely with the
Sergeant at Arms Computer Design teams to create new software database
information management programs that took advantage of the growing
reliance on the Internet. While the systems were designed to handle
larger capacities, they were occasionally overwhelmed by the volume of
requests that poured into the Media Galleries. When the application
period finally closed, the Media Gallery staffs had to quickly process
thousands of documents in order to assign the limited media resources
available to cover the Inauguration. If not for the diligent work of
all our Media Gallery staff, the process would never have been
completed on time.
The growth of 24-hour news channels and websites has increased the
demands for constant news. As a result, Congress may be covered in more
detail than ever before. In response to the changing needs of the
reporters covering Capitol Hill, all four Media Galleries worked with
the office of the SAA Chief Information Officer to upgrade the
technical infrastructure of the Media Galleries offices including
incorporating Wi-Fi in all four Media Galleries.
Senate Daily Press Gallery
Just over a year ago, we completed remodeling and rewiring the
Daily Press Gallery. This was the first such renovation since the early
1980s. Restoring the suite of rooms that has been occupied by the press
since before the Civil War was a mammoth undertaking that involved a
number of SAA and AOC offices. Furniture was replaced; wires were
completely removed and redone; and walls, ornate ceilings, Minton-tiled
floors and historic mirrors were completely restored down to the
smallest detail. The renovation not only improved the gallery's
appearance and working conditions for reporters, it did away with piles
of haphazard wires that had evolved over the years.
Senate Periodical Press Gallery
While high-profile hearings garner the most attention by staff and
media, the Senate Periodical staff always strives to work with all
Senate committees on their media arrangements for typical hearings and
events. Senate Periodical Press Gallery staff worked with new Committee
and Senator Press Secretaries in order to familiarize them with the
Periodical Gallery's functions at committee hearings. Constant
collaboration occurs with various Senate committees to set up media
arrangements for a number of widely-viewed hearings, including
confirmation hearings for all Presidential nominations, Senate Budget
consideration, Senate Appropriations Committee events, and Senate
Banking Committee consideration of the automobile industry and banking
crises.
Press Photographers' Gallery
The primary role of the Press Photographers' Gallery is to
credential photographers and to assist at news events at the Senate.
Our staff also has the unique responsibility of assisting at large news
events and hearings in the House of Representatives.
The demand for news images has increased as Web publications expand
and gain popularity. Also, deadlines for pictures have shifted from
daily to constantly, as organizations and publications strive to have
the latest pictures available for online publications. These radical
changes in how events are captured have increased the number of
photographers covering Capitol Hill on a daily basis, as more news
organizations seek to the fill the demand for more images.
Senate Radio and Television Press Gallery
In an effort to address new requirements for electronic media
coverage of Senate events, improvements were made in upgrading the
technical infrastructure of Senate committee hearing rooms and other
news event locations throughout the Senate campus. For example, in a
collaborative effort with the Senate Committee on Rules and
Administration, Gallery staff oversaw the installation of fiber optic
cable in 14 Senate committee rooms. Along with the Senate committee
rooms, several meeting rooms in the Capitol and the Senate wing of the
CVC were outfitted with fiber optic cable.
In addition to upgrading the Senate committee rooms, the backdrop
in the Senate Radio-TV Gallery studio was renovated to accommodate
high-definition news broadcasts. The improved backdrop enhances
Senators' appearances by incorporating several enriching elements such
as columns and LED lighting.
Employee Assistance Program
Our Employee Assistance Program (EAP) offered a variety of services
to staff, Pages, interns, and family members. In 2009, 4.6 percent of
Senate employees and/or their family members met with/spoke to an EAP
Counselor, 263 employees took a mental health on-line screening, and
2,042 employees attended EAP training. EAP expanded outreach programs
through updating materials on a wide variety of mental health topics;
providing an interactive and informative Web page that includes
confidential mental health screenings, self-paced training modules and
access to mental health, management and trauma response resources; and
offering a variety of training programs including video
teleconferencing training programs for state offices. EAP continued to
hone, expand and utilize the skills of the 32 members of the Senate
Peer Support Team through a series of presentations, trainings and
informational lectures. In July 2009, EAP began working with a vendor
to provide Senate employees and their family members with access to
personalized information and referrals for childcare and parenting,
adult care and aging, education, legal and financial concerns. Between
July 1 and December 31, 2009, 1,751 employees and their family members
utilized these services.
appendix.--fiscal year 2011 budget request
attachment i.--financial plan for fiscal year 2011
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
[Dollar amounts in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2011 vs. fiscal year 2010
----------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year Increase/
Fiscal year 2011 Amount decrease
2010 budget request (percent)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Operations and Maintenance:
Salaries............................................... $70,000 $78,000 $8,000 +11.4
Expenses............................................... $90,409 $92,403 $1,994 +2.2
----------------------------------------------------
Total General Operations and Maintenance............. $160,409 $170,403 $9,994 +6.2
====================================================
Mandated Allowances and Allotments......................... $52,239 $53,596 $1,357 +2.6
Capital Investment......................................... $4,503 $9,612 $5,109 +113.5
Nondiscretionary Items..................................... $6,450 $5,675 ($775) -12.0
----------------------------------------------------
TOTAL................................................ $223,601 $239,286 $15,685 +7.0
====================================================
Staffing................................................... 961 962 1 +0.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To ensure that we provide the highest levels and quality of
security, support services, and equipment, we submit a fiscal year 2011
budget request of $239,286,000, an increase of $15,685,000 or 7 percent
compared to fiscal year 2010. The salary budget request is $78,000,000,
an increase of $8,000,000 or 11.4 percent, and the expense budget
request is $161,286,000, an increase of $7,685,000 or 5 percent. The
staffing request is 962, an increase of one.
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
$78,000,000, an increase of $8,000,000 or 11.4 percent compared to
fiscal year 2010. The salary budget increase is due to the addition of
one FTE, a COLA, merit funding, and other adjustments. The additional
staff will support increased demand for services, as well as advancing
technology.
The general operations and maintenance expenses budget request for
existing and new services is $92,403,000, an increase of $1,994,000 or
2.2 percent compared to fiscal year 2010. Major factors contributing to
the expense budget increase are escalating costs of the IT Support
Contract and other IT Support agreements, $2,042,000; replacement of
the Senate Office Personnel System (SOPS), $2,000,000; IT Security
consulting and equipment, $1,000,000; audio visual equipment intended
for the Senate Emergency Operations Centers (EOCs), $1,000,000; and a
decrease due to Research Services' transfer to the Secretary of the
Senate, $3,889,000.
The mandated allowances and allotments budget request is
$53,596,000, an increase of $1,357,000 or 2.6 percent compared to
fiscal year 2010. This budget supports state office rents, $16,594,000;
voice and data communications for Washington, D.C. and state offices,
$15,385,000; purchase of computer and office equipment, $13,894,000;
procurement and maintenance of member office constituent services
systems, $4,500,000; wireless services and equipment, $1,548,000; and
state office security enhancements, $1,275,000.
The capital investment budget request is $9,612,000, an increase of
$5,109,000 or 113.5 percent compared to fiscal year 2010. The fiscal
year 2011 budget request includes funds for equipment purchases for the
Storage Area Network (SAN), $2,775,000; hardware related to the network
upgrade project $2,500,000; data network expansion, $1,600,000; Senate
Floor Camera replacement, $1,500,000; PGDM server replacement,
$400,000; replacement of a digital printer, $200,000; layout and design
upgrades, $162,000; and EPPN upgrade, $100,000.
The nondiscretionary items budget request is $5,675,000, a decrease
of $775,000 or 12 percent compared to fiscal year 2010. The request
funds projects that support the Secretary of the Senate: contract
maintenance for the Financial Management Information System,
$3,824,000; maintenance and necessary enhancements to the Legislative
Information System, $885,000; support for public records systems,
$500,000; and support for payroll systems, $466,000.
UNITED STATES CAPITOL POLICE
STATEMENT OF HON. PHILLIP D. MORSE, SR., CHIEF
ACCOMPANIED BY:
DAN NICHOLS, ASSISTANT CHIEF
GLORIA JARMON, CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
Senator Nelson. Chief Morse.
Mr. Morse. Chairman Nelson, Senator Murkowski, Senator
Pryor, I am honored to be here today and I appreciate the
opportunity to be able to present the United States Capitol
Police (USCP) budget for fiscal year 2011.
Behind me is sitting my executive management team, along
with my Assistant Chief, Dan Nichols and my Chief
Administrative Officer, Gloria Jarmon.
And with your permission, sir, I would like to submit a
written testimony for the record.
Senator Nelson. Without objection.
Mr. Morse. Thank you.
First, I would like to thank the subcommittee for its
sustained and unwavering support for the men and women of the
United States Capitol Police. You and your staff have continued
to generously support both the mission, as well as our
personnel, not just in a monetary way, but also in a private
and public recognition of our role and responsibilities. The
security and protection of this great institution is, indeed,
our job, but we consider it to be a sacred duty and it is a
privilege to serve you, the congressional staff, and the
millions of visitors from every corner of the world who come to
the United States Capitol complex every day of the year.
Over the last year, the department has, with your support,
successfully implemented the Library of Congress police merger.
We have transitioned our primary fleet to a fleet leasing
program through the General Services Administration and
replaced ballistic vests for our officers. We have proceeded
with the migration of our financial system to the Library of
Congress for cross-servicing.
Our mission focused request is grounded in the USCP's
strategic goals that describe our mission and frame our budget
planning, assessing the threat, taking proactive measures to
mitigate the threat, responding in the event of a disruption,
and supporting the USCP's mission through constructive internal
business processes and controls that foster effective and
efficient mission delivery.
This budget is in strong support of these goals. Yet, the
department is flexible enough to achieve and maintain solid
mission-critical results with efficient use of resources at a
funding level near the fiscal year 2010 appropriated level, if
necessary.
The proposed 2011 budget is designed to address and
mitigate identified security challenges that potentially affect
the safety and security of the Capitol complex and keep up with
the changing security environment and threat level. And it also
contains requests to solidify innovative protective technical
initiatives previously funded and that are underway, for
example, the radio modernization initiative and continuing to
support the alternate computer facility.
In addition, it incrementally augments our force
development goals to maximize personnel depth and strength.
Based on the department's rigorous force development
business process that includes a review of our budget
requirements by our executive management team, our executive
team, and the Police Board, the department has identified for
fiscal year 2011 budget consideration only those increases most
critical to further our mission and support certain projects
planned by our legislative partners. We are well aware and we
understand the economic climate and the effects on our country,
the legislative branch, and the entire Federal Government, and
we want to assure you that the USCP will successfully adapt our
resources and continue to safeguard the congressional
community.
As for the budget shortfall and resulting budget amendment,
when things do not go right in the police department, I take
full responsibility for it. I take quick action to stabilize
the situation. I assess it and I find a way to fix it. And then
I ensure that it never happens again. In this case, I have
taken responsibility for it. I have found solutions and
proposed those solutions to the Capitol Police Board. Security
of the complex and personnel programs will not be affected, and
I want to pledge to you that this type of incident will not
happen again.
PREPARED STATEMENT
Finally, I would like to thank all the men and women of the
Capitol Police for their support of me and their outstanding
performance yet again another year in keeping this campus safe.
Thank you.
Senator Nelson. Thank you, Chief.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Phillip D. Morse, Sr.
Chairman Nelson, Senator Murkowski, and Members of the Committee, I
am honored to be here today, and appreciate the opportunity to present
the United States Capitol Police budget request for fiscal year 2011.
First, I would like to thank the Committee for its sustained and
unwavering support for the men and women of the United States Capitol
Police. You and your staff have continued to generously support both
the mission as well as our personnel--not just in a monetary way, but
also in private and public recognition of our role and
responsibilities. The security and protection of this great institution
is indeed our job, but we consider it a sacred duty and privilege to
serve you, the congressional staff, and the millions of visitors from
every corner of the world who come to the United States Capitol complex
every day of the year.
Due in large part to your support, the Department continues to
progress and evolve toward our shared vision of becoming a premier
security and law enforcement agency.
With your support, the Department has over the last year
successfully implemented the Library of Congress Police Merger,
transitioned our primary fleet to a fleet leasing program through the
General Services Administration, replaced ballistic vests for our
officers, and proceeded with the migration of our financial management
system to the Library of Congress for cross-servicing.
With regard to our progress on addressing administrative
deficiencies and improving corresponding business practices, we
continue to experience challenges.
In recent weeks, we discovered some calculation errors that
occurred with regard to the formulation of our fiscal year 2011 budget
request. I am able to report to you however, that we identified the
sources and scope of the errors, and have submitted an amended budget
request to the Congress for consideration.
These calculation errors originated in our fiscal year 2010 budget
causing a need to identify funds within our accounts to address funding
requirements. We have identified these funds and will be asking for
your support through a reprogramming request in the near future.
The modifications to our intended fiscal year 2010 budget execution
will ensure our ability to maintain the security of the Capitol Complex
and to support our workforce by maintaining our critical human capital
programs. They will not be without pain for the Department, but are
necessary for our mission capability.
Our amended fiscal year 2011 budget request does not change the
scope of the mission requirements within the request before you. It is
still with two basic principles in mind--moving forward and achieving
continuous improvement--that our fiscal year 2011 budget request is
based.
Our mission-focused request is grounded in the USCP strategic goals
that describe our mission and frame our budget planning: (1) assessing
the threat to the Capitol community, (2) taking proactive measures to
mitigate the threat so as to prevent disruption to the legislative
process, (3) responding in the event of a disruption so that Congress
can continue to operate, and (4) supporting USCP's mission through
constructive internal business processes and controls that foster
effective and efficient mission delivery.
This budget is strong in support of those goals--with modest
increases and initiatives that move us soundly toward our vision of a
model, state-of-the-art Federal law enforcement agency--yet it is
flexible enough to achieve and maintain solid mission-critical results
with efficient use of resources at a funding level near our fiscal year
2010 appropriated level.
The proposed fiscal year 2011 budget is designed to address and
mitigate identified security challenges that potentially affect the
safety of the Capitol complex and keep up with the changing security
environment and threat level, and also contains requests to solidify
innovative, protective technological initiatives previously funded and
underway, for example, the Radio Modernization Initiative and
continuing support of the Alternate Computer Facility. In addition, it
incrementally augments our force development goals to maximize
personnel depth and strength.
I would first like to offer the Committee an overarching summary of
our fiscal year 2011 request. I will follow the summary with a
discussion of specific budget items of particular significance to you
and the Department.
The fiscal year 2011 request totals $385 million representing an
overall increase of 17 percent, or $57 million over the enacted fiscal
year 2010 funding level of $328 million. Our request represents
increases in three areas: (1) Personnel or ``salaries''; (2) General
expenses; and (3) Special projects and new initiatives.
With regard to personnel, we are requesting an overall increase
which includes funding for 52 new sworn positions and 12 new civilian
positions.
With regard to general expenses, we are requesting an overall
increase which is primarily due to the modifications made to general
expenses in 2010 including funding for operational travel; outfitting
and training new sworn personnel, if approved; enhanced management
systems, et cetera.
With regard to the third area of special projects and new
initiatives, we are requesting funding that would support the final
phase of the Radio Modernization Initiative and certain other new
annual and multi-year initiatives that would fund security requirements
primarily associated with projects expected to be undertaken by the
Architect of the Capitol, as well as other security related programs.
The combined bottom line for all three of these areas represents an
overall increase of 17 percent over enacted fiscal year 2010 funding
levels.
The first subject area that I would like to provide more detail for
is in the area of personnel salaries and overtime, where we are
requesting an increase of which includes staffing enhancements and
funding for overtime.
Personnel costs are reflective of salaries and benefits--to include
an anticipated cost-of-living increase, insurance benefits and
retirement, within-grade step increases and promotions, and overtime.
In addition, personnel costs also include funding for workers
compensation, specialty-assignment pay for sworn personnel, metro-
transit subsidy, incentive awards, and student loan repayment programs.
The Department's fiscal year 2011 personnel request reflects our
continuous efforts at all levels of management to effectively manage
our existing resources to achieve the best possible balance of staff-
to-mission requirements. We are constantly analyzing our workforce to
align job functions, assignments, workload, risk management, and
organizational readiness along with the ever-changing threat
assessments and mandatory mission requirements of a dynamic
Congressional community and its environs.
Using the 2007 Enlightened Leadership Solutions (or ELS) manpower
study, we now have a multi-year roadmap to help guide our budget and
staffing recommendations regarding the resources needed to accomplish
each operational process as identified in the study.
To better manage our sworn resources and to work toward determining
the actual manpower needed to meet our existing mission, in conjunction
with the ELS study, a custom-designed formula was devised to determine
the true number of work-hours in a year that each officer is available
to perform work. This ``utility'' number is used to determine overall
staffing requirements, and balances the utility of available staff with
annual salary and overtime funding along with known mission
requirements such as post coverage, projected unscheduled events such
as demonstrations, late sessions, holiday concerts, et cetera, and
unfunded requirements that occur after the budget is enacted, such as
unforeseen critical emergency situations.
The Department's current authorized sworn strength does not
entirely provide the necessary resources to meet all our mission
requirements within the established utility. Thus, mission requirements
in excess of available personnel must be addressed through use of
overtime, identification of efficiencies such as post realignment and/
or reductions, technology, and cutbacks within the utility, such as
reductions in the number of hours of training.
With that in mind, our requested fiscal year 2011 personnel costs
support the current authorized staffing levels of 1,800 sworn and 443
civilians as well as a request for 52 new sworn and 12 new civilian
positions, resulting in a total overall increase in personnel from
2,243 to 2,307.
In fiscal year 2011, the addition of 52 new sworn positions would
address mission needs and work toward our goal of closing the gap--as
validated by the ELS manpower study--between existing mission
requirements and current staffing levels through assignment of the
additional personnel to the Uniformed Services Bureau.
The approval of additional sworn strength in fiscal year 2011 will
have a positive effect on our ability to manage the inter-related
balance of mission requirements, overtime use, and officer training.
The request for 12 new civilian positions will provide much needed
professional and technical support for the Department in the areas of
fleet management; budget analysis; IT security, network operations,
systems administration, and telecommunications; and physical security
operations, as well as three positions in the Office of Inspector
General, consisting of one criminal investigator, one financial
management and internal control auditor, and one information technology
and contract auditor.
It should be noted that half of the requested new civilian
positions would replace existing contract employees, with the resulting
savings in contract dollars offsetting the cost of additional personnel
added to the permanent employment rolls.
At current overtime levels, we are able to meet our mission by
continuing to adjust officers' training hours and finding efficiencies
in post requirements. However, any additional or new mission
assumptions will require additional sworn personnel or equivalent
overtime to meet new requirements.
At current staffing levels, the Department's fiscal year 2011 basic
overtime projection of approximately $27 million reflects an increase
over the $25.5 million that was provided for in fiscal year 2010. This
increase of $1.5 million adjusts for mostly cost-of-living.
Other requested increases to overtime include an additional
$201,000 in funding to cover Library of Congress' non-reimbursable
events, and $1.84 million for overtime necessary to secure new multi-
year AOC initiatives, to include the Capitol Dome Skirt, and Utility
Tunnel projects.
These items bring the total fiscal year 2011 overtime request to
$29.094 million which is an increase of $3.6 million--or 14.1 percent
over the enacted fiscal year 2010 level for overtime.
The second area of detail is our requested general expenses budget,
which includes protective travel; hiring, outfitting, and training of
new sworn personnel; supplies and equipment; management systems; et
cetera.
Significant savings in our general expense budget provides an
offset to our requested increases by realizing reductions in major
areas such as contractual services, executing efficiencies in physical
security systems, movement of our financial systems from the Department
of the Interior's National Business Center to the Library of Congress,
and the realigning of core training requirements to specific and
critical job competencies.
The third and final area of detail is a request for multi- and no-
year funding for special projects and new initiatives, to include the
final phase of the Radio Modernization Initiative, Alternative Computer
Facility fit-out, and the design and installation of security equipment
and systems for utility tunnels, hallways, and garages throughout the
Capitol complex. The total funding requested for these special projects
is $32.187 million, of which $15.956 million is for the final phase of
the Department's multi-year Radio Modernization Initiative.
Over the past 2 fiscal years, the Congress approved the USCP's
requests to develop an encrypted, interoperable digital radio system
able to communicate securely and immediately across the Capitol campus
as well as with other first responding Federal, state and local law
enforcement partners.
The upgrade to a new-generation VHF trunked radio communications
system will achieve reliable, secure radio contact in routine day-to-
day operations and in emergency situations from any location within the
jurisdiction of the USCP.
We are grateful for the Congress' substantial response to our
previous requests in the fiscal year 2009 Supplemental and fiscal year
2010 annual appropriation that addressed this critical communications
vulnerability, supporting our endeavor to provide dynamic
enhancements--in this post-9/11 security environment--to our aging,
outdated radio equipment and infrastructure.
I am especially pleased to report that the system delivery for
Phase I of the radio modernization is on schedule and within budget for
completion within budget estimate.
The current fiscal year 2011 budget request of $15.956 million over
2 years is for the final indoor portion of this highly complex project.
This request falls within the contract's broadly estimated range of
costs, including contingencies, which we provided for you during the
fiscal year 2010 budget discussion. The final phase will provide the
infrastructure changes necessary to support the new radio system.
To calculate the cost of completing the Radio Modernization
Project, our NAVAIR contractors--who are highly experienced in design
and implementing communications systems for other Federal agencies--
conducted a detailed design engineering study of each building, garage,
tunnel, and outdoor site in the Capitol complex--each with unique
characteristics requiring different engineering design solutions. With
Congressional approval of this request, we expect the project to be
completed on-time and within budget by 2012.
Further, the Department is requesting $16.231 million to support
eight additional new security initiatives. These include: security
enhancements for the Alternate Computer Facility; security designs for
the utility tunnel system; design and installation of a security
program for the AOC's Dome Skirt Rehabilitation project; design of a
security management system for the Federal Office Building 8; design
and installation of a security camera system in egress points within
House and Senate office buildings; design and installation of security
management systems within House and Senate parking garages; a perimeter
security and a garage and tunnel screening.
Based on the Department's rigorous Force Development business
process that includes review by our Executive Management Team,
Executive Team, and Police Board of our budget requirements, the
Department identified for fiscal year 2011 budget consideration only
those increases most critical to further our mission and support
certain projects planned by our legislative partners.
We are well aware of and understand the economic climate that
affects our country, the Legislative Branch and the entire Federal
government, and I want to assure you that the USCP will successfully
adapt our resources and continue to safeguard the Congressional
community.
I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today and would
be glad to answer any questions you may have at this time.
SOS deg.SENATE INFORMATION SERVICES
Senator Nelson. Let us do a 5-minute round.
Nancy, the $32 million, which really stands out, involves a
multiyear request for certain continuing services. Is that
something that has to be done on a multiyear basis? Because the
implications to the budget are so significant that one wonders
if it would not be better to spread that out over a longer
period of time. What have you found about that?
Ms. Erickson. Well, we would be happy to work with your
subcommittee staff to work out a funding mechanism for this
program.
My concerns are that our staff working with the Sergeant at
Arms staff and the chairman's staff--we have looked at the
trends, the cost increases in this program over the years.
There has been real consolidation in the news industry and so
there is not the competition that there used to be. So it is
fair to say there has been an average of a 10 percent increase
in a number of contracts over the years.
I also know that the Sergeant at Arms has incurred other
costs associated with this program that required them to tap
into other funding sources. I want to create a firewall between
these program funds and my operating budget funds so that it is
very transparent.
And then the other reality is, as you well know, we have a
strong track record of operating under continuing resolutions,
and it is important, when we are negotiating these contracts
that are 1-year contracts with the option of a 4-year renewal,
that we have a little bit of flexibility in our budget to fund
these contracts.
But I think it is fair to say, yes, we do have flexibility
and look forward to working with your subcommittee's staff on
some other funding options.
Senator Nelson. Well, as you know, we have trouble even
with the Medicare doctor fix to get something over some short
period of time, and if somebody identifies this at 5 years,
they will ask us why we cannot fix everything for 5 years. So
that is one of those optic things, but obviously we need to
look at it and if there is a way to retain some efficiencies
cost effectively, we ought to seek to do that.
Ms. Erickson. And I will add I am very proud of our
library's staff. They have saved just this year $55,000 over
the next 4 years in negotiating similar contracts that we have
in the Senate Library. So I can assure you that we are going to
be shrewd negotiators with these contractors and get the best
dollar for the Senate.
Senator Nelson. Well, I think that we would have some
leverage to be able to do that, but there is a limit to what
that can do.
Ms. Erickson. Right.
SOS deg.SENATE EMPLOYEES CHILD CARE CENTER
Senator Nelson. Also, could you give us an update on the
Senate child care feasibility and expansion study that we
directed last year, together with the AOC?
Ms. Erickson. Correct. The AOC was charged with the child
care study, consulting with the Secretary's office. I just
received the report, and let me report on some good things have
happened since last year's hearing and issues that Senator
Pryor and his staff notably have raised.
There is wait list transparency now. The flip side is,
unfortunately, there was a long wait list. We have roughly 106
families that are waiting to get into the infant room, and
there are currently only nine slots. There is a waiting list of
over 143 to get into the child center as a whole. But for the
first time, families now know where they stand on the wait
list.
Another positive development is the Parent Cooperative
Board decided to adopt Senate preference policies. So parents
who have children get preference. If they have a child already
in the day care center, they also have sibling preference.
Right now, 72 percent of the families that are enrolled in the
Senate child care center have one parent who is a Senate
employee. I believe over 82 percent of the families have at
least one parent who works in the legislative branch.
I think it is fair to say the goal is to increase the size
of the Senate day care center from 68 to 134 slots overall. I
think it is also fair to report that it is probably unrealistic
that we can expand the current site or reconfigure the current
space. So I think the subcommittee will receive recommendations
for building or leasing property. I think it is also unlikely
that we will be able to find another child care center to
partner with. But we will be providing that report to you and
your staff shortly.
Senator Nelson. Thank you.
Senator Murkowski.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
SOS deg.SENATE INFORMATION SERVICES
Nancy, let us go ahead and continue with the SIS program,
the Senate information services program. Tell me why we are
moving it from the Sergeant at Arms to your offices.
Ms. Erickson. Well, it actually was a recommendation that
was made by the Sergeant at Arms staff. Tom Meenan, who manages
the program and another colleague--one colleague had retired
and Tom Meenan is nearing retirement. And he looked at the
model that is used in the Government to finance other similar
enterprise contracts such as the SIS program, and they are
typically run and managed by people with a library of science
degree. So it was a decision that we embraced. It was something
that we spent a great deal of time deliberating, and the
recommendation was that we felt that our folks who already
negotiate such contracts for our Senate library would be in the
best position to take over this program.
And I do think there are some improvements that can be made
in the program. I think we need to do a better job of doing
outreach in the Senate community to make sure they are aware of
these free online services that your offices----
Senator Murkowski. That is one of the questions that I have
of you. To what extent are these services actually utilized?
Who uses them? Are all of the services necessary? Are there
some that can be eliminated? And as this transfer is being
made, are you doing that kind of a review to figure out whether
we are current? We know that access to information today--what
is current today is not current tomorrow, and users change
dramatically. So are we giving this that level of scrutiny?
Ms. Erickson. We are. The services can be found on Webster,
and some of the examples of some of these services we provide
would be CQ, National Journal, BNA, Roubini Economics,
Newswatch. These are real live, up-to-the-minute news
developments that you can have sent to your desk to track
information on a Member or issue.
Senator Murkowski. Do we survey the Members to ask them----
Ms. Erickson. Well, the last study, Senator, that was
conducted was in 1999 by the Sergeant at Arms, and our library
staff initiated a recent study. We decided to do it on our own
as a cost-saving mechanism rather than to hire an outside firm.
So we are in the process of looking at those results and
looking at usage statistics----
Senator Murkowski. Will you take those assessments and
analyses into account before you negotiate with----
Ms. Erickson. Yes, definitely. And we will--as I mentioned,
the Senate Rules Committee has close oversight of this program,
and we will not be making any decisions without getting Senate
Rules Committee approval, and we will be going over the survey
results, usage statistics.
I also think we need to do a better job of providing
training for offices on how to use these online services.
Senator Murkowski. Let me ask the math question here. Your
budget increases $32 million, and as the chairman has noted,
that raises eyebrows here. But yet, the Sergeant at Arms'
budget, which is transferring this same system over to you, is
only being decreased by $4 million. What happens to the money
in the middle?
Ms. Erickson. Well, as I mentioned, Senator, we looked at
the historic cost increases of these programs and money that
was spent and decided that it was an opportunity to take a
fresh look at this program and how we can manage it most
effectively for the Senate. And it was a recommendation of the
people who had managed the program that multiyear funding would
provide us with the best leverage for managing this program.
Senator Murkowski. Even if you were not doing the multiyear
funding, your numbers still do not add up.
Terry, do you want to speak to that?
Mr. Gainer. I was just going to add that if we were
starting this program anew, it probably would have never been
in our office, and I think it really ended in our office
because it involved technology.
But I also think what the Secretary is trying to do versus
the $4 million that we are giving up on this is do exactly what
we talked about earlier. Do you want us to sustain a process
and give you the same thing that we are doing, or do you want
to upgrade and acquire and be prepared for the future? So,
again, I think it is kind of a policy decision.
I do believe we handled it well. I believe that the
Secretary and the librarians and the people who do research
have a vision of enhancing this and reaching out further and
deeper, and that is part of the decision one makes on whether
you do the ``same old, same old'' or take the opportunity to do
it the correct way.
Senator Murkowski. Well, my time is expired, Mr. Chairman.
But even if we were to just look at this as a 1-year instead of
a multiyear request, as you have, the request from the
Secretary's office is still an increase. So I guess what you
are suggesting is that it is enhanced services. And I guess
what I would come back to you with is before we talked about
enhanced services, let us make sure that we are using all of
these services and an assessment or an analysis or survey of
the offices. It sounds like you are underway with that and I
think that that is a good approach.
Ms. Erickson. And like I said, we also looked at the
program and understand that Terry's office tapped into other
funding options within their budget to finance this program
outside of SIS funds. An example would be when they received a
letter from 57 Members requesting that leadership directories
be added to the SIS program, and so Terry's office did that and
tapped into other funding sources and options in their budget
to do that.
Senator Murkowski. That is helpful.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Nelson. Senator Pryor.
Senator Pryor. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Nancy, let me start with you if I can and kind of pick up
where Senator Murkowski left off. This $32 million for the
Senate information services--I understand that that is
generally subscription services. And I know it is like Westlaw,
Lexis/Nexis, et cetera. I do not know if you provided it to
staff, but I would like to see a breakdown of each of those and
how much we are paying per year. I know that, on the one hand,
we just have 100 offices, but I know it is a lot broader than
that. So I would like to, if I could, understand how that
contract is structured, and I want to look at it to see if we
are getting a good deal for that usage.
And I have a question about, if you know or if you can
tell, how well the Senate staff is using it. In other words, we
had an incident when I was in the Attorney General's office. We
were negotiating a Westlaw contract back then. And we had two
or three people on the staff that just turned it on in the
morning and left it on all day, and the clock was just running
on it, and that caused our contract price to go up. Of course,
their view was, hey, it is free to me. So it must be okay. I am
curious about sort of the practices, and if you can monitor
that. In our office back in the Attorney General's office, we
could actually monitor that. We knew who was on because of the
way it was set up. And I do not know how your contract is. But
I would like to know some of that detail before----
Ms. Erickson. The services that we provide are stipulated
by the Rules Committee and require unlimited access. In the old
days, offices--maybe 1987--were each given $12,000 to enter
into these contracts. But yes, offices are not incurring costs
for leaving Westlaw on all day, although we do have those types
of contracts that we enter into with the Senate library,
Courtlink, and we restrict that to our librarians because of
that very reason. But I think you raise a good point. I think
that we need to take a hard look at user statistics and we will
be sitting down with the Rules Committee staff to share that
information with them. But I would be happy to provide you a
breakdown of what the current contract costs are.
Senator Pryor. That would be great.
Also, you mentioned in one of your answers a minute ago
that you had some savings on some current contracts. Are these
same subscription services?
Ms. Erickson. They are similar to ones that our Senate
library enters into, such as Courtlink. But they were able to
achieve $55,000 in savings over the next 4 years for those
contracts.
Senator Pryor. Do these contracts--both these contracts we
are talking about there--that is a great savings. I love that.
But both these contracts here--they also include the hard
copies of this material or is this the online?
Ms. Erickson. The online.
SAA deg.PGDM RELOCATION
Senator Pryor. Let us see. Let me ask, if I may, Terry,
about the $1.2 million request to relocate your printing,
graphics, and direct mail operation. That is in your budget, if
I am not mistaken. And you are talking about going out to the
Maryland suburbs. I understand that that is a pretty expensive
proposition out there. Could you talk about that? I understand
you need more space, but could you talk about the decision
there?
Mr. Gainer. Yes, Senator. The fact of the matter is it is
substantially less expensive. So from a purely business point
of view, if one concurs that we need the additional space--and
again, I think reasonable people would feel that is the case--
our return on investment over the 20 years would be
significant.
Senator Pryor. How so?
Mr. Gainer. Well, because the rent we are paying at the
Postal Square versus the rent of the building that we are
suggesting is substantially different, that we would save
approximately $500,000 a year. Now, when I say that, I mean the
money gets saved by our partner, the Architect of the Capitol.
Now, there is an up-front investment preparing the building for
that of about between $8 million and $10 million.
Senator Pryor. Is that $500,000 a year based on a per-foot
basis or is it based on actual when the rent would be here
versus there? I know you have a limited space here, so you have
a smaller space.
Mr. Gainer. It is per foot.
Senator Pryor. So in other words, you are paying more there
but you are getting more space.
Mr. Gainer. We will be getting more space. We would be
paying less per square foot and we would be saving $500,000 per
year.
Senator Pryor. You would be saving $500,000 over what you
are paying currently.
Mr. Gainer. Correct.
Senator Pryor. I see.
Mr. Gainer. And Senator, if I can speak on that issue: we
have added powerful equipment in the Postal Square building.
There is really not an ounce more of electricity available
there. So we have worked with the General Services
Administration (GSA), we have worked with the building owner,
and we could, tongue in cheek, say if we are running our
presses and someone plugs in a toaster, we would be in trouble.
Senator Pryor. Is Postal Square a GSA building?
Mr. Gainer. It is a private building run by the GSA, as I
recall.
Senator Pryor. As I understand it--well, I am out of time.
So why do you not go ahead and I will do a second round. Thank
you.
SAA deg.IT SECURITY
Senator Nelson. Terry, your request includes $1 million for
IT security. What does this involve and is this going to
require additional funding in the future with respect to that
IT?
Mr. Gainer. Senator, I do not think there is ever going to
be an end in sight for IT security. As I mentioned, the amount
of people trying to get to our network is continuing.
Senator Nelson. Do you feel like we are protected?
Mr. Gainer. I think we are very safe. As I said, we deal
with some 1.8 million attempts per month. We average about 1.5
per day that actually penetrate. Once we find out, we then take
action, along with the Member's office on how that occurred.
But looking at what is happening to IT across the Nation, the
Department of Defense (DOD), and Homeland Security, it is a
continued constant threat. Our adversaries are getting sharper.
We must also get sharper.
Senator Nelson. Are we partnering with DOD, as well as
Homeland Security? Because there is clearly a lot of work that
is being done protecting against cyber and malware, everything
that we fear most. I know they are doing a significant amount
of work on that.
Mr. Gainer. We do have a good partnership with them. We
have some great security experts who come from some of those
agencies. We work closely to look at the best practices of the
National Security Agency and others. We really are on top of
it, but again, our adversaries are playing chess with us trying
to stay one move ahead.
Senator Nelson. Yes. Offense always seems to be one step
ahead. We are always playing catch-up.
SAA deg.SENATE PERSONNEL SYSTEM
Also, you have got $2 million for a Senate office personnel
system. Could you explain what that is about?
Mr. Gainer. Yes. It is somewhat related but separate from
the Senate payroll system, but the Senate office personnel
system is really a direct request of your administrative
officers and the Rules Committee to aid in keeping track of
your own employees and their time. And we are operating in a
very antiquated system. This one ought to begin, but again, it
can be deferred. But your systems administrators will be very
unhappy with us.
Senator Nelson. Are you telling me Senator Schumer is
spending our money over here?
Mr. Gainer. I am taking the fifth on that.
SAA deg.TELECOM MODERNIZATION PROGRAM
Senator Nelson. The telecom modernization project. I know
there has been some movement on that. Could you give us an
update on the progress of what is, obviously, a $20 million
project, what we might be able to expect from it?
Mr. Gainer. Yes, sir. The telecom modernization project is
proceeding slowly but steadily. The design phase of the project
has been completed. We were not particularly happy with the
contractor, Verizon Business in this case, and we struggled
with them for well over 1 year to meet the goals and steps that
we wanted in this. They could not meet our goals. We brought in
other contractors to take a look at it. The manufacturer of the
main switch was bought out by another company. We had to wait
some 6 months to see who was going to buy the company. Then we
waited longer to see if the company that made the purchase was
going to continue making the product. We now know that they
will stay at it for about another 6 years. So looking at it in
the most positive vein, we would hope we would have the program
up and running sometime in 2011. The worst case scenario, it
might be as far away as 2012.
Again, as time goes by, the technology keeps taking leaps
and bounds. So the technology will improve as we move closer
and it is going to drive the price up a little bit. Ultimately,
the Senate will have a powerful, 21st century telecom system.
Senator Nelson. And still in the 21st century?
Mr. Gainer. Yes.
Senator Nelson. Okay.
CPB deg.USCP SALARY MISCALCULATION
Chief Morse, can you give us some background on the salary
miscalculation? I know there is an in-house review underway.
Are you looking at every aspect of it, whether there is any
criminal activity or whether this is a human error of some sort
without regard to that?
Mr. Morse. Yes. The salaries shortfall was found during the
first quarter budget execution review. We do that, obviously,
to ensure that the budget is being executed as we had planned,
and there are things that we have to plan for in the next
quarter, for instance, promotions of our employees, as well as
recruit classes. During that review, there were salary
shortfalls identified.
Our preliminary look at this indicates that those salary
shortfalls are human error. There were miscalculations in both
sworn and civilian salaries, as well as the lack of submission
for funding for lump sum repayment when our employees retire or
leave the agency and miscalculations associated with night
differential and premium pay and holiday pay. All those sort of
pile on top of each other when you have a low attrition rate.
So I am happy to report we have one of the lowest attrition
rates in 20 years I am told.
But because of the miscalculations, there is no dependency
on any of the salary lag and therefore the shortfall is about
$5.5 million.
We have our recommendation to correct this through
reprogramming monies within our general expenses, as well as
identifying other money in savings through overtime and perhaps
if the attrition rate stays as low as it is, savings in general
expenses and salaries with regard to hiring the next class and
a look at only hiring civilian staff that are critical to the
operational mission.
So we have identified means to correct the problem within
our budget, and now my focus, obviously, is on exactly what did
happen and who is responsible so that we can ensure that the
appropriate oversight is there, that the internal controls and
processes that we have in place are followed, and that we can
ensure you that this never happens again.
Senator Nelson. Have you taken any action thus far against
any personnel at this point?
Mr. Morse. No adverse action of any type has been taken
against any employee because we do not have all the facts yet.
There are employees who have been put on administrative leave,
but that is a part of our general performance or discipline
process. It is a process in which we look at things thoroughly,
we find out what the facts are, we hear both sides of the
story, and certainly I make no judgments until that
adjudication takes place.
Senator Nelson. I appreciate that.
Senator Murkowski.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Let me just continue, if I may, Chief. You have indicated
that to make up this shortfall of some $5.8 million, that you
can look to reprogramming and you have also suggested in the
area of expenses. But in your proposed budget here, in your
expenses account, you have got an increase of $16 million for
the final phase of the radio modernization project, but you
also have $16.2 million for other new initiatives.
Are you proposing then that you would scale back on some of
these new initiatives, or how are we going to take care of this
expense?
Mr. Morse. With regard to the salary shortfalls, it is in
the fiscal year 2010 budget that we are currently operating
under that we will go into the general expenses to pay for the
salary deficit. With the approval of the subcommittee, we
resubmitted a fiscal year 2011 budget to ensure that the
calculations are correct and that the budget that I am
testifying to reflects the same needs it did before we
corrected it. But, of course, with the corrected calculations,
the budget request is higher.
But with respect to the $16 million radio modernization
money in 2011 and the remaining $16 million for other new
initiatives, we will certainly work with the subcommittee in
some cases where they are or could be multiyear funding.
So the current problem that we are dealing with is within
the fiscal year 2010 budget and the general expenses and
savings to reprogram and pay for that. And we have corrected
the miscalculations associated with 2011 through a resubmission
of our fiscal year 2011 budget.
SAA deg.TELECOM MODERNIZATION PROGRAM
Senator Murkowski. Mr. Gainer, let me ask you about this
telecom modernization plan and the situation with Verizon. You
have indicated that you are not happy with what has happened,
and you are talking to potentially other vendors. What does
this do to the timeline that you had anticipated? What does it
do to the budget that you had anticipated? I know when you try
to change horses in midstream, oftentimes it can end up costing
more and taking longer. Can you speak to that?
Mr. Gainer. Yes, ma'am. It will take longer. And the phase
that Verizon Business completed, the design phase, is solid. So
the next vendor that is ultimately selected can take and
validate that and then use it for implementation. So that is
not a truly lost opportunity. That is money that was well
spent, although it took us too long to get there.
Senator Murkowski. It is your intention, though, to get a
vendor who will accept that Verizon plan.
Mr. Gainer. That is correct. And that is entirely doable.
Again, we have had some other outside experts come in and look
at the design phase and ascertain whether it is usable. So we
are not going to lose the work product. We are not going to
lose the money invested. We are losing time. The only up side
of the lost time is, again, that technology improves, and we
will have an even better system when we ultimately get there.
So, we have been set back a good 1\1/2\ years on the project.
Senator Murkowski. Is it my understanding that--well,
obviously, if we have got to bring in a new vendor, we do not
know what the total cost is expected to be. What are our
ranges? What do you anticipate?
Mr. Gainer. Well, the range of new total cost is anywhere
from $3.5 million to $8.7 million more dollars.
Senator Murkowski. And that is on top of what we have
already authorized.
Mr. Gainer. That is correct.
Senator Murkowski. So in looking through my notes here, I
had been under the understanding that we had anticipated a need
for an additional $2 million to $4 million for implementation,
but you are suggesting that it is going to be about double
that.
Mr. Gainer. I believe so. I can provide additional
information to clarify that. That is my understanding, Senator.
Senator Murkowski. If you would.
SAA deg.PRIOR YEAR BALANCES
And let me ask you about the unobligated balances. I
appreciate your statement and your commitment to really work to
provide a flat budget under these very difficult times. I think
the American public appreciates that, and I do not think they
understand the half of what we ask our staff and the folks that
you all manage to do. So I appreciate that effort.
You have indicated that you would like that flexibility
with these unobligated balances which are somewhere between $14
million and $15 million. Clearly you have needs for the funds,
but can you give the subcommittee some parameters in terms of
what you are looking at?
For instance, you have mentioned the situation with the
facility over there at Postal Square. You have got some
expenses within the Senate personnel system. You have indicated
that maybe the staff system would not go forward. Where are you
thinking that you might be plugging in these unobligated
balances?
Mr. Gainer. We are still working through that. The
suggestion of our experts is to prioritize some of the things
that we are talking about leaving out of the fiscal year 2011
budget. The Senate office personnel system would be very high
on the list, as well as the funds to complete the telephone
modernization program. And quite frankly, in doing the
briefings I have had in the last 24 hours, I feel pretty
strongly about what we need over at Postal Square in our PGDM
operations.
Number one, we would have to determine where we go if we
cut the $7.7 million that we suggested, that we think are
important to improve, and then work with you and the Rules
Committee and others to decide what is the best use of those
limited dollars. And we would work with you to do that.
Senator Murkowski. Mr. Chairman, my time is expired. But I
think this is a very important part of the conversation, and we
would like to be working very closely with you on that. Thank
you.
Senator Nelson. Thank you.
Senator Pryor.
Senator Pryor. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
SAA deg.TELECOM MODERNIZATION PROGRAM
Terry, let me follow up on the telephone issue, the
modernization there. Last year, especially during the
healthcare debate, my understanding is several offices' phone
systems had problems, and it seems to me like it may have been
in the capacity in terms of how many calls they were getting
and voice mail systems, et cetera. Will this modernization fix
that?
Mr. Gainer. It would, Senator. That is important
information. On one of our busiest days for the healthcare
debate, for instance, we had 770,000 phone calls come into our
switch in a 24-hour period. During the busiest hour, which was
at 5 o'clock, we had 155,000 telephone calls come in. Just for
going to voice mail, I think our current system was developed
to handle 182 simultaneous voice mails. This system, as I
understand it, would be about seven times that. Again, what
your office is doing is what a lot of us are doing at home.
Calls are going to voice mail so you can kind of pick and
choose the voice mail. But the current system was never, ever
designed to handle 155,000 calls an hour, and the new system
will do that.
But we are actually on the cutting edge, I believe, of the
technology to do that. That is some of the difficulty in
getting some of the best people like Verizon, whose phones we
all use, to make our system work for us.
Senator Pryor. Thank you.
USCP deg.USCP RADIO PROJECT
Chief, let me ask you a question about the radio
modernization project. When it is completed and fully up and
running, will it be fully interoperable with the systems and
other first responders in this jurisdiction and your key
partners in the day-to-day operation of the U.S. Capitol
Police?
Mr. Morse. Yes, it will. During the design phase of this
project and throughout its build-out and implementation, those
partnerships are used to ensure that we have that
interoperability.
Senator Pryor. And have either you or NAVAIR--I am assuming
you are still working with NAVAIR--sat down with these key
partners to make sure everything is the way it should be with
regard to interoperability?
Mr. Morse. Yes, we have.
Senator Pryor. When do you anticipate that the new radio
system will be completely installed and fully operational?
Mr. Morse. The spring of 2012.
Senator Pryor. As I understand it, it is kind of a phased
program, a phased process. Can you give the subcommittee here a
status report of where you are right now in your phases?
Mr. Morse. Right now we are in phase two of the project. So
we are currently in the design for the mirror site, the
redundant site. It is off campus.
Senator Pryor. And who is doing that design for you?
Mr. Morse. Verizon. It is a Verizon building. Verizon is
doing the design and the AOC has oversight of that design and
construction.
Senator Pryor. Do you know who is going to actually be
doing the construction? Will it be Verizon?
Mr. Morse. Yes, sir.
Senator Pryor. So the total cost of this project is how
much?
Mr. Morse. The total cost? $97.6 million.
Senator Pryor. And where are we in terms of our spending of
that, that has actually gone out the door or is in the process
of being spent? Where are we in the process of that?
Mr. Morse. Right now, I believe we have obligated about
$3.5 million in phase two, but we are currently working on an
obligation plan to be submitted to you this month that is being
reviewed by the AOC which will obligate another $10 million to
begin the cabling work for this project. And if we back up to
phase one, of course, we had initial funding, I believe, of
about $10 million that was associated with design and concept
of this.
So as we complete the construction of the off-sites, I
believe we are looking at December for the Manassas off-site,
as well as February 2011 for the Verizon. We will then begin to
obligate more money and the pace of this project will begin to
accelerate.
Senator Pryor. Given the size of the project, I am just
concerned--I want to make sure, I should say, that every step
of it is properly competitively bid and that there is the right
amount of competition in this. Are you going through this with
competitive bids, or have you kind of deferred that to some of
these companies to let them take care of that for you?
Mr. Morse. Well, first, we have the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) who is working with us. We meet
weekly with NAVAIR and GAO keeps the oversight of this project.
But NAVAIR also recognizes the need to have a very competitive
process and they also are under the requirements of the Federal
acquisition regulations. So with that communication, the
communication from our oversight, the constant review by our
partners in GAO, we feel certain that this will be a fair and
competitive process.
Senator Pryor. Great. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
USCP deg.USCP OVERTIME
Senator Nelson. Chief Morse, your fiscal year 2011 request
assumes an increase of 52 officers and roughly $30 million in
overtime costs. After a study to try to determine how best to
manage overtime, have we created, let us say, a fixed part of
the budget every year that is going to be calculated for
overtime, just as part of the basic compensation, or is this
$30 million simply based on an expectation of what might happen
if we have extraordinary circumstances or something of that
sort?
Mr. Morse. We have worked very hard on this particular
issue with our study and our methodology which our partners
from S&I from House Appropriations reviewed; and GAO are
currently reviewing who have reviewed our methodology. We feel
that we are very on course with being able to project
accurately what our overtime needs are.
What we have been able to do with our study is establish a
utility number, the number of hours an officer is available to
us in a year, the number of hours of mission requirement. The
gap between the two is where the overtime comes into play. If
you reduce the mission, you reduce the overtime. If you add
officers to that gap, you reduce overtime.
We have been very innovative and proactive in the way that
we have tried to internally reduce overtime and produce
officers, and let me give you a couple of examples.
First, with the Library of Congress transfer, we were able
to civilianize some 23 positions within the command center of
the Library of Congress. Those officers then are able to be put
back into the field. The civilianization of our off-site
delivery center--we were able to put officers back into the
field.
We most recently--not a savings of overtime but a savings
of money through contract--we were able to take folks off the
DOL list, the Department of Labor list, and bring them back to
our organization, replace the contractors and put them into the
alarm monitoring where we have better supervision and more
efficiency and the ability to bring back our employees because
of that DOL payment that we have to do.
We are working on technology, for instance, within the
truck interdiction program. Once that is complete, it will be a
give-back of officers.
We also have had some other projects that we are working on
that would generate less overtime and produce more officers for
the core business hours. I was actually talking to Mr. Gainer
yesterday about this issue, as we discussed potential
questions. But the culture here--and he talked earlier about
the convenience. I have been on the police department for 25
years, and I worked many of the doors that are here on the
campus. Today we have looked at the number of people, for
instance, the pedestrian counts at many of our doors after 7
o'clock when the Senate or House stays in late. We still have
to man those doors.
We have done a study. We have done a cost analysis based on
pedestrian counts where we could move some 60 officers to the
core business hours by closing those doors. Moving them to the
core business hours enables us to fill some of the empty mags
that we see during the daytime, to shorten lines, to reduce
overtime over the year, and provide a more robust presence
during the most critical times of the day when we have
subcommittee hearings and dignitary arrivals and both the House
and Senate are in session.
So we think that we have done a very good job of managing
overtime, creating positions within the police department
without asking for the additional officers that we need, and
also being creative in the way that we plan to continue to do
that, to master the overtime issue and to have the best and
robust protection that we can during the core hours.
USCP deg.CIVILIAN CONTRACTING
Senator Nelson. Have you considered at some of the sites
civilianizing those who read the magnetometers or the scopes as
the bags are going through to be x-rayed rather than have a
uniformed officer do that at particular points in the day, as
well, maybe the lower traffic locations, lower traffic times?
If you have considered that, could that result in some savings
and better utilization of the uniformed officer's time?
Mr. Morse. It is not something we have considered. It is
certainly not something that is off the table. But as I think
back to the 1998 shootings, there were some issues and things
that we addressed with regard to the simple structure of the
doors and how the screening equipment and tactical positioning
of officers could take place because these buildings were not
built for this type of security.
So there are situations where internally people have
already been screened at a certain level, and they are simply
being screened at a higher level to proceed into the Capitol.
Those are areas that certainly we could take a look at and, if
possible, discover savings there. But we want to make sure that
we keep in mind the safety of all our employees and obviously
be able to mitigate any threat that would exist at those
locations.
Senator Nelson. Absolutely. Security stands first, but from
time to time, there are other ways to accomplish it, and
depending on the timeframe, as well as the location, it is
possible to maybe consider that as well.
Mr. Morse. Yes, sir.
Senator Nelson. Thank you.
Senator.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
USCP deg.OVERTIME
To continue with the discussion about where we are with the
overtime, I understand that within the budget request here, you
are seeking to add 52 new sworn, 12 new civilians, and the
budget justification material provided to the subcommittee
states that even with the addition of these officers in fiscal
year 2011, it would not reduce the overtime costs. And you have
just stated that there are a couple of different ways to reduce
these overtime expenses, and one of them is obviously moving
forward with additional staff.
So tell me how, if you were to fill these positions, we
would not be getting closer to that management point that we
seem to discuss a lot around here about how we work to reduce
that overtime.
Mr. Morse. The 52 officers--there is, first, a recruiting
process for that. There is the hiring process for that that
must take place, and then there are some 30 weeks of training
that have to take place which include field training. Then we
look at the schedule of when we can hire those classes
throughout the year, and when you add all that up, you are not
going to realize--you will realize some overtime savings in
2011 dependent upon when those employees are hired, when they
complete training, and when they are permanently assigned to
the division. But the real savings comes in 2012.
Senator Murkowski. Well, let me ask you that then because
in fiscal year 2010, the plan was to add 24 sworn officers and
15 civilian staff positions. So where are we in that pipeline?
Mr. Morse. I believe the 24 you are referring to is the
backfill, which is already in our base salaries, which is the
backfill for attrition. And that was the----
Senator Murkowski. So are those positions filled?
Mr. Morse. Those positions are currently filled and if
attrition does not pan out to what we projected--and so far it
has not because it is extremely low--if that does not pan out,
then there is not a need to hire those officers. If the
attrition continues, as we projected, then we will make a
decision to hire that class because we need for them to be
brought on board and trained so that we can feel the effects of
a savings of overtime, which equates to about $1 million for 24
FTE in 2011.
Senator Murkowski. So when do you make that decision as to
whether or not you are at that attrition level that you had
anticipated?
Mr. Morse. What we do is we have our recruiting efforts
continue and we have people in the queue to hire. The decision
to hire them is made a couple months prior. So for July, we
would have to be prepared to make the decision to hire them
based on attrition sometime in April or early June.
USCP deg.NEW INITIATIVES
Senator Murkowski. I appreciate the responses that you gave
to the Senator from Arkansas about the radio modernization
project, where you are with that. And there has been a lot of
discussion in this subcommittee about the expense of that
undertaking and the need to have this interoperability.
I would like to know a little bit more about these new
initiatives that you are proposing, a little over $16 million
for new initiatives beyond the radio project. It seems like a
lot of funding--a lot of new projects to be taking on at a time
when we are looking to really rein in the budget here. As I
looked down the list, can you give me your top two or three
absolutely, positively must-haves? I am going to make you
choose between your favorite children here because I think it
will be helpful to know what we can anticipate here in terms of
new initiatives.
Mr. Morse. I am not going to take the fifth.
But I will say up front that two of these initiatives of
the eight that you see are force development, meaning they are
for the safety and security of the Capitol campus. And that
would be, for instance, the modernization of our video
management system upgrade. We have already completed the first
phase of that, and we would like to be able to complete the
second phase of that.
The remaining new initiatives are really from our threat
analysis of the campus, and it is in partnership with the
Capitol Police Board. So if I go picking anything right now,
without my bosses' input, then they will be a little bit mad at
me. But I think we can certainly take a look at these.
And as I said before, there are several here that are very
expensive but, for instance, in one case, can be funded
throughout fiscal year 2014. So the impact of that from a
budget standpoint is not that high, but the results of not
doing this certainly have an impact on the level of security
that we provide.
So I can work with the Capitol Police Board to look at this
as a priority and certainly work with the subcommittee to make
the best choices we can for the safety of the complex.
Senator Murkowski. I would certainly appreciate that. If it
is something in progress--and as I understand what you have
just said, the only one that is in progress in terms of phases
is the video management system. But of the other items that are
listed, I would like to know from a security perspective what
the must-haves are. If there are some that can be done in a
phased approach, I would also like to know and understand that.
I am hesitant, while we are in the midst of a very
expensive radio modernization project, which again I agree we
have got to do, that we be taking on other initiatives that may
be nice but not necessary. So I would like to know what the
nice and what the necessary are, and if you can help us
prioritize that, that would be greatly appreciated.
Mr. Gainer. Senator, I can give him some guidance now. All
the ones on the Senate side we should approve. All the ones on
the House side can be deferred.
Senator Murkowski. See, you have got your first helping
hand right there.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Nelson. Thank you.
I do not know that I have anything further. Do you?
Senator Murkowski. I am done. That was my last question.
Senator Nelson. That was mine too.
I want to thank all three of you and, once again, emphasize
how appreciative we are of your staff to continue to work so
diligently on our behalf and on behalf of the American people.
It is difficult for us to ask you to do more and then ask you
to do it with less. We understand that that is a challenge that
you face. It is a challenge we face as well. We appreciate your
spirit of cooperation and willingness to work with us to find a
way through, sort of a way forward for all of us to have
security, have services, and be able to accommodate our offices
and make certain we do work on behalf of the American people in
a more diligent way.
Are you sure that my office did not get all 150,000 of
those calls in 1 hour?
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
I thought we got at least that.
So thank you all.
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
were submitted to the offices for response subsequent to the
hearing:]
Questions Submitted to Terrance W. Gainer
Questions Submitted by Senator Ben Nelson
fiscal year 2011 budget request
Question. If the Legislative Branch Appropriations bill for fiscal
year 2011 is held to current year levels, what will be the impact to
your agency's operations and on the day to day operations of the
Senate?
Answer. We will be forced to delay some initiatives and cancel
others. We will review all of our major spending plans and reevaluate
each one, setting new priorities, recognizing the reduced resources
allocated to us. As a note, we constantly evaluate our plans and
resources and have concluded that about $1 million in the fiscal year
2011 budget for equipment for an Emergency Operations Center is not
cost effective and no longer needed.
Specifically, if we do not upgrade network and data storage
equipment, we may face increasing maintenance outages and higher future
maintenance costs. We also planned to add capacity to State office
Internet connections to improve network speed. We will be forced to
eliminate that project. As a result, offices will continue to
experience slower response times when using the Internet.
printing department relocation
Question. The Architect of the Capitol's request includes $1.2
million to relocate your Printing, Graphics and Direct Mail operation
to a leased space in the Maryland suburbs. Why is this move necessary
right now when we are attempting to rein in spending?
Answer. One of our departments currently runs a large printing
operation in the basement of a building a few blocks from here. Since
2007, we have had 2 major sewage floods, 2 clean water floods, 4
ceiling collapses of tile or concrete, among other events, that disrupt
work, threaten the health of our staff or pose risk of damage to our
expensive printing equipment. We have over $20 million in sophisticated
equipment in the building. We believe that remaining in the facility
will at some time cause an injury to staff or serious damage to our
equipment. While we recognize the need to manage spending carefully, we
believe this move is justified.
Question. What is the total cost of this relocation?
Answer. The initial cost to set up the facility will be between
$7.8 million and $9.7 million depending on construction contingencies.
In the long term, the government will save millions of dollars. One a
purely financial basis, the government saves money over the life of the
lease. The project has a net positive cash flow and a positive return
on investment. The positive cash flow comes from significantly reduced
rent and operating costs at the new facility compared to rent and
operating costs in the heart of the District. We are paying over $54
per square foot today and would pay about $22 per square foot at the
new facility. Costs for the space now occupied are projected to be
about $36 million over the next 20 years. The proposed facility would
cost about $25 million over the same time period. The funds included in
the Architect's budget would pay for the rent at the new facility that
would be shared by us and the Architect. We believe that the Architect
would use the space to consolidate several storage locations into one
facility.
unobligated balances
Question. Last year, your office identified a substantial amount of
unobligated multi-year balances from fiscal year 2006, fiscal year
2007, and fiscal year 2008. What is the total sum of these balances and
how can you best utilize these funds to reduce your fiscal year 2011
request?
Answer. We have about $14 million in unobligated balances. Some of
these funds can be used to reduce the fiscal year 2011 request,
especially some of the capital investments in equipment that we plan to
make.
Additionally, there are three important projects that are not fully
funded at this time. These are the Telecom Modernization Project,
payroll system replacement and the move of our printing operation to a
new facility. At the present time, only the costs of the relocation of
the printing operation are known. As we clarify our priorities and as
costs for TMP and the payroll system replacement become more defined,
we will make a recommendation to the Committee on the use of the funds.
Question. Are there remaining balances from fiscal year 2009 as
well?
Answer. We expect that all fiscal year 2009 funds will be obligated
for the purpose intended and that there will not be unobligated
balances as we had in fiscal years 2006-2008.
fiscal year 2011 budget request
Question. Your organization has requested a 7 percent increase in
fiscal year 2011. As we have discussed, increases are going to be very
difficult in a tight budget year. What projects in your fiscal year
2011 request can be deferred for another year?
Answer. If funding is not available, we will defer some of the
capital investments in network and data storage equipment, and possibly
replacement for video and printing equipment. We also may have to defer
development of the Senate Office Personnel System. We will look closely
at all of our operations and get back to the Committee with more
specific information.
Question. Your request includes $1 million for IT security. What
will this cover and what additional funding if any will be required?
Answer. The additional funding will primarily cover continued
migration to Symantec Endpoint Protection version 11, which is a vast
improvement upon the current software we use for anti-virus protection
on individual desktop and portable computers; security assessments and
additional monitoring for new projects, including the payroll system
and telecommunications modernization; improvements to our IT Security
awareness program; and development of an enterprise risk-reduction
``dashboard'' that will help individual offices view and quantify the
risks present in their networks, assess their adherence to security
standards and guidelines, and receive rapid feedback on the risk
reduction effects of their remediation efforts.
Question. How well is the Senate protected against a cyber-attack?
Answer. We believe the Senate is well-protected, for now. We employ
a variety of state-of-the-art security technology, procedures, and
training to help defend the Senate network against cyber attacks.
However, the frequency, complexity and sophistication of attacks
against our systems continue to escalate, particularly in the form of
targeted attacks from organized adversaries with adequate resources.
The fact that the Senate has not yet suffered a major incident in the
face of these escalating attacks is a testament to the people,
processes, and technology that we commit to our defense. However, as
the Senate continues to rely more heavily on ever-changing Internet
technologies that can potentially expose us to new avenues of attack,
we must also continue to improve our defenses to keep ahead of our
adversaries.
Question. Your request includes $2 million for a ``Senate Office
Personnel System.'' Can you explain this?
Answer. This project is to replace the antiquated system many
administrative managers and chief clerks use to manage personnel
administrative functions such as salaries, leave, and time and
attendance. One of the key goals is to integrate office personnel
requests with other automated systems to eliminate redundant data and
data entry. Once the current requirements gathering effort is
completed, we will be able to make a decision whether commercial
systems can meet the requirements or whether we will have to develop a
system ourselves.
Question. Is this a one-time cost?
Answer. Two million dollars is the estimated implementation cost.
Funding for annual maintenance will be required in an amount to be
determined after the system acquisition strategy is selected.
combined appropriation account
Question. What economies do you expect to realize by combining your
salaries and expenses into a single appropriation, which you are
requesting to initiate in fiscal year 2011?
Answer. A single appropriation account will reduce the 70 monthly
manual reconciliations of balances for the accounts we have currently
to seven reconciliations for the consolidated accounts. At any point in
time, we have seven active appropriations to manage. Each appropriation
has 10 subaccounts.
Also, because salaries and expenses will be combined in one
structure, managers also will be able to have a complete view of the
cost of their operations in one report rather than the two at a minimum
currently needed (one for salaries and one for expenses).
Additionally, the current appropriation account structure is a
legacy of Sergeant at Arms' organization structure of the early 1990s
and the Senate's financial systems at the time. Today, the Senate has a
financial system that easily can accommodate a consolidated
appropriation and allow the appropriate level of management reporting
for tracking both salary and expenses.
telecom modernization project
Question. I understand there has been some movement on the telecom
modernization project. Can you update the subcommittee on the progress
of this $20 million project and whether or not additional funding may
be required?
Answer. The design phase of the Telecom Modernization Project has
been completed. At this time, we do anticipate that additional funding
will be needed for the project. Improvements to the buildings to
support the solution have proven more expensive than originally
estimated. In addition, new components to improve security and the
manageability of the solution were added during the final engineering
and design effort. We are evaluating that design against recently
announced product roadmaps to determine what changes, if any, should be
made to align with the manufacturer's direction. Depending on which of
various implementation options is chosen, the additional cost is
projected to be between $3.5 million and $8.7 million. We will continue
to strive to minimize these increases. Based on these changes we
anticipate that testing will begin late this year and that the system
will be installed during fiscal year 2011.
telephone/voicemail interruption
Question. What steps has your office taken to address the
interruption in telephone and voicemail service that the Senate
experienced during the Health Care Reform debate last summer?
Answer. We have identified and rectified several issues over the
past months to improve the reliability of the system, which will
address most of the issues that we experienced. However, there is an
issue we cannot resolve with the current voice mail system: it can
handle only 132 simultaneous callers being redirected to voice mail.
That number is not sufficient in this time of organized call-in
campaigns and increased reliance on the voice mail system for screening
callers. In the longer term, we will be installing a new voice mail
system, which will have 782 ports, as one of the early efforts of the
new telephone system implementation.
senate emergency notification system
Question. There was an event last year where the Senate community
was not immediately notified of an emergency which caused many road
closures and interruptions to traffic in and out of Senate parking
lots. What have you done to improve your system for alerting offices
during an emergency that affects the Senate community?
Answer. The Sergeant at Arms works closely with the USCP Command
Center to ensure the Senate community is notified of potential impacts
throughout evolving emergency situations. To assist the Command Center
in keeping the Senate community informed, the Sergeant at Arms moved a
full time employee to USCP Headquarters to provide a presence during
normal work hours for real-time information relay. Furthermore, a
Sergeant at Arms employee fully trained to issue notifications is
present in the Command Center after normal work hours while the Senate
is in session to support communication between USCP and the Senate
community.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Lisa Murkowski
salaries
Question. I understand the Sergeant at Arms (SAA) has successfully
filled 25 positions since our hearing last year. What impact has that
had on your operations?
Answer. We have filled over 25 positions since the hearing last
year. The impact has been real and substantive and has occurred in
nearly every department. For instance, in Technology Development, one
major outcome of filling several vacancies during the year was the very
successful launch of the virtual machine infrastructure service. This
service allows Senate offices needing new servers to build logical
servers in the SAA physical environment at Postal Square at a fraction
of the cost of buying their own physical servers. In addition to the
cost savings, there are significant savings in office space, power,
noise, and air handling for these offices. Several of the employees
recently hired were instrumental to this successful launch. Another new
staff person will implement electronic leave request and approvals for
our staff, replacing the manual, tri-part forms now used. This project
has been planned for 18 months and can be completed now with the
position filled.
In Capitol Facilities, we added a night manager and filled three
vacancies in the night cleaning crew. We needed a manager to oversee
the work of the 34 staff that keep the Senate side of the Capitol well
maintained. We have observed a higher degree of good order in the
Capitol and OSHA compliance since these staff were added.
Question. I understand there are 23 positions currently vacant and
that the budget request seeks 7 new positions, proposing to convert 6
of those into contract employees, for a net gain of 1 new position in
fiscal year 2011. If we approve the budget request as presented, there
will be 24 vacancies in SAA. What would be the impact of not filling
those 24 positions? Which services that you provide would have to be
scaled back or eliminated?
Answer. In the case of filling the existing positions, the most
immediate and significant impact will be delay in completing current
work. Member office and committee staffs expect rapid turnaround on
work order and service requests. These response times will lengthen
somewhat for certain services.
In the case of the newly requested positions, following are
explanations of their need.
In addition to providing support for information technology,
telecommunications and general office equipment and applications, IT
Support Services has seen its less visible responsibilities expand
rapidly over the past 2 years in the areas of contractor oversight,
financial management of contracts, and asset management. The escalating
workload has resulted in a strong need for additional FTEs to handle
the growing demands.
Three FTEs are requested for the Constituent Services Systems
Coordination section, one of the areas hardest hit by increasing
contract oversight and financial management duties. During the past
year, due to office demands, we added a new vendor to the list from
which offices could select a constituent services system. Because of
the complexities of the CSS contracts, each contractor is assigned a
separate contracting officer's technical representative from the CSS
Coordination section. With the addition of the newest CSS vendor, the
COTRs are forced to concentrate primarily on ensuring the contract
terms and conditions are met. The critical financial management of the
contract has become, at best, a tertiary duty for the COTRs. This new
FTE is vital to our ability to fully manage the financial aspects of
the CSS vendor contracts and ensure the Senate is receiving the best
value for its money.
The CSS Coordination section, again due to office demand, is now
also tasked to provide oversight and support to three new categories of
contracts covering the areas of website development, SharePoint
integration, and member scheduling software, with multiple vendors in
each of those areas. An office can select a vendor from each of those
categories to perform work. Because current staff levels do not allow
us to provide adequate oversight for these new areas, we now have an
additional vendor onsite to oversee the website development contracts.
We believe it is vitally important for us to have these
responsibilities in-house due to the sensitive nature of information
that must be gathered from offices. Having contractors oversee other
contractors is not in the best interest of the offices. The additional
FTEs would allow us to absorb the increased workload caused by the new
contracts and provide the type of detailed contract oversight that the
Senate community expects.
The Asset Management section has also seen an expansion of duties
as a result of the need for more accurate State inventories, the
addition of service levels to the work being done for offices, and
additional workload caused by the two new $5 million party recording
studios. Previously, GSA assisted with State office inventories. GSA
staff does not have adequate knowledge of the types of assets the
Senate must capture, and, over the past 2 years, they have been unable
to perform the inventories at the rate at which we need them. This has
resulted in inaccuracies in State offices inventories and the need for
time-consuming research to ensure offices are not forced to pay for
equipment that may not be missing, or pay twice for equipment that is
missing. The new equipment for the party recording studios must also be
tracked by the Asset Management section. The equipment is staged off-
site and in smaller components that are aggregated together to form
larger units. The only way to ensure accuracy of these inventories is
to send Asset Management staff to the off-site location leaving the
rest of the section short-handed. Without the new FTE, we will continue
to have issues with State offices inventories and GSA interactions and
will not be able to provide the level of oversight needed for the $10
million worth of Senate assets in the studios.
Our Printing, Graphics and Direct Mail group seeks to add a systems
administrator position. Providing immediate systems support and
troubleshooting is essential to maintaining a constant work flow.
PGDM's networked equipment is in six separate locations, and
troubleshooting, maintenance and general oversight is impossible for
the current single systems administrator.
PGDM's one systems administrator will not be able to maintain
efficiency and quality service for future hardware/software
acquisitions and for increases in production data. No back up for the
systems administrator means less support to Postal Square, Senate
Support Facility and ACF facilities. Another year's delay in filling
this essential position will ensure delays in service to PGDM
equipment, PGDM employees and customers.
Question. How much money would you save?
Answer. We could save about $1.5 million were these positions not
filled.
expenses
Question. The budget request includes $2 million for replacement of
the Senate Office Personnel System (SOPS). Please explain why
replacement of SOPS is necessary at this time.
Answer. One of the key goals of the project, as expressed by
administrative managers and chief clerks, is to integrate office
personnel-related requests with other automated systems to eliminate
redundant data and data entry. The current system is built on
technology no longer supported by its vendor, which leaves the
application at risk to potential exploits and makes integration with
related Senate systems more costly and difficult, if not impossible.
Question. Has a replacement system already been identified? Is the
$2 million requested the total amount needed for the new system?
Answer. We have not yet chosen a replacement system. Once the
current requirements gathering effort is completed, we will be able to
make a decision to what degree commercial systems can meet the
requirements and to what degree we will have to develop the system
ourselves. The $2 million represents the estimated implementation cost.
Funding for annual maintenance will be required in an amount to be
determined after the system acquisition strategy is determined.
unobligated balances
Question. I understand that SAA has approximately $14 million
available in unobligated balances from fiscal year 2006-2008. Do you
have any anticipated needs for these funds?
Answer. There are three important projects that are not fully
funded at this time. These are the Telecom Modernization Project,
payroll system replacement and the move of our printing operation to a
new facility. At the present time, only the costs of the relocation of
the printing operation are known. As we clarify our priorities and as
costs for TMP and the payroll system replacement become more defined,
we will make a recommendation to the Committee on use of the funds.
telecom modernization plan
Question. The fiscal year 2011 budget request includes an increase
of $2 million in the telecommunications portion of the budget, which is
necessary to maintain two systems in tandem throughout the installation
of the new system--possibly 18-24 months. Will this $2 million increase
cover the maintenance costs for the entire installation phase, or will
additional funding be requested in fiscal year 2012?
Answer. We will not request additional funding for maintenance in
fiscal year 2012. We anticipate that the new system will be installed
in fiscal year 2011 and that the cost to do so will include maintenance
for the first year. Because maintenance costs on the new system will be
lower than on our current system, no additional funding will be needed
for fiscal year 2012.
Question. Please give us an update on the Telecom Modernization
Plan. What is the status of the $21 million that was previously
appropriated for this project?
Answer. We have awarded contracts for about $8.6 million for the
following: engineering and design ($2.1 million); electrical and HVAC
improvements in Senate office buildings ($5.1 million) and independent
third party reviews and validation of the design ($1.4 million).
At this time, we anticipate that additional funding will be needed
for the project, although as mentioned above, we may be able to use
some of our unexpended balances from prior years. Improvements to the
buildings to support the solution have proven more expensive than
originally estimated. In addition, new components to improve security
and the manageability of the solution were added during the final
engineering and design effort. Depending on which of various
implementation options is chosen, the additional cost is projected to
be between $3.5 million and $8.7 million. We will continue to strive to
minimize these increases.
Question. Are you ready to begin the implementation of the new
system?
The design phase of the Telecom Modernization Project has been
completed. We are evaluating that design against recently announced
product roadmaps to determine what changes, if any, should be made to
align with the manufacturer's direction. Upon completion of this
evaluation, we anticipate that testing will begin later this year and
that the system will be installed during fiscal year 2011.
payroll system upgrade
Question. Please give us an update on the payroll system upgrade,
which we funded in fiscal year 2010 at the requested level of $2
million.
Answer. The $2 million in the fiscal year 2010 budget will cover
software maintenance costs for both the old and new software and the
cost of the project management office and independent verification and
validation of the implementation project. The original estimate for
implementation was $5 million, but this is only a rough estimate.
Responses to the solicitation are due at the end of March, at which
time we will have a range of costs and will be able to determine what
the cost for implementation would be.
Answer. Would utilizing a portion of the current unobligated
balances to fund the contract award for implementation of the new
payroll system complete the funding necessary for this project?
Answer. As noted above, there is a possibility that these
unobligated balances can be used for the payroll system upgrade. We
will work with the Committee as we review our priorities and funding
options.
printing, graphics and direct mail relocation
Question. SAA is in the beginning stages of developing a plan to
move the printing facility to a suburban warehouse in Landover,
Maryland. Projected upfront costs of this relocation could be
approximately $7.5 million. What will be the long-term savings
associated with this relocation?
Answer. Net savings in rent and other operating expenses would be
$11 million over the life of the lease or approximately $500,000 per
year when compared against the much higher cost of leasing space in the
current D.C. facility.
Question. What is the timeframe for making the decision about
relocation?
Answer. Ideally, the decision to relocate the printing facility
will be made in the next 60-90 days in order to take advantage of
currently available space and cost estimates.
Question. Why is a warehouse in Landover, Maryland a better
location than somewhere closer to Capitol Hill?
Answer. The current D.C. facility has a decaying infrastructure
which is not being addressed by the owners/lessee and presents no
opportunity for our production plant to grow as we expect the
requirements to entail. Other locations near Capitol Hill do not have
sufficient open spaces that allow for the efficient layout of
machinery. The Landover facility also would be in close proximity to
the Senate's warehouse which would permit economies to be realized by
use of common transportation equipment.
______
Questions Submitted to Phillip D. Morse, Sr.
Questions Submitted by Senator Ben Nelson
salary miscalculation
Question. Chief Morse--I want to better understand the
circumstances surrounding the salary miscalculations which you recently
discovered and their impact on your fiscal year 2010 appropriation. The
Capitol Police has long been plagued with financial management problems
and I had hoped we were moving in the right direction in that regard.
Regarding the budget shortfall, Chief you say you have identified
potential reductions in the fiscal year 2010 General Expenses account
that could, with this committee's approval, provide funds to be
transferred to the Salaries account. What specific reductions are being
considered?
Answer. To address our projected salaries shortfall in fiscal year
2010, the United States Capitol Police has conducted an internal review
of available funding and have identified potential areas for the
reprogramming of funds. In doing so, the Department's primary focus has
centered on its ability to maintain its security and law enforcement
mission, as well as mitigate potential impacts to human capital
programs affecting its workforce.
The funds identified for potential reprogramming include funding to
support lifecycle replacement of technology, technology upgrades,
integration of technology systems, internal and external training and
lifecycle replacement of uniforms and equipment, as well as general
administrative mission support functions.
The elimination of these funding sources in fiscal year 2010 will
delay the Department's established lifecycle replacement processes and
result in greater fiscal needs in future years, but it will not affect
the security of the Capitol Complex. Further, while it will also hamper
the Department's ability to invest in professional and technical
training for its workforce, the Department will continue to provide
mission critical mandatory and certification training.
Additionally, for the remainder of fiscal year 2010, the Department
will fill mission critical civilian vacancies through civilian
attrition salaries savings from within an 393 civilian strength target.
As civilian positions are vacated through attrition, the vacated
position will be added to our comprehensive civilian vacancy lists
based on an analysis of mission critical requirements. Available
salaries funding will be directed to the next position on the
prioritized civilian vacancy list for backfill.
In an effort to make the necessary adjustments to our fiscal year
2011 budget request, and to remain close to our fiscal year 2010
enacted appropriation, I have determined that we will limit our onboard
civilian strength to 393 in fiscal year 2011, unless a mission critical
requirement makes it necessary to exceed that level. Therefore, I would
respectfully request that we retain the budgetary authority for our
authorized civilian positions above our target civilian staffing level
of 393, so that the Department may take the necessary hiring actions to
meet unforeseen civilian hiring requirements within appropriated
funding levels.
In addition, fewer sworn officers are leaving the Department. This
has reduced the Department's need to backfill officer attrition, which
has resulted in available funding that would have otherwise been used
to recruit, hire, train and equipment new officers.
Later this fiscal year, the Department has indicated that it plans
to reevaluate the projected salaries shortfall and will make a request
to the Committee at that time for the reprogramming of necessary funds
to its salaries account.
Question. I would like you to provide this subcommittee with a
detailed plan outlining the sources of funding you will use to cover
this shortfall within 30 days.
Answer. The Department has ``fenced'' the identified funding
referenced above (total of $5.886 million in annual general expense
funds and $1.385 million in no-year and 2-year funds). The Department
plans to reevaluate the salaries shortfall during the fiscal year third
quarter, at which time we will identify the funding necessary to meet
the salaries shortfall. Based on this reevaluation, the Department
plans to submit a request for the approval of funds reprogramming. To
ensure we have ``fenced'' sufficient funding to address this issue, the
Department based its salaries shortfall projection on a worst case
scenario. (Currently estimated at $6.8 million.)
Because of the security sensitive nature of the information
included in the Department's response to this question, I am
respectfully providing my specific response under separate cover. I
would, therefore, request that the information provided in that
document not be included as a part of the public record.
Question. This committee gave your department a 7 percent increase
in salaries in fiscal year 2010 to maintain your current workforce, yet
we were still short. The actual total needed for fiscal year 2010 is
nearly 10 percent over 2009. How do you explain this increase to simply
maintain your staffing level?
Answer. The Department began fiscal year 2009 with close to its
authorized level of 1,702 officers as of September 30, 2008. With the
Library of Congress Police merger, the backfill of LOC sworn attrition
and the coverage of the CVC tunnels requirement, our authorized level
increased in fiscal year 2009 to 1,799. The transferring LOC sworn
employees were added to the USCP payroll during the last 4 days of
fiscal year 2009, but the larger authorized staffing level required for
these employees was carried for the entire fiscal year in 2010.
Likewise on the civilian side, the authorized levels increased from
418 in fiscal year 2009 to 444 in fiscal year 2010. This increase of 26
civilians resulted from the 21 former LOC sworn officers transferring
as civilians to the Department on October 11, 2009 and the addition of
5 radio technicians to support our new radio modernization project.
These increases in sworn and civilian staffing levels contributed to
the nearly 10 percent increase.
Question. You have made significant personnel changes within the
administrative side of your agency. Do you feel you have the right
personnel in place to put together an accurate budget? If not, how do
you plan to prevent this from happening again?
Answer. Over the last 2 years, we have hired a number of employees
who we felt possessed the requisite knowledge, skills and abilities to
resolve the ongoing systemic problems within our financial management
area.
Unfortunately, in fiscal year 2010 the formulation of our budget
did not follow our repeatable budgeting process, to include our Force
Development review for the evaluation of specific mission requirements
and potential new programs. This deviation from the prior fiscal year
process resulted in the resubmission of our fiscal year 2010 budget and
a resulting salaries shortfall. The fiscal year 2010 salaries
miscalculation was carried forward into our fiscal year 2011 budget
formulation as well.
The USCP Inspector General (OIG) is currently auditing the budget
development processes for fiscal year 2010 and 2011 to determine the
reasons for the budget formulation miscalculations and why the fiscal
year 2009 budget process was not utilized as a repeatable process.
While the OIG audit is being conducted, the Department is reviewing
the overall financial management function of the Department to
determine the best method for achieving the budget, accounting and
procurement functions.
The outcome of the OIG audit, our internal business process review,
and our continued interaction with the Capitol Police Board, the
Government Accountability Office and oversight committees, we believe
will assist the Department in developing permanent solutions for
resolving the systemic financial management problem.
fiscal year 2011 request
Question. How confident are you that the revised fiscal year 2011
numbers you provided to us are accurate?
Answer. Upon finding the fiscal year 2010 salaries miscalculation,
the Department notified the Capitol Police Board in its budget
oversight capacity. To assist the Department in preparing a fiscal year
2011 budget amendment with accurate and verifiable information, the
Board convened a budget review panel consisting of the Chief Financial
Officer for the Senate Sergeant at Arms, the CFO for the Architect of
the Capitol (AoC), the Director of the Office of Security Programs for
the AoC, and a technical expert from the House Sergeant at Arms Office.
Based on this review and the review of the Department's Executive Team,
we believe the revised fiscal year 2011 submission is accurate based on
the assumptions at the time of development.
Question. Your fiscal year 2011 request assumes an increase of 52
officers and roughly $30 million in overtime costs. How much will it
cost to maintain your current staffing levels in fiscal year 2011
without the additional officers you requested?
Answer. To maintain current staffing levels of 1,800 sworn and 393
civilians in fiscal year 2011, the Department will require $342.9
million in Salaries and General Expenses, as well as an additional
$15.9 million to complete the indoor coverage portion of the radio
modernization project. This does not include funding for the special
initiatives included in our fiscal year 2011 budget submission.
Question. Have you realized any savings as a result of the GSA
fleet-leasing initiative?
Answer. From the initial review of the leasing program in fiscal
year 2009, we estimated a potential cost savings over a 5 year period
of $2 to $3 million at our current primary fleet size. This projected
savings reflects the difference between purchasing lifecycle
replacement vehicles for our primary fleet and leasing the vehicles
from the General Services Administration (GSA). So far, we have
realized work hour savings in efficiencies in the vehicle surplus/
disposal process through GSA. More importantly, we are in a consistent
lifecycle replacement process for our primary fleet, which is critical
to our mission capability.
Question. You mentioned in your testimony, that half of the
civilians you are requesting in fiscal year 2011 will replace contract
employees. Will adding these individuals to your workforce actually
save money?
Answer. First, I would like to clarify a reference in my testimony
that was derived from our fiscal year 2011 budget submission. In our
fiscal year 2011 budget submission, we indicate that all five of the
new Office of Information Systems civilian positions, as well as the
additional budget analyst position for the Office of Financial
Management, which we are requesting would replace contractors, when in
fact only two of the five OIS positions are requested in order to
replace contractors. Therefore, only three of the civilian positions
being requested in fiscal year 2011 would replace contractors.
To address your specific question, yes, we believe that adding
these individuals to our workforce will save money. We are requesting
to convert the annual general expense cost for the two contractors
which is approximately $405,000 to salaries to support two new civilian
positions, a CP-11 and a CP-7, which fully loaded have an annual FTE
cost of approximately $225,000. In future fiscal year budget requests
we intend to request additional conversions where it makes fiscal
sense.
In the Information Technology field, for example, it is not
uncommon for FTE cost to be lower than contractor cost. In situations
where we have Information Technology staff augmentation contractors
that cost more than the fully loaded cost of an FTE equivalent we
should pursue a conversion. OIS conducted an informal review and
determined it could save over $1 million per year by addressing these
and other contractor conversions.
Question. You are requesting $16.2 million in ``new initiatives,''
including hallway security, House and Senate garage security, and
several AOC projects. Could these items be deferred, or funded in
phases?
Answer. If these projects are deferred, the vulnerabilities that
they are designed to mitigate would remain. Some of these projects
could be funded in phases.
Because of the security sensitive nature of the information
included in the Department's response to this question, I am
respectfully providing my more detailed response under separate cover.
I would, therefore, request that the information provided in that
document not be included as a part of the public record.
manpower reductions
Question. What effect has the merger with the Library of Congress
police had on the USCP's salaries and overtime thus far? What
additional changes, if any, are expected to result from the merger?
Answer. In fiscal year 2010, the Department received funding to
support the sworn and civilian employees who transferred from the
Library of Congress (LOC) Police to the Department as a part of the
Library of Congress Police/USCP Merger. When the funding for overtime
was requested for fiscal year 2010, the fiscal year 2009 overtime
executed as a part of the LOC's appropriation (approx. 17,000 hours)
was not requested to be included as an increase to the Department's
overtime base. Therefore, the Department absorbed these mission
requirements into our base for fiscal year 2010.
Following the implementation of the merger, the Department load-
leveled the LOC Division's sworn personnel allocations with other
mission requirements across the Department. This resulted in an
overtime allocation of 560 hours of overtime from within the USCP
overtime base per week to meet current mission requirements associated
with the LOC Division.
Currently, the Department is reviewing the results of our physical
security and threat assessments that were conducted on the LOC
Buildings post-merger. We are in the process of evaluating potential
mission set adjustments that may result in sworn personnel and overtime
savings. Resulting savings would be placed against existing mission
requirements across the Department. Once we have concluded this review
and analysis, we will vet potential changes through the Capitol Police
Board and appropriate stakeholders for consideration.
Question. Having conducted risk assessments, security testing, and
coordinating intelligence with other Federal law enforcement agencies,
in your opinion, do you have the right mix of officers, technology, and
equipment to provide for the security of the Capitol Complex?
Answer. To better manage our resources and to work toward
determining the requirements needed for the Department to meet its
mission, we undertook, with full support of our committees, a staffing
study in 2007 focused on the core mission requirements at that time.
This study resulted in a target sworn officer utility of 1,560 in an
optimum resource environment, which includes a level of overtime needed
to address unplanned events.
USCP plans and projects its resources, to include overtime (OT)
requirements, based on this target 1,560 hours annual utility for each
USCP officer. This number includes the use of leave both scheduled and
unscheduled, holiday, training, and administrative time for each
officer.
To determine the overall current staffing requirements for our
mission in fiscal year 2010, the Department balanced the scheduled core
mission requirements of today, projected unscheduled events
(demonstrations, state funerals, heads of state visits, etc.), unfunded
core mission requirements (those that have been added after the annual
budget submission and appropriation of funds for the current fiscal
year), and available annual salary and overtime funding to determine
the level of sworn officer utility required to perform the mission of
Department.
The Department's current authorized sworn strength does not provide
the necessary utility to meet current core mission requirements within
the target 1,560 utility. This was determined by applying the 1,560
utility hours against the hours necessary for base core mission
requirements. The remaining hours must be met through overtime, post
reduction, the use of technology, or reductions from within the
utility, such as training.
To maximize the utilization of resources, the Department balances a
number of factors as noted above. For example, in an effort to control
overtime costs, the Department must maintain a robust sworn strength
throughout the year. Therefore, the onboard sworn strength must remain
at or above the authorized sworn strength to accommodate attrition
without increasing the resource gap. This allows the Department the
maximum sworn officer utilization to meet core mission requirements.
However, in doing so, the Department is utilizing its appropriated
salary funds to their maximum potential throughout the year. A by
product of this level of funding utilization is the potential slowing
of civilian hiring to allow for the funding availability for sworn
hiring.
Further, the Department has an average of 40-60 sworn officers in
recruit training during various parts of the fiscal year, which results
in these sworn officer utility hours not having an immediate direct
impact of the reducing the resource gap upon their entry on duty with
the Department. Generally, recruit officers hired and trained after
March of any given fiscal year will not have a impact on reducing the
resource gap until the next fiscal year, assuming that the core mission
does not increase or projected attrition is not exceeded.
In an effort to reduce requirements and narrow this gap, the
Department has worked with the Capitol Police Board and its oversight
committees to review possible requirements reductions. In fiscal year
2008 and fiscal year 2009, the Department closed a number of non-
security posts, which allowed the Department to remain within the
appropriated salary and overtime funding levels.
To further reduce the resource gap, the Department has looked at a
number of opportunities to civilianize positions currently performed by
sworn officers, so these sworn staffing resources may be realigned to
meet other core mission requirements. In fiscal year 2009, the
Department utilized available civilian positions to return former USCP
employees from the Department of Labor's Worker's Compensation Roll to
the Department's Communications Section. This allowed the Department to
utilize civilian personnel to perform the security camera and alarm
monitoring function in-house, rather that using contractors. Further,
this allowed the Department additional general expense funds for
potential use on technology, as well as allowing for some realignment
of sworn resources.
Additionally, the Department civilianized 26 sworn positions in the
Library of Congress command center during the LOC Police and USCP
Merger. This allowed the Department to utilize civilianizing former LOC
Police employees to perform the Command Center functions and realign
sworn resources to other core mission requirements.
The Department is currently reviewing other areas that may result
in civilianization of posts, which may provide additional available
sworn officer utility. As these are developed, they will be vetted
through the Capitol Police Board and appropriate stakeholders for
consideration.
Even with these reductions efforts and the use of technology, the
remaining requirements currently exceed the Department's appropriated
overtime funding level. Therefore, the training hours contained within
the 1,560 officer utility must be utilized to meet the requirements gap
between available sworn officer resources and requirements.
An analysis was conducted by USCP with available data to estimate
the current sworn officer utility, which is estimated in an approximate
range of 1,650-1,725 per officer annually, including overtime. Almost
all of these utility hours are used in support of USCP core mission
requirement. Based on this estimated utility range, the Department is
not currently meeting its 80 hour annual training target as contained
in the target 1,560 sworn officer utility described above.
A random sampling of USCP officers in the Uniform Service Bureau
(USB) indicates that approximately 7-20 hours were actually used for
training in fiscal year 2009, vice the 80 hours allotted for training
in the utility calculation. By focusing this analysis on USB, we are
addressing the largest sworn population within the Department. This
analysis did not include USCP specialty units such as K9, CERT or HDS
and DPD.
The reduction of training hours will not have an immediate impact
on the USCP mission. However the long term impact of reducing core
training hours, will impact the recertification of officers in certain
programs, may affect officer response capability and may result in the
overall degradation of the proficiency of our officers to meet their
mission. All of these will result in greater risks to the Department
and create a cycle that will have long-term impacts on the Department.
In an effort to address this training matter before it becomes a
serious issue and work toward the optimum sworn officer utility of
1,560, the Department has requested overtime funding to support a
minimum of 16 hours of training for 1,500 sworn officers in fiscal year
2011. Because our current onboard officers cannot work increased
overtime levels for the long-term without affecting their
effectiveness, we are also requesting 52 additional officers to begin
to narrow the resource gap while allowing for the minimum annual
training level described above. These two resource requests are a part
of a larger balance that the Department is attempting to reach between
the use of personnel, overtime, technology and mission balance to meet
required core mission requirements.
Question. What effect have these assessments had on post openings
and closings? To what extent are there opportunities for further post
closings?
Answer. In an effort to reduce mission requirements and narrow the
sworn utility gap referenced above, the Department has worked with the
Capitol Police Board and its oversight committees to review possible
requirements reductions. In fiscal year 2008 and fiscal year 2009, the
Department closed a number of non-security posts, which allowed the
Department to remain within the appropriated salary and overtime
funding levels.
To further reduce the resource gap, the Department has looked at a
number of opportunities to civilianize positions currently performed by
sworn officers, so these sworn staffing resources may be realigned to
meet other core mission requirements. In fiscal year 2009, the
Department utilized available civilian positions to return former USCP
employees from the Department of Labor's Worker's Compensation Roll to
the Department's Communications Section. This allowed the Department to
utilize civilian personnel to perform the security camera and alarm
monitoring function in-house, rather that using contractors.
Additionally, this allowed the Department additional general expense
funds for potential use on technology, as well as allowing for some
realignment of sworn resources.
Further, the Department civilianized 26 sworn positions in the
Library of Congress command center during the LOC Police and USCP
Merger. This allowed the Department to utilize civilianizing former LOC
Police employees to perform the Command Center functions and realign
sworn resources to other core mission requirements.
The Department is currently reviewing other areas that may result
in civilianization of posts, which may provide additional available
sworn officer utility. As these are developed, they will be vetted
through the Capitol Police Board and appropriate stakeholders for
consideration.
It is important to note, in order for the Department to reduce
overtime utilization, the mission requirements expected of the
Department cannot increase. Otherwise, the Department will be required
to request additional overtime or staffing to meet the new
requirements.
Question. Chief, one of the big issues you and your department face
each year are the ever-mounting responsibilities that require the use
of more and more overtime. I think you should consider a study to
determine the feasibility and wisdom of contracting out some of your
technology-related tasks, such as x-ray machines and magnetometers, to
highly trained civilian technicians. This will free up your sworn
personnel for other more traditional law enforcement activities.
Obviously, sworn personnel will still provide appropriate law
enforcement support and action at doors, as appropriate. What are your
thoughts on this?
Answer. Prior to the 1998 shooting of two USCP sworn officers in
the Capitol Building, we had instituted a staffing model that would
place one unarmed civilian security aide at various entry points to
operate the metal detectors and x-ray machine, as well as a single
police officer to take law enforcement actions.
Based on our analysis of the 1998 shooting and reviews of other
similar situations around the nation, we know that the confrontation
point for an armed intruder will be at the screening locations.
Therefore, we instituted a staffing model that eliminated the civilian
position and replaced it with a sworn officer to improve security and
the ability to confront an armed attack.
It is recommended that we maintain that model at building entry
points.
That said, we will undertake a study to determine if we can place
civilian screeners at select secondary screening points at interior
building locations and will report the findings back to the Committee
once completed.
Question. If you are held to your fiscal year 2010 appropriation in
fiscal year 2011, what adjustments could you make to your request to
maintain current staffing?
Answer. Within the context of reviewing our budget requirements at
or near the fiscal year 2010 appropriations level, the Department has
undertaken a comprehensive review of its fiscal year 2011 salaries and
general expense request. The review was intended to determine the core
mission requirements necessary to operate at our current staffing level
(1,800 sworn and 393 civilian) in fiscal year 2011, while maintaining
the ability to carry out our core mission.
Because of the fiscal year 2010 salaries miscalculation, our fiscal
year 2011 salaries mandatory base funding requirement is higher than
anticipated. In an effort to reduce the overall fiscal year 2011 budget
requirements (both salaries and general expense), we are attempting to
reduce all non-mandatory general expenses from our no-growth request.
As the Committee is aware, our fiscal year 2011 budget amendment
resulted in a $9 million difference between our original and revised
fiscal year 2011 request. However, in our effort to develop a fiscal
year 2011 request at or close to our fiscal year 2010 appropriated
level, the Department anticipates that we will require in fiscal year
2011 an estimated $14 to $16 million in funding above of fiscal year
2010 appropriated level in order to meet our current staffing and
mission levels, to include the carryover of the fiscal year 2010
salaries miscalculation.
We are again reviewing our fiscal year 2010 general expense base to
look for potential areas to reduce this overall funding requirement and
plan to submit to the Committees by the end of the second week of
April, an fiscal year 2011 base requirements budget to support our core
mission requirements.
Question. The fiscal year 2011 budget justification states that the
52 new sworn officers you are requesting would not reduce overtime
until at least 2012 because of the time it takes to train an officer.
What longer-term strategy does the USCP have to reduce overtime?
Answer. There are two factors which affect the Department's ability
to reduce its overtime utilization: (1) sworn utility and (2)
additional mission requirements.
To better manage our resources and to work toward determining the
requirements needed for the Department to meet its mission, we
undertook, with full support of our committees, a staffing study in
2007 focused on the core mission requirements at that time. This study
resulted in a target sworn officer utility of 1,560 in an optimum
resource environment, which includes a level of overtime needed to
address unplanned events.
USCP plans and projects its resources, to include overtime (OT)
requirements, based on this target 1,560 hours annual utility for each
USCP officer. This number includes the use of leave both scheduled and
unscheduled, holiday, training, and administrative time for each
officer.
To determine the overall current staffing requirements for our
mission in fiscal year 2010, the Department balanced the scheduled core
mission requirements of today, projected unscheduled events
(demonstrations, state funerals, heads of state visits, etc.), unfunded
core mission requirements (those that have been added after the annual
budget submission and appropriation of funds for the current fiscal
year), and available annual salary and overtime funding to determine
the level of sworn officer utility required to perform the mission of
Department.
The Department's current authorized sworn strength does not provide
the necessary utility to meet current core mission requirements within
the target 1,560 utility. This was determined by applying the 1,560
utility hours against the hours necessary for base core mission
requirements. The remaining hours must be met through overtime, post
reduction, the use of technology, or reductions from within the
utility, such as training.
To maximize the utilization of resources, the Department balances a
number of factors as noted above. For example, in an effort to control
overtime costs, the Department must maintain a robust sworn strength
throughout the year. Therefore, the onboard sworn strength must remain
at or above the authorized sworn strength to accommodate attrition
without increasing the resource gap. This allows the Department the
maximum sworn officer utilization to meet core mission requirements.
However, in doing so, the Department is utilizing its appropriated
salary funds to their maximum potential throughout the year. A by
product of this level of funding utilization is the potential slowing
of civilian hiring to allow for the funding availability for sworn
hiring.
Further, the Department has an average of 40-60 sworn officers in
recruit training during various parts of the fiscal year, which results
in these sworn officer utility hours not having an immediate direct
impact of the reducing the resource gap upon their entry on duty with
the Department. Generally, recruit officers hired and trained after
March of any given fiscal year will not have a impact on reducing the
resource gap until the next fiscal year, assuming that the core mission
does not increase or projected attrition is not exceeded.
In an effort to reduce requirements and narrow this gap, the
Department has worked with the Capitol Police Board and its oversight
committees to review possible requirements reductions. In fiscal year
2008 and fiscal year 2009, the Department closed a number of non-
security posts, which allowed the Department to remain within the
appropriated salary and overtime funding levels.
To further reduce the resource gap, the Department has looked at a
number of opportunities to civilianize positions currently performed by
sworn officers, so these sworn staffing resources may be realigned to
meet other core mission requirements. In fiscal year 2009, the
Department utilized available civilian positions to return former USCP
employees from the Department of Labor's Worker's Compensation Roll to
the Department's Communications Section. This allowed the Department to
utilize civilian personnel to perform the security camera and alarm
monitoring function in-house, rather that using contractors. This
allowed the Department additional general expense funds for potential
use on technology, as well as allowing for some realignment of sworn
resources.
Additionally, the Department civilianized 26 sworn positions in the
Library of Congress command center during the LOC Police and USCP
Merger. This allowed the Department to utilize civilianizing former LOC
Police employees to perform the Command Center functions and realign
sworn resources to other core mission requirements.
The Department is currently reviewing other areas that may result
in civilianization of posts, which may provide additional available
sworn officer utility. As these are developed, they will be vetted
through the Capitol Police Board and appropriate stakeholders for
consideration.
Even with these reductions efforts and the use of technology, the
remaining requirements currently exceed the Department's appropriated
overtime funding level. Therefore, the training hours contained within
the 1,560 officer utility must be utilized to meet the requirements gap
between available sworn officer resources and requirements.
An analysis was conducted by USCP with available data to estimate
the current sworn officer utility, which is estimated in an approximate
range of 1,650-1,725 per officer annually, including overtime. Almost
all of these utility hours are used in support of USCP core mission
requirement. Based on this estimated utility range, the Department is
not currently meeting its 80 hour annual training target as contained
in the target 1,560 sworn officer utility described above.
A random sampling of USCP officers in the Uniform Service Bureau
(USB) indicates that approximately 7-20 hours were actually used for
training in fiscal year 2009, vice the 80 hours allotted for training
in the utility calculation. By focusing this analysis on USB, we are
addressing the largest sworn population within the Department. This
analysis did not include USCP specialty units such as K9, CERT or HDS
and DPD.
The reduction of training hours will not have an immediate impact
on the USCP mission. However the long term impact of reducing core
training hours, will impact the recertification of officers in certain
programs, may affect officer response capability and may result in the
overall degradation of the proficiency of our officers to meet their
mission. All of these will result in greater risks to the Department
and create a cycle that will have long-term impacts on the Department.
In an effort to address this training matter before it becomes a
serious issue and work toward the optimum sworn officer utility of
1,560, the Department has requested overtime funding to support a
minimum of 16 hours of training for 1,500 sworn officers in fiscal year
2011. Because our current onboard officers cannot work increased
overtime levels for the long-term without affecting their
effectiveness, we are also requesting 52 additional officers to begin
to narrow the resource gap while allowing for the minimum annual
training level described above. These two resource requests are a part
of a larger balance that the Department is attempting to reach between
the use of personnel, overtime, technology and mission balance to meet
required core mission requirements.
Question. With the country in the midst of an economic crisis,
attrition rates have been lower than usual. Has your department seen
lower attrition rates? Have you taken this into consideration when
preparing your budget request?
Answer. Yes, USCP has seen an unprecedented lower attrition rate
(almost half of what would be normal). This was factored into the re-
formulated budget for fiscal year 2011.
radio modernization project
Question. On September 30, 2009, the Committee received the first
funding obligation plan pursuant to the fiscal year 2009 Supplemental
Appropriations Act that provided $71.6 million for the USCP radio
modernization project. That funding obligation plan specified $3.5
million for the design and construction of the mirror site facility to
house the radio system's technical requirements. Who is doing the
actual design of the mirror site and when will it be completed?
Who will be doing the construction of the mirror site and when will
it be completed?
Answer. The design and construction of the mirror site will be done
by Verizon and its contractors under the supervision of the AOC and
USCP. The design is scheduled to be completed by July 15, 2010 and the
construction build out is scheduled to be completed by March 2011.
Question. When can the Committee expect to receive the next
obligation plan?
Answer. The Committee can expect to receive the next obligation
plan in March 2010 then another one in April 2010.
Question. Will the $16 million requested in fiscal year 2011 be the
final funding request for this project?
Answer. That is our intention and is our plan. At this point in
time, the estimate for the total cost of this project is just over
$91.9 million. The total amount appropriated (assuming the $16 million
in fiscal year 2011) is $97.562 million, leaving a contingency fund of
$5.655 million.
Should we need to utilize contingency funds during the project, the
Department plans to notify the Committees and provide an explanation
for its utilization.
Additionally, the Department plans to provide an update on the
status of the radio modernization project to the Committees in the near
future. As a part of this update, we will provide additional
information on the development and status of our budget estimates, a
current status of funds utilization, the status of the various phases
of the overall project, and our revised obligation plan for the
appropriated and requested funds.
Question. With only $3.5 million obligated of the $71.6 million
that was appropriated in the fiscal year 2009 supplemental, is it
really necessary to have an additional $16 million in fiscal year 2011?
Answer. Yes, it is necessary. Without the additional funding, there
will be insufficient funds to complete the project. The total cost of
the project is estimated to be $91.9 million, and that is without any
contingency fund. The additional $16 million in funding will bring the
total appropriated amount to $97.562 million which should be sufficient
to complete the project and to provide for a small contingency fund.
Currently, there is an Obligation Plan that was recently sent to
the House and Senate Appropriation Committees seeking permission to
obligate another $9.9 million. Another obligation plan will be prepared
in April 210 for approximately $12 million. This summer, once the
Request For Quote process is completed over $34 million should be
obligated with most of the remaining funding obligated in the fall of
2010.
Question. What are the consequences of delaying or phasing this $16
million?
Answer. The completion of the project would be delayed month for
month for any delay in funding beyond October 2010. Many of the
components of the project have long lead times for order delivery and
then they have to be installed within the campus buildings. In order to
complete the project by spring of 2012, the infrastructure and
installation work must start in Spring 2012. Delaying the project would
mean continuing to operate longer with an aging analog radio system
that is becoming more difficult and more expensive to maintain.
Question. When do you anticipate having the new radio system
completely installed and fully operational? Will there be a multi-phase
implementation plan?
Answer. The project is scheduled for completion during Spring 2012.
The most challenging part is the in-building wiring and installations
in 16 different buildings/facilities including the Capitol Building.
Though this work is expected to take about a year, there are always
unforeseen issues when doing this type of work in these buildings.
Also, if the in-building wiring work is not allowed to start prior to
the passage of the fiscal year 11 budget, then the schedule is in
jeopardy.
The project itself is divided into five phases as follows: Phase 1:
Cost Analysis; Phase 2: System Design; Phase 3: Procurement,
Integration and Installation; Phase 4: Acceptance Testing; and Phase 5:
Operations and Maintenance.
We are currently entering into Phase 3. Within Phase 3,
implementation will be conducted in a parallel approach. Inside work,
outside work, facilities construction, etc. will be done in parallel;
the goal is to have all the component pieces completed by September
2011 in order to then conduct system integration and testing. The ``go-
live'' migration plan will have a single cutover event from the analog
system to the digital system.
Question. When this system is completed, will it be fully
interoperable with the systems of other first responders in this
jurisdiction that are key partners to the day-to-day activities of the
U.S. Capitol Police? Who does the USCP view as its key partners? Has
the USCP, or NAVAIR on behalf of the USCP, consulted with those
partners on the radio requirements to ensure interoperability?
Answer. Yes. The P25 Digital radio system was designed to be fully
interoperable.
Our key partners are MPD, D.C. Fire/EMS, Office of the Attending
Physician, FBI, U.S. Secret Service, U.S. Park Police, WMATA Police,
and Amtrak Police.
Yes, the USCP is currently working on creation and updates on MOUs
with all of the above mentioned agencies. The MOUs will include the
Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for the interoperability to occur.
USCP, NAVAIR and the various agencies need to have further detailed
meeting to determine the technical details for this. NAVAIR has the IP
gateways, needed for interoperability, included in the cost estimate to
perform this effort.
Question. The Committee remains concerned that all aspects of this
significant procurement for the USCP will be openly and fairly
competed. What assurances do you have from NAVAIR that this is the
case?
Answer. Early in the program effort, in the review of the
requirements document NAVAIR developed a broader specification to meet
the requirements of the USCP radio program and to preclude any vendor
specific solutions/capabilities. NAVAIR is not utilizing in-house,
existing contracting vehicles for the required materials. NAVAIR is
independent of any particular vendor, and are vendor agnostic. NAVAIR
has engaged their designated Contracting Authority who is adhering to
the Federal Acquisition Regulations and clauses, promoting full and
open competition. Their Contracting Authority has issued Request For
Information's for all significant procurements for the USCP effort.
NAVAIR has assessed the RFI's against the specifications and are
developing the Request For Proposal to be broad enough to include all
of the vendors found to satisfy the requirements for the USCP radio
program. Additionally, through extensive market research, NAVAIR knows
there are vendors capable of satisfying the requirement and if these
vendors did not respond to the RFI they still have the opportunity to
respond to the RFP.
addressing threats to senate offices
Question. What is your normal procedure when a threat is received
against a member of the United States Senate? My office is somewhat
frustrated at the lack of response received from the Threats Division
after a threat was called into my office.
Answer. The United States Capitol Police Investigations Division
provides a broad range of investigative services in support of the
Department's protective mission. The Investigations Division is
comprised of the Criminal Investigations Section (CIS), Threat
Assessment Section (TAS), and the Intelligence Investigations Section
(ISI). One of the key components to our protective mission is our
ability to manage and investigate threats to the Congressional
community. The Investigations Division continues to provide an
investigative response to subjects who make direct or implied threats,
or who demonstrate unusual or concerning behavior toward any USCP
interests. Threats are conveyed in a variety of means to include in-
person contact, telephone calls, and/or written correspondence/emails.
Once notified by the community several investigative procedures are
implemented to include notifying the FBI. Certain criminal offenses
(U.S. Code Title 18 part 1, chap. 18 S351 Congressional, Cabinet and
Supreme Court Assassination, kidnapping, and assault) provide specific
investigative authority to the FBI. The Threat Assessment Section
continues to actively work with the FBI Violent Crimes Task Force
(VCTF) to facilitate investigative efforts. This task force position
provides immediate access to law enforcement agent's nationwide in
order to identify, locate, and prosecute criminal offenders. Aside from
the task force position, the Investigations Division has special agents
assigned to conduct criminal investigations to include the reporting of
an offense, collection of evidence, coordination with prosecutors both
locally and across the nation for the purposes of seeking prosecution
of offenders.
In addition to the intensive investigative work associated with the
Division, agents are often tasked with dual responsibilities to include
elevation of the protection models for USCP interests. Not only are
threats investigated, but offenders, once identified are examined in
order to develop a viable threat assessment. Depending on the set of
circumstances surrounding the threat and the offender, considerations
are made for the assignment of protection details. Some of these
factors include the behavior demonstrated by the offender, for instance
if approaches have been made toward USCP interests. Extensive
background investigations are also conducted by subject matter experts
in the field of threat management to examine not only the offender's
intent and ability, but also to verify access to weapons and relevant
criminal history, and finally, ascertain the veracity of an offender's
threat. If the assessment identifies an offender as a moderate or high
threat than requests for protection details are considered. Protection
teams are coordinated through the Dignitary Protection Division (DPD)
with support of the Investigations Division.
Additionally, I have tasked that Division to reach out to your
office to follow up on the specific threat you reference in the
question above.
internal control weaknesses
Question. The fiscal year 2008 Capitol Police financial statement
audit report cited 3 material internal control weaknesses: (1)
verification of employee hours worked; (2) inadequate timekeeping
records; (3) internal weaknesses with regard to duplicate payments. The
report also discussed problems related to payroll processing and
invoice handling along with other issues. The problems the auditors
cited are troubling.
What is the USCP doing about these internal control weaknesses? How
do these weaknesses impact your budget proposal?
Answer. Since becoming the Chief of Police, we have focused our
Executive Team and Executive Management Team energies on addressing
material internal control weaknesses and recommendations from the
Government Accountability Office and USCP Inspector General, as well as
to establishing standardized and repeatable business practices. We
believe that addressing these core issues will substantially address
the long term systemic administrative issues within the Department.
To that end, Office of Administration under the guidance of the
Chief Administrative Officer has indicated that they have taken the
following steps to addressing the fiscal year 2008 financial statement
audit material weaknesses:
An electronic system has been implemented, and is monitored by OHR
in order to track and report time and attendance certification
compliance. All recordkeeping requirements have been reinforced through
briefings, training, and written memorandums. Random inspections to
ensure compliance with timekeeping procedures are conducted quarterly
with the results reported to Bureau Commanders.
With regard to payroll processing, the pre and post National
Finance Center payroll data reconciliations have been reinstated and
are executed within 4 weeks of payroll transmission. Variations are
reported, researched and resolved.
Internal Standard Operating Procedures have been developed for
payroll processing, as well as time and attendance certification
procedures to ensure repeatable business processes are outlined and
utilized.
The Office of Financial Management accounts payable section
processed approximately 8,050 payments totaling $46.3 million in fiscal
year 2008. During the financial statement audit, 1 duplicate payment
was noted for $384.20. This duplicate payment was discovered by
Accounts Payable staff and the amount was repaid to USCP prior to the
financial statement audit.
To further enhance internal control, OFM accounts payable section
has implemented a daily review of aging accounts payable invoices.
Communication improvements have been established between OFM accounts
payable section and the financial liaison officers from each of the
bureaus and offices thru periodic status updates regarding oldest
invoices. The OFM accounts payable section has implemented a Vendor
Input System utilizing the Microsoft Access software which has
significantly enhanced the detection of a potential duplicate payment
prior to distribution. Additionally, OFM is currently updating an
internal Standard Operating Procedure for the processing of payment
vouchers.
To insure that these weaknesses are fully addressed, our Executive
Team is working closely with the USCP Inspector General and the
Department's auditors to validate our progress in the upcoming
financial statements. Based on this audit feedback, we will continue
our efforts to improve our administrative functions.
In the interim, we are working to close the many recommendations
focusing on our administrative functions.
We believe that control weaknesses or a lack of standardized and
repeatable business processes have potential impact on our ability to
execute our management functions and responsibilities, to include
budget formulation and execution.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Lisa Murkowski
salaries
Question. The budget justification material provided to the
subcommittee states that the addition of these officers in fiscal year
2011 would not reduce overtime costs in fiscal year 2011. Please
explain.
Answer. To better manage our resources and to work toward
determining the requirements needed for the Department to meet its
mission, we undertook, with full support of our committees, a staffing
study in 2007 focused on the core mission requirements at that time.
This study resulted in a target sworn officer utility of 1,560 in an
optimum resource environment, which includes a level of overtime needed
to address unplanned events.
USCP plans and projects its resources, to include overtime (OT)
requirements, based on this target 1,560 hours annual utility for each
USCP officer. This number includes the use of leave both scheduled and
unscheduled, holiday, training, and administrative time for each
officer.
To determine the overall current staffing requirements for our
mission in fiscal year 2010, the Department balanced the scheduled core
mission requirements of today, projected unscheduled events
(demonstrations, state funerals, heads of state visits, etc.), unfunded
core mission requirements (those that have been added after the annual
budget submission and appropriation of funds for the current fiscal
year), and available annual salary and overtime funding to determine
the level of sworn officer utility required to perform the mission of
Department.
The Department has on average 40-60 sworn officers in recruit
training during various parts of the fiscal year, which results in
these sworn officer utility hours not having an immediate direct impact
of the reducing the resource gap upon their entry on duty with the
Department. Generally, recruit officers hired and trained after March
of any given fiscal year will not have an impact on reducing the
resource gap until the next fiscal year, assuming that the core mission
does not increase or projected attrition is not exceeded.
Question. With a total of 76 additional sworn officers proposed
through fiscal year 2010 and 2011, will we start to see a reduction in
overtime costs with the fiscal year 2012 budget request? Will there be
a requirement for additional officers in fiscal year 2012?
Answer. For clarification, I offer the following explanation of
what I believe the referenced 76 additional sworn officers includes.
In fiscal year 2010, the Department did not receive authorization
or funding to support additional sworn personnel above our sworn
authorization of 1,799 (now 1,800 with the reallocation of 1 civilian
position). In the final quarter of fiscal year 2010, the Department has
scheduled a recruit officer class consisting of 24 recruit officer
slots to backfill sworn attrition from within our authorized strength
referenced above should backfill be required.
In fiscal year 2011, the Department has requested 52 new sworn
officers above our current authorized and funded sworn staffing level.
As for the reduction of overtime, there are two factors which
affect the Department's ability to reduce its overtime utilization: (1)
sworn utility and (2) additional mission requirements.
To better manage our resources and to work toward determining the
requirements needed for the Department to meet its mission, we
undertook, with full support of our committees, a staffing study in
2007 focused on the core mission requirements at that time. This study
resulted in a target sworn officer utility of 1,560 in an optimum
resource environment, which includes a level of overtime needed to
address unplanned events.
USCP plans and projects its resources, to include overtime (OT)
requirements, based on this target 1,560 hours annual utility for each
USCP officer. This number includes the use of leave both scheduled and
unscheduled, holiday, training, and administrative time for each
officer.
To determine the overall current staffing requirements for our
mission in fiscal year 2010, the Department balanced the scheduled core
mission requirements of today, projected unscheduled events
(demonstrations, state funerals, heads of state visits, etc.), unfunded
core mission requirements (those that have been added after the annual
budget submission and appropriation of funds for the current fiscal
year), and available annual salary and overtime funding to determine
the level of sworn officer utility required to perform the mission of
Department.
The Department's current authorized sworn strength does not provide
the necessary utility to meet current core mission requirements within
the target 1,560 utility. This was determined by applying the 1,560
utility hours against the hours necessary for base core mission
requirements. The remaining hours must be met through overtime, post
reduction, the use of technology, or reductions from within the
utility, such as training.
To maximize the utilization of resources, the Department balances a
number of factors as noted above. For example, in an effort to control
overtime costs, the Department must maintain a robust sworn strength
throughout the year. Therefore, the onboard sworn strength must remain
at or above the authorized sworn strength to accommodate attrition
without increasing the resource gap. This allows the Department the
maximum sworn officer utilization to meet core mission requirements.
However, in doing so, the Department is utilizing its appropriated
salary funds to their maximum potential throughout the year. A by
product of this level of funding utilization is the potential slowing
of civilian hiring to allow for the funding availability for sworn
hiring.
Further, the Department has an average of 40-60 sworn officers in
recruit training during various parts of the fiscal year, which results
in these sworn officer utility hours not having an immediate direct
impact of the reducing the resource gap upon their entry on duty with
the Department. Generally, recruit officers hired and trained after
March of any given fiscal year will not have a impact on reducing the
resource gap until the next fiscal year, assuming that the core mission
does not increase or projected attrition is not exceeded.
In an effort to reduce requirements and narrow this gap, the
Department has worked with the Capitol Police Board and its oversight
committees to review possible requirements reductions. In fiscal year
2008 and fiscal year 2009, the Department closed a number of non-
security posts, which allowed the Department to remain within the
appropriated salary and overtime funding levels.
To further reduce the resource gap, the Department has looked at a
number of opportunities to civilianize positions currently performed by
sworn officers, so these sworn staffing resources may be realigned to
meet other core mission requirements. In fiscal year 2009, the
Department utilized available civilian positions to return former USCP
employees from the Department of Labor's Worker's Compensation Roll to
the Department's Communications Section. This allowed the Department to
utilize civilian personnel to perform the security camera and alarm
monitoring function in-house, rather that using contractors. This
allowed the Department additional general expense funds for potential
use on technology, as well as allowing for some realignment of sworn
resources.
Additionally, the Department civilianized 26 sworn positions in the
Library of Congress command center during the LOC Police and USCP
Merger. This allowed the Department to utilize civilianizing former LOC
Police employees to perform the Command Center functions and realign
sworn resources to other core mission requirements.
The Department is currently reviewing other areas that may result
in civilianization of posts, which may provide additional available
sworn officer utility. As these are developed, they will be vetted
through the Capitol Police Board and appropriate stakeholders for
consideration.
Even with these reductions efforts and the use of technology, the
remaining requirements currently exceed the Department's appropriated
overtime funding level. Therefore, the training hours contained within
the 1,560 officer utility must be utilized to meet the requirements gap
between available sworn officer resources and requirements.
An analysis was conducted by USCP with available data to estimate
the current sworn officer utility, which is estimated in an approximate
range of 1,650-1,725 per officer annually, including overtime. Almost
all of these utility hours are used in support of USCP core mission
requirement. Based on this estimated utility range, the Department is
not currently meeting its 80 hour annual training target as contained
in the target 1,560 sworn officer utility described above.
A random sampling of USCP officers in the Uniform Service Bureau
(USB) indicates that approximately 7-20 hours were actually used for
training in fiscal year 2009, vice the 80 hours allotted for training
in the utility calculation. By focusing this analysis on USB, we are
addressing the largest sworn population within the Department. This
analysis did not include USCP specialty units such as K9, CERT or HDS
and DPD.
The reduction of training hours will not have an immediate impact
on the USCP mission. However the long term impact of reducing core
training hours, will impact the recertification of officers in certain
programs, may affect officer response capability and may result in the
overall degradation of the proficiency of our officers to meet their
mission. All of these will result in greater risks to the Department
and create a cycle that will have long-term impacts on the Department.
In an effort to address this training matter before it becomes a
serious issue and work toward the optimum sworn officer utility of
1,560, the Department has requested overtime funding to support a
minimum of 16 hours of training for 1,500 sworn officers in fiscal year
2011. Because our current onboard officers cannot work increased
overtime levels for the long-term without affecting their
effectiveness, we are also requesting 52 additional officers to begin
to narrow the resource gap while allowing for the minimum annual
training level described above. These two resource requests are a part
of a larger balance that the Department is attempting to reach between
the use of personnel, overtime, technology and mission balance to meet
required core mission requirements.
Question. The budget request proposes converting some contractor
positions into full-time civilian positions with USCP.
Isn't it more expensive to take on a full-time employee for a
position that is currently under contract?
Answer. Not in all cases. In the Information Technology field, it
is not uncommon for FTE cost to be lower than contractor cost. We are
requesting to convert two positions, a CP-11 and a CP-7, the annual
cost for the two contractors is approximately $405,000, while the fully
loaded annual FTE cost for those positions is approximately $225,000.
Question. Why do you feel it is more beneficial to the USCP to have
some of the positions converted?
Answer. In situations where we have staff augmentation contractors
that cost more than the fully loaded cost of an civilian FTE equivalent
it makes financial sense to make the conversion. The Office of
Information Systems did an informal review and determined they could
save over $1 million per year if they could convert most of their staff
augment contractors to civilian FTEs.
Question. How were the decisions made about which positions to
convert from contract to full-time?
Answer. Realizing the limitations of the overall Legislative Branch
annual budgetary resources, we kept our fiscal year 2011 request for
civilian positions to replace contractors to those that would provide
the largest offset. We plan to review this matter annually and may make
additional requests in future fiscal years for civilian positions to
convert contractors.
radio modernization project
Question. On September 30, 2009, the Committee received the first
funding obligation plan pursuant to the fiscal year 2009 Supplemental
Appropriations Act that provided $71.6 million for the USCP radio
modernization project. That funding obligation plan specified $3.5
million for the design and construction of the mirror site facility to
house the radio system's technical requirements. Who is doing the
actual design of the mirror site and when will it be completed? Who
will be doing the construction of the mirror site and when will it be
completed?
Answer. The design and construction of the mirror site will be done
by Verizon and its contractors under the supervision of the AOC and
USCP. The design is scheduled to be completed by July 15, 2010 and the
construction build out is scheduled to be completed by March 2011.
Question. When can the Committee expect to receive the next
obligation plan?
Answer. The Committee recently received an obligation plan in March
2010. The next obligation plan is anticipated in April 2010.
Question. Will the $16 million requested in fiscal year 2011 be the
final funding request for this project? With only $3.5 million
obligated of the $71.6 million that was appropriated in the fiscal year
2009 supplemental, is it really necessary to have an additional $16
million in fiscal year 2011? What are the consequences of delaying this
appropriation?
Answer. That is our intention and is our plan. At this point in
time, the estimate for the total cost of this project is just over
$91.9 million. The total amount appropriated (assuming the $16 million
in fiscal year 2011) is $97.562 million, leaving a contingency fund of
$5.655 million. Should we need to utilize contingency funds during the
project, the Department plans to notify the Committees and provide an
explanation for its utilization.
Additionally, the Department plans to provide an update on the
status of the radio modernization project to the Committees in the near
future. As a part of this update, we will provide additional
information on the development and status of our budget estimates, a
current status of funds utilization, the status of the various phases
of the overall project, and our revised obligation plan for the
appropriated and requested funds.
Yes, the additional funding is necessary. Without the additional
funding there will be insufficient funds to complete the project. The
total cost of the project is estimated to be $91.9 million, and that is
without any contingency fund. The additional $16 million in funding
will bring the total appropriated amount to $97.562 million which
should be sufficient to complete the project and to provide for a small
contingency fund.
Currently, there is an Obligation Plan that was recently sent to
the House and Senate Appropriation Committees seeking permission to
obligate another $9.9 million. Another obligation plan will be prepared
in April 2010 for approximately $12 million. This summer, once the
Request For Quote process is completed over $34 million should be
obligated with most of the remaining funding obligated in the Fall of
2010.
The completion of the project would be delayed month for month for
any delay in funding beyond October 2010. Many of the components of the
project have long lead times for order delivery and then they have to
be installed within the campus buildings. In order to complete the
project by spring of 2012, the infrastructure and installation work
must start in spring 2012. Delaying the project would mean continuing
to operate longer with an aging analog radio system that is becoming
more difficult and more expensive to maintain.
Question. When do you anticipate having the new radio system
completely installed and fully operational? Will there be a multi-phase
implementation plan?
Answer. The project is scheduled for completion during late spring
2012. The most challenging part is the in-building wiring and
installations in 16 different buildings/facilities including the
Capitol Building. Though this work is expected to take about a year,
there are always unforeseen issues when doing this type of work in
these buildings. Also, if the in-building wiring work is not allowed to
start prior to the passage of the fiscal year 11 budget, then the
schedule is in jeopardy.
The project itself is divided into five phases as follows: Phase 1:
Cost Analysis; Phase 2: System Design; Phase 3: Procurement,
Integration and Installation; Phase 4: Acceptance Testing; and Phase 5:
Operations and Maintenance.
We are currently entering into Phase 3. Within Phase 3,
implementation will be conducted in a parallel approach. Inside work,
outside work, facilities construction, etc. will be done in parallel;
the goal is to have all the component pieces completed by September
2011 in order to then conduct system integration and testing. The ``go-
live'' migration plan will have a single cutover event from the analog
system to the digital system.
new initiatives in fiscal year 2011
Question. $16.2 million is requested for other new initiatives,
beyond the radio project, which seems to be a lot of funding for new
projects in one year. Does this request represent the full funding
requirements for these projects, or will additional funding be
requested in future fiscal years?
Answer. Funding requirements are specific to each project. In some
cases the projects may be funded in stages. All future funding requests
to support the continued maintenance and operation of the projects will
be requested through increases in the Bureau's base annual general
expense funding requests.
Because of the security sensitive nature of the information
included in the Department's response to this question, I am
respectfully providing my more detailed response under separate cover.
I would, therefore, request that the information provided in that
document not be included as a part of the public record.
Question. What would be the impact of providing only that funding
which would actually be obligated in fiscal year 2011 for each of these
projects?
Answer. Some of these projects could be funded in phases. Because
of the security sensitive nature of the information included in the
Department's response to this question, I am respectfully providing my
more detailed response under separate cover. I would, therefore,
request that the information provided in that document not be included
as a part of the public record.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
Senator Nelson. The subcommittee will stand in recess until
2:30 p.m. on March 18, 2010, when we will meet in room SD-138
to take testimony on the fiscal year 2011 budget requests of
the Architect of the Capitol and Office of Compliance.
We are recessed. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 6:08 p.m., Thursday, March 4, the
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene at 2:30 p.m., Thursday,
March 18.]
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011
----------
THURSDAY, MARCH 18, 2010
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 2:47 p.m., in room SD-138, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Ben Nelson (chairman) presiding.
Present: Senators Nelson and Murkowski.
ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL
STATEMENT OF STEPHEN T. AYERS, ACTING ARCHITECT OF THE
CAPITOL
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR BEN NELSON
Senator Nelson. Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome.
Senator Murkowski asked me to go ahead and start because she is
going to be a bit delayed but will be here in short order. So
that is what we will do.
Well, we meet this afternoon to take testimony on the
fiscal year 2011 budget request for the Architect of the
Capitol and the Office of Compliance. I want to welcome our two
witnesses today: Stephen Ayers, Acting Architect of the
Capitol; and Tamara Chrisler, Executive Director of the Office
of Compliance.
I also want to welcome my good friend ranking member,
Senator Murkowski, when she gets here, and I am hopeful that
other members of the subcommittee, Senator Pryor and Senator
Tester, may be able to join us as well.
AOC deg.CONGRATULATIONS ON NOMINATION
Mr. Ayers, I want to first congratulate you on your recent
nomination by the President to serve as the next Architect of
the Capitol. You will be only the 11th person in history to
serve in this capacity, which is really quite impressive, and
on behalf of the Senate and particularly this subcommittee, I
want to thank you for your service over the last 3 years as
acting Architect of the Capitol where your accomplishments
include the opening of the Capitol Visitor Center (CVC), the
staging of the 56th Presidential inauguration, and the opening
of the Library of Congress' National Audiovisual Conservation
Center, to name just a few. You have served us well in this
capacity and we look forward to moving toward your confirmation
by the Senate in the very near future.
Mr. Ayers. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Nelson. I appreciate that. I do not want to in any
way preempt the Senate from that effort on confirmation or to
get ahead of anything, but I am certain that that is in the
near future.
I also want to congratulate and acknowledge the hard work
and dedication of your staff of 2,600 employees. We rely on
these individuals for so many services around here, and this
year, in particular, with the record snowfalls, I want to
especially thank Ted Bechtol of your Capitol Grounds staff and
his team for the long hours they put in removing more than
11,000 tons of snow from the complex. We are deeply grateful
for their dedication and for the commitment of your entire
staff.
AOC OOC deg.FISCAL YEAR 2011 BUDGET REQUEST
Your budget request this year totals $755 million, an
increase of $153 million, or 25.5 percent over current year.
Now, I know you faced a difficult challenge when putting
together your budget request, attempting to balance
maintenance, security, energy efficiency, and new construction
projects on an aging, historical infrastructure within limited
resources. Hopefully, you understand the position the
subcommittee is in, in trying to hold the line on spending
while meeting the critical needs of your agency. So we
definitely have our work cut out for us this year, and I look
forward to hearing your testimony shortly.
Ms. Chrisler, the fiscal year 2011 budget request for the
Office of Compliance totals $4.7 million, an increase of
$300,000, or 6.7 percent over the current year. We appreciate
the efforts that both of your agencies have made to work
cooperatively toward resolving the many fire and life safety
needs around the complex, once again, within limited resources.
So we look forward to your testimony as well and to discussing
the status of health and safety conditions throughout the
Capitol complex.
AOC deg.BUDGET INCREASE CONCERNS
We held our first hearing of this fiscal year 2 weeks ago
and just in case you missed it--I am sure you did not--I would
like to reiterate a few concerns that were raised during that
hearing. I am disappointed in some respects that this
subcommittee has, once again, been presented with a large
budget increase in fiscal year 2011. The fiscal year 2011
legislative branch budget request totals $5.1 billion, or 10
percent over current year. Given the fact that the President
has made it clear about holding the line on spending, this
increase is not acceptable and it is not doable. The fact is
that this country remains in economic turmoil and the American
taxpayers simply will not tolerate unnecessary Government
spending at a time of unemployment. It is questionable whether
they will tolerate necessary Government spending at this time.
And last year, we received an overall increase of 5 percent
in the legislative branch bill, including some fairly large
ticket items for the House, over which we have no control. But
that is history.
And I have stated repeatedly that I am going to do
everything I can to hold the legislative branch flat this year.
I believe we need to lead by example in this subcommittee as
part of the Government, and we cannot do that by appropriating
large increases to our agencies. The President sent the message
loudly and clearly in his State of the Union Address this year,
noting that families across the country are tightening their
belts and making tough decisions. The Federal Government must
do the same, he said. And he announced a 3-year freeze on
nonsecurity discretionary Government spending, and I think we
need to do the same on this subcommittee.
And arriving just in time for my comments, turning it over
now to our ranking member of the subcommittee, Senator
Murkowski, for her opening remarks. What great timing.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR LISA MURKOWSKI
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I have to
tell you it is music to my ears. As I walk in, you are
repeating the refrain that you and I have made these past 2
years on these budget hearings about the need for fiscal
discipline. If we cannot set the example, if we cannot set the
standard here, how can we expect others outside of our
institution to exercise that same level.
But I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for calling the
hearing as we consider the fiscal year 2011 legislative branch
request from the Architect of the Capitol and the Office of
Compliance.
I would like to welcome both of our witnesses here today
and look forward to the opportunity to discuss some pretty
important issues on how the agencies that you both represent
are planning to move forward in the fiscal year. I appreciate
the way that your offices have continued to work to develop the
relationship that is necessary for good communication,
continued cooperation in the common goal that we ensure a safe
environment for our employees and our visitors while we
maintain the important historic nature of the surroundings.
I will start by recognizing Mr. Ayers and congratulating
you on your official nomination to be the next Architect of the
Capitol. We anticipate that the confirmation hearing will be
later on in the spring.
AOC deg.FISCAL YEAR 2011 BUDGET REQUEST
As the chairman has mentioned, the Architect of the Capitol
is requesting $754.8 million, an increase of 25.5 percent over
the fiscal year 2010 enacted level. Again, the chairman's
remarks about how we are going to do more with less I think are
appropriate. I do recognize that the AOC's significant increase
is associated with $216 million requested for line item
projects, a fair amount for deferred maintenance, capital
renewal, capital improvement, capital construction.
But I do think it is going to be important in our
discussions here today to figure out how we prioritize these
projects because it is just simply not going to be possible to
advance all that is contained within the proposal that we have
before us. We have got to look for the best possible solutions,
but it is all about prioritization.
Ms. Chrisler, I want to thank you for your leadership there
at the Office of Compliance. While your budget increase is not
on the level that we are seeing out of the Architect of the
Capitol's Office, it still is a 6.8 percent increase. I know
that you probably looked at that and said that this is a lean
budget and the decisions that went into submitting a request of
this nature are not easy. We appreciate what goes into it. But
I think we need to recognize that we continue to pare down the
agency's request and that we are going to be working to pare
down the Architect's budget, and that you will be working with
the Architect of the Capitol in reprioritizing the projects for
the year ahead.
I am anxious to hear from both of you this afternoon as to
how we can all work together to ensure that we are taking care
of the immediate needs of the historical structures that have
been left to our care, how we minimize the risks to those who
work here and to those who visit here every day. It is not an
easy job, but we know we can do it.
Mr. Chairman, I look forward to the opportunity to get some
questions and answers from our witnesses.
Senator Nelson. Thank you, and I continue to say how much
of a pleasure it is to be able to work with you and to share
many of the same ideas about an approach to dealing with the
budgets and look forward to continuing this year.
Now I would like to begin with witnesses. Because of the
timeframe, if it is possible to keep the opening comments to
somewhere around 5 minutes or something of that nature, the
rest of your comments will be received and, if written, put
into the record. So with that, Mr. Ayers, we will start with
you and then we will hear from Ms. Chrisler. Thank you.
SUMMARY STATEMENT OF STEPHEN T. AYERS
Mr. Ayers. Mr. Chairman and Senator Murkowski, thank you
for the opportunity to testify today regarding the Architect's
2011 budget request.
I would like to first express my thanks to this
subcommittee and the Congress for its support for the Architect
over the past year, as we have worked to maintain and preserve
the Capitol complex.
AOC deg.ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL--PROUD STEWARDS
Twenty-four hours a day, 7 days a week, and 365 days a
year, the AOC serves as proud stewards of the most iconic
buildings and grounds in the world. Nothing demonstrated our
commitment more than our team's remarkable response to
``snowmageddon'' last month. AOC crews logged nearly 35,000
hours to remove more than 11,000 tons of snow to ensure that
the Congress could continue to conduct its business.
The AOC had a very successful 2009, a year that began with
the Presidential inauguration and ended with the first of three
major blizzards to hit Washington. In between these major
events, we welcomed more than 2.3 million visitors to the
Capitol Visitor Center during its first year in operation and
we carried out numerous projects designed to save energy and
improve operations.
AOC deg.FISCAL YEAR 2011 PROJECTS
In that regard, our fiscal year 2011 budget request focuses
on projects that are necessary to attend to the critical needs
of the Capitol complex, and specifically this entails
addressing a significant backlog of deferred maintenance and
capital renewal projects, as well as security, life safety, and
accessibility requirements.
Mr. Chairman, we are requesting $755 million in fiscal year
2011, and the projects portion of this budget is devoted to
addressing these critical issues needing the most urgent
attention. Although every project on the list in our budget is
necessary and will ultimately need to be done, we realize that
not all can be funded in this fiscally challenging year.
However, we do take our responsibility to identify,
quantify, and report to the Congress the state of facilities
and the extent of deferred maintenance very, very seriously.
Most importantly, our project prioritization tools we believe
provide the Congress with concrete and practical assessments of
our infrastructure enabling good decisionmaking about our
future investments.
Over the past year, this process has matured to include a
5-year capital improvements plan, which examines phasing
opportunities and project sequencing and other factors to
better facilitate the timing of projects.
The AOC is committed to making the right choices by doing
our part on energy savings on Capitol Hill. For 2009, the
Congress met its energy reduction goals for the fourth year in
a row and reduced energy consumption by 15.3 percent across the
Capitol complex.
AOC deg.ENERGY CONSERVATION
To help meet future energy reduction requirements, last
summer we entered into our first energy-savings performance
contract to implement energy-saving projects across the House
office buildings, and in December, we entered into an energy-
savings performance contract for the Senate and the Capitol
Building. These public/private partnerships will help us
achieve significant energy reductions over the next several
years.
On the operations side, we have been successful in our
endeavors due to the professional men and women who make up
this great AOC team. Their commitment to excellence allows us
to provide exceptional service to the Congress and the visiting
public every day. In that regard, our annual operating budget
request for $443 million supports the critical activities
necessary to support the Congress and the other legislative
branch agencies.
AOC deg.CAPITOL VISITOR CENTER
With regard to accommodating Members' and visitors' needs,
the Capitol Visitor Center is top in its class. Now in our
second year of operation, we continue to make improvements to
our policies and tour procedures, including modifying the
advance reservation system to give congressional offices more
flexibility to modify, cancel, and reschedule tour
reservations. We have also added a congressional staff line at
the south information desk, increased the number of operators
to ensure prompt response to phone calls, and are placing staff
in strategic locations throughout the Capitol Visitor Center to
improve visitor flow.
In addition, we continue to hold monthly listening sessions
with congressional staff to receive feedback and answer
questions, and to date, more than 5,200 staff members have
attended our Capitol Visitor Center training program.
PREPARED STATEMENT
Mr. Chairman, the AOC is ready to do what is necessary to
keep the Capitol complex open and operating every day of the
year under any circumstances. I am honored and privileged to
work alongside this great team.
Thank you again for the opportunity to testify today.
Senator Nelson. Thank you.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Stephen T. Ayers
Mr. Chairman, Senator Murkowski, and members of the Subcommittee,
thank you for the opportunity to testify today regarding the Office of
the Architect of the Capitol's (AOC's) fiscal year 2011 budget request.
I would like to begin by expressing my thanks to this Subcommittee
and to the Congress for its support of the AOC over the past several
years as we worked to fulfill our mission of serving the Congress and
the American people by maintaining and preserving the U.S. Capitol
complex. I also very much appreciate, and I'm honored by, the trust the
President and the Congress have placed in me to lead this dedicated
group as the nominee to serve as the 11th Architect of the Capitol as
we continue to address the challenges ahead. We are very aware of the
need to preserve the historic infrastructure on Capitol Hill while, at
the same time, recognize the need for fiscal responsibility. It is a
tremendous honor to have the opportunity to continue to work with this
very talented team of professionals.
Twenty-four hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year, the AOC
team serves Congress as proud stewards of the most iconic buildings and
grounds in the world. Through our work, we protect the past by
preserving the historic integrity of the U.S. Capitol complex, we are
boldly working today to promote a safe and sustainable workplace, and
we continue to build a legacy of professionalism for generations to
come.
Nothing demonstrated our commitment to our mission more than our
team's remarkable response to the back-to-back blizzards that hit the
Washington, DC, metro area in early February--otherwise known as
``Snowmageddon.''
Throughout both of these snow emergencies, AOC employees
successfully cleared the streets, sidewalks, entryways, and parking
lots across the Capitol complex in order to support the Congress as it
conducted its business on the weekend and during the following week,
keeping the complex cleared of snow and ice for Members, staff, and the
public. At the same time, we continued to operate and maintain all our
facilities, and the Capitol Power Plant's service continued
uninterrupted.
AOC crews logged in nearly 35,000 man hours to remove more than
11,000 tons of snow. Once the snow had ended, our work did not. Our
crews continued to remove piles of snow from across the complex, treat
the sidewalks, streets, and parking lots as the snow melted and re-
froze overnight, and attended to hundreds of trees that were damaged in
the storms.
This pride in our work extends throughout the organization.
Stewardship of the Capitol complex is a unique challenge. The challenge
is amplified by the historic significance of our buildings and
landscape, aging physical infrastructure, and day-to-day operational
requirements. We strive every day to improve the conditions of our
facilities using innovative technologies and sustainable practices to
ensure the U.S. Capitol remains the nation's most visible and treasured
icon of our government for centuries to come.
Our fiscal year 2011 budget request details a number of projects
necessary to ensure we address the critical needs of the Capitol
complex as quickly and effectively as possible. Specifically, this
entails a significant backlog of deferred maintenance and capital
renewal projects, as well as security, life-safety and accessibility,
and environmental requirements. Although every project that we have
listed in our budget request is necessary, we realize that not all can
be funded in these fiscally-challenging times.
However, we take our responsibility to identify, quantify, and
report to Congress the state of our facilities and the extent of the
deferred maintenance backlog very seriously. The prioritization tools
we have developed and refined over the past several years provide
Congress with concrete and practical assessments of our infrastructure.
By using these tools, Congress can choose where best to make
investments in the Capitol complex.
capital budget request and project planning process
We are requesting $755 million for fiscal year 2011. The majority
of our capital budget request is devoted to addressing the critical
projects we've identified as needing urgent attention, which are
primarily classified as deferred maintenance. This portion of our
budget is the most volatile. It fluctuates greatly from year to year
based on the size and complexity of the projects that have been
prioritized as having immediate urgency.
Only a small percentage of our requested increase is non-
discretionary for mandatory cost-of-living increases, and other
operating expenses or contract price increases. We deliberately worked
to keep the growth of this segment of our budget to a minimum in order
to maximize the capital budget. This will enable the greatest
investment as possible in our infrastructure and to allow us to ``buy
down'' the deferred maintenance backlog.
As I have discussed at previous hearings, we have successfully
developed and implemented a robust and balanced process to prioritize
projects based on the facilities' conditions and the level of
maintenance required to ensure they remain functional and viable
working environments.
This process uses several tools in the formulation of the project
prioritization list including Facility Condition Assessments, the
Capitol Complex Master Plan, and Jurisdiction Plans. Over the past
year, this process has matured to include a Five-Year Capital
Improvements Plan, which examines phasing opportunities, project
sequencing, and other factors to better facilitate the timing of the
execution of major deferred maintenance and capital renewal projects.
As I discussed earlier, these tools assist us and the Congress in
looking ahead and enable us to plan when and where to make future
investments in our facilities and infrastructure. We also took into
consideration the challenge of executing required programs efficiently
throughout this process.
As this chart demonstrates, we continue to invest most of our
resources in infrastructure projects that are designed to address the
backlog of deferred maintenance.
Tied into the overall planning process is the Line Item
Construction Program. During this process, projects are scored against
six criteria: preservation; regulatory compliance; mission; economics;
security, and energy efficiency and environmental quality.
As we developed our fiscal year 2011 budget, we considered $373
million worth of capital projects, and are requesting $216 million for
Line Item Construction Program projects. The remaining $157 million in
projects were considered, but were not submitted in this budget
request, and therefore remain on the deferred project list.
As I mentioned earlier, our Capital Budget request is quite
volatile from year to year based on the projects that rise to the top
of the priority list. The AOC's fiscal year 2011 Capital Budget request
includes nine projects that each requires an investment of $10 million
or more. They are:
--Utility Tunnel Improvement Program;
--Egress Projects in the Thomas Jefferson Building;
--Capitol Building Dome Skirt Rehabilitation;
--Capitol Building Exterior Stone and Metal Preservation;
--Copper Roof Replacement and Fall Protection System for John Adams
Building;
--Roof and Skylight Replacement for Hart Senate Office Building;
--Refurbishment of Federal Office Building 8;
--Task 9, Phase II Infrastructure Improvements in Dirksen Senate
Office Building; and
--Collection Storage Module V for Library of Congress.
Mr. Chairman, I'm pleased to report that our Utility Tunnel
Improvement Program is on schedule to meet the June 2012 completion
date. In addition, by utilizing our comprehensive planning process, we
have been able to further reduce the program's cost. This was
accomplished by collecting new information from engineering studies,
visual examination of the exterior of the tunnels, and additional
structural testing. Funds were also saved through an efficient
procurement process and execution plans that consolidated work
elements, thereby saving contract overhead costs. These actions enabled
the AOC to reduce our fiscal year 2010 request and re-phase some work,
thereby reducing the total projected cost of the program from $186.4
million to $176.13 million. We continue to seek additional ways to
further reduce the program's total cost.
energy conservation and sustainability programs
The AOC is committed to making the right choices and doing our part
to save energy on Capitol Hill. With Congress' support, we have
implemented a number of programs and completed a variety of projects
designed to produce significant results in saving taxpayer dollars and
conserving our natural resources. One of our biggest challenges is
ensuring that we preserve the historic elements of our buildings, while
at the same time making them as energy efficient as possible. That's
why the Architect of the Capitol is committed to using sustainable
design practices whether we're building a new facility or maintaining
one that's 100 years old, like the Russell Building.
For fiscal year 2009, the Congress met its energy reduction goals
for the fourth year in a row, and reduced energy consumption by 15.3
percent across the Capitol complex. This exceeded the fiscal year 2009
requirement of a 12 percent reduction (as compared to the fiscal year
2003 baseline). For fiscal year 2010, a 15 percent reduction is
required under the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, (3
percent reduction per year for a 30 percent reduction by 2015), and in
fiscal year 2011, an 18 percent reduction is required.
To meet these requirements to further reduce energy consumption, we
have requested $11.2 million in fiscal year 2011 for energy and
sustainability projects. In addition, we're asking for an increase of
nearly $10 million in operations funding for energy and sustainability
purposes. These sustainable practices include using low-impact
materials, installing energy efficient equipment, incorporating durable
and high-performance systems and materials, investing in renewable
energy, and encouraging and supporting a culture that promotes reuse
and recycling. This includes using food waste, garden clippings, and
other green waste, and repurposing it as compost for flower beds, and
sustaining other plantings throughout the Capitol complex.
To better identify and evaluate energy savings opportunities in
Capitol complex facilities, we have been using energy audits since
fiscal year 2007. The data collected help us realize better cost-
benefit results, and determine where best to invest our resources.
In December, the AOC entered into an Energy Savings Performance
Contract (ESPC) in the Senate Office Buildings. The project includes
nearly $42 million in facility infrastructure upgrades in the Hart,
Dirksen, and Russell Senate Office Buildings, as well as the Senate
Underground Garage, and Senate Employees' Child Care Facility.
Highlights of this project include:
--Energy-efficient lighting upgrades of nearly 31,000 fixtures in all
buildings, with state-of-the-art lighting controls, expanding
AOC/Senate's centralized dimming system, integrating occupancy
and daylight sensors;
--Upgrading of existing pneumatic and electric controls for heating,
ventilating, and air-conditioning (HVAC) systems with direct
digital controls (DDC) and providing an ongoing program to
train building automation system operators specifically in the
monitoring and diagnosis of energy-related controls
deficiencies;
--HVAC Testing, Adjusting, and Balancing to trim excessive outdoor-
air ventilation, provide for high-efficiency cog belts (for fan
drives), and add weather stripping to exterior doors to
minimize infiltration;
--Replacement of existing transformers with high-efficiency
transformers; and
--Installation of removable insulation covers for steam valves to
reduce heat loss, improve comfort, and reduce the safety risks
associated with the hot surfaces.
After implementation of all energy conservation measures over the
36-month construction period, the Senate Office Buildings are estimated
to potentially realize: a 36 percent reduction in total energy
consumption; and approximately $3.9 million in annual energy savings.
We appreciate the support of the Senate Leadership, Chairman
Schumer, and all of our Oversight Committees in our ongoing efforts to
improve energy efficiency and reduce the carbon footprint of the
Capitol complex. They have made clear their commitment to reduce energy
consumption, conserve natural resources, protect the environment, and
in the long term, save taxpayer dollars.
Last year, the AOC also entered into an ESPC to implement energy
savings projects in the House Office Buildings. The contract includes
nearly $34 million in facility infrastructure upgrades in the Rayburn,
Longworth, Cannon, and Ford House Office Buildings, as well as the
House Page Dormitory.
After implementation of all energy conservation measures over the
30-month construction period, the House Office Buildings are estimated
to potentially realize: a 23 percent reduction in total energy
consumption; a 32 percent reduction in total water consumption; and
approximately $3.3 million in annual energy savings.
In our Energy Savings Performance Contract for the U.S. Capitol
Building, nearly $17 million in facility infrastructure upgrades are
planned for the Capitol Building. They include:
--Upgrading existing light fixtures with high-efficiency lamps,
ballasts and reflectors as well as new replacement fixtures;
--A comprehensive Building Automation System modernization, including
the upgrade of existing pneumatic and electric controls for
heating, ventilating and air-conditioning (HVAC) systems with
direct digital controls. These improvements will reduce energy
consumption and improve temperature and humidity control;
--Replacement of the air-handling systems with variable air volume
(VAV) systems to reduce energy consumption while augmenting
capacity and improving temperature and humidity control;
--Replacement of existing electrical transformers with high-
efficiency transformers; and
--A comprehensive audit and repair effort to restore steam trap
performance.
After implementation of all energy conservation measures over the
27-month construction period, the Capitol Building is estimated to
realize: a 38 percent reduction in total energy consumption; and
approximately $2.2 million in annual energy savings.
In addition, we are continuing our efforts to complete the program
to install steam, electricity, natural gas, chilled water, potable
water, and condensate meters across the Capitol complex. This is a key
effort in terms of being able to measure current consumption, look for
improvement opportunities, and measure energy savings results. To date,
approximately one-third of the meters have been installed. The
remaining meters for facilities located outside the Capitol complex, as
well as the rest of the Capitol complex, are included in our fiscal
year 2011 budget request, with a final initial installation funding
request projected for fiscal year 2012.
Because the Capitol Power Plant (CPP) plays a critical role in our
long-term energy conservation strategy, we are continually working to
improve and upgrade operations there. The CPP has served the Capitol
complex very well since 1910, but in order to continue to provide these
services into the future, it is time to transform the CPP and its
operations. We started this transformation last February when we began
using natural gas as the primary fuel source. We are now studying and
evaluating potential new technologies to implement at the CPP. We
recently completed our Strategic Long-Term Energy Plan, which will help
to determine our future Energy Program planning, and explore various
options for continued energy efficiencies.
Over the past several years we have been working to create a
healthy and productive workplace where environmental awareness and
sustainability are the normal ways of doing business in the Capitol
complex. There are a number of initiatives that the AOC has been
engaged in, and we continue to see results in our efforts to improve
energy efficiency.
Here are just a few of our ongoing sustainability initiatives and
projects:
--We recently renovated room G-50 in the Dirksen Building, to install
new LED light bulbs that use over 80 percent less electricity,
give off less heat, and have a life expectancy of 30 years. In
addition, the carpet and paint used in the room has low or no
volatile organic compounds (VOCs). We also use low-VOC and
other green cleaning products throughout the complex to ensure
we maintain excellent indoor air quality.
--We installed nine solar panels in a Senate parking lot to power new
lights which make the parking lot safer.
--We have installed daylight harvesting systems in Member and
Committee Offices that use electronic sensors to lower
artificial lighting levels when enough natural light is
available.
--Nearly 35 percent of AOC employees use public transportation to get
to work.
--We are updating our 2006 Alternative Fuel Policy so, in addition to
providing E-85 fuel to official government vehicles across the
Capitol complex, we require the purchase or leasing of
alternate fuel vehicles when replacing aging vehicles. To date,
there are 40 flexfuel, hybrid, and electric vehicles in the
AOC's fleet.
--In September 2009, the American Lung Association of the District of
Columbia (ALADC) commended the AOC for its use of B20 blend
biodiesel fuel in its shuttle buses that service Capitol Hill.
The ALADC's Chief Executive Officer thanked the AOC for its
leadership in switching to biodiesel noting, ``The ALADC has
long called for greater use of biodiesel to improve the air
quality in our city, so it is particularly noteworthy that a
highly visible location like the Capitol uses biodiesel to
reduce emissions, including carbon monoxide, particulate matter
and unburned hydrocarbons.''
--The AOC recycles 100 percent of its e-waste in three basic ways.
Computer equipment is donated by the Agency. If it's not
donated, it is reused or resold. Any equipment that is not
donated or reused is recycled by a commercial recycling
company. Typically the equipment is either reused or broken
down and its components are repurposed.
--As part of Committee office renovations, the AOC has incorporated
sustainable design features. The AOC installed lighting control
systems where the electricity is metered, used rapidly
renewable materials and certified wood, and recycled more than
12 tons of construction waste in this Committee suite.
--For construction projects, we regularly purchase materials
containing recycled content such as acoustical ceiling tiles,
resilient flooring, sheet rock, doors, low volatile organic
compound materials, and medium density fiberboard. Whenever
possible, construction materials are purchased locally.
--We continue to install low-flow fixtures and automatic faucets in
restrooms, convert from pneumatic to direct digital controls to
maximize energy usage efficiency, and replace incandescent
light bulbs with Compact Fluorescent light bulbs throughout the
Capitol campus.
u.s. botanic garden/sustainable sites initiative
Because sustainable design, construction, and landscape management
can have a significant and positive impact on our environment, in
November 2009, the U.S. Botanic Garden launched the Sustainable Sites
Initiative, in partnership with the Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center
and the American Society of Landscape Architects.
The goals of the Sustainable Sites Initiative encourage the
sustainable design, construction, and maintenance of landscapes. These
are the first national guidelines for building landscapes that will
help to clean the air and water; mitigate temperatures; reduce
flooding; provide more natural habitat for birds, insects, and animals,
and help support our health and well-being.
The effort to transform the way built landscapes are designed,
constructed, and maintained for generations to come is a very important
one, and the AOC is proud to be among those leading this national
effort.
annual operating budget request
Our fiscal year 2011 annual operating budget request for $443
million provides funding for continuing the critical activities of
operating and maintaining the infrastructure which supports the
Congress, other Legislative Branch agencies, and the public, as well as
other AOC essential mission support services. Some of these services
include financial management, safety, human resources, project and
construction management, planning and development, communications,
information technology, procurement, and central administration.
As I mentioned earlier, this non-discretionary spending has
remained fairly constant over the past several years, and significant
reductions in this portion of our budget would greatly impact our
ability to provide day-to-day services and maintain our facilities at
expected and acceptable levels.
Other operating cost increases lie outside our control, including
additional price increases that exceed inflation and are imposed by
vendors as the cost of doing business. In addition, the cost of leases
has increased, new technologies require investment in new networks, as
well as hardware and software upgrades, and mandatory pay raises
combined with the increase in costs for goods and services have added
to the cost of our daily operations.
capitol visitor center operating budget request
At the opening ceremony for the Capitol Visitor Center (CVC) in
December 2008, I noted that, ``Visitors now have a respectful and
dignified way to come to the People's House, and I invite everyone to
come and explore all that the Capitol Visitor Center and the U.S.
Capitol have to offer.'' Little did I realize that 2.3 million people
would take me up on my offer in just the first year.
We are requesting $23.9 million for CVC operations and
administration, and four FTEs to support operations including an
interpretive curator.
The CVC's first year of operation has been extremely successful.
Average wait times continue to be 6 minutes versus the 3 or 4 hours in
line in years past. More than 1,100 events have been held in the CVC's
meeting spaces in the past year, and we're looking forward to large
crowds again as Cherry Blossom season approaches.
We continue to make improvements and adjustments to our policies
and tour procedures including modifying the Advanced Reservation System
to give Congressional offices more flexibility to modify, cancel, or
reschedule tour reservations. We've also added a Congressional staff
line at the South Information Desk, brought on more operators to ensure
prompt responses to phone calls, and will be assigning staff to
strategic locations in Emancipation Hall to help facilitate visitor
traffic flow of staff- and guide-led tours.
We continue to hold monthly listening sessions with Congressional
staff to receive feedback and answer questions, and to date, more than
5,100 staffers have participated in the CVC's training program.
As a point of interest, I would like to note that in April we will
install new documents into the CVC's Exhibition Hall. The new items,
which include a map used by the National American Woman Suffrage
Association showing their successful campaign for voting rights, the
proclamation to residents of the Louisiana Territory that the United
States had purchased the area from France, and the map showing the
route of the Wilkes Expedition (the U.S. Exploring Expedition to the
South Seas that brought to Washington a collection of living plants
from around the globe) will be on display through early October.
aoc accomplishments
Mr. Chairman, this past year we have recorded a number of
significant achievements. The following is a list of just a few of our
many accomplishments.
--Our annual Building Services Customer Satisfaction Surveys for
fiscal year 2009 again showed that a large majority of our
customers are satisfied or very satisfied with the level of
service the AOC is providing them.
--We continued to improve our cost accounting procedures and internal
controls, and received our fifth consecutive clean audit
opinion from independent auditors on all of our financial
statements. The Capitol Visitor Center construction project
received a clean audit opinion; the third in 3 years. We
submitted the first set of semi-annual financial statements for
CVC operations in 2009, and received a clean audit opinion on
those as well.
--We made tremendous progress to close out the recommendations from
the Government Accountability Office's (GAO's) General
Management Review (GMR) of the Agency. Ninety-one percent of
the recommendations are now closed (61 out of 67). Three of the
items from the original GMR are pending closure, and expected
to be completed in summer 2010. The remaining open items focus
on long-term recommendations (not part of the original GMR). We
are closely monitoring those activities and reporting status to
GAO.
--We activated our pandemic flu plan in response to the H1N1 Flu
threat, including implementing action plans to address
continuity of operations; educating staff on how to prevent
getting sick; providing hand sanitizing stations across the
Capitol complex, and doing regular cleaning with a focus on
cleaning hard surfaces, such as desks and tables.
--Worker safety remains one of our top priorities and our focus
remains on decreasing our Injury and Illness Rate each year, as
we have done since 2000. Safety training and education are keys
to our success, with a particular emphasis on injury prevention
through hazard recognition and elimination.
--We will complete the initial phase of our preventative maintenance
standardization program this month. Included in this effort is
the identification of common preventative maintenance issues
across jurisdictions, minimum corrective procedures to follow,
and timelines for completion. This information will be
automated in our facilities management information system and
allow us to track metrics in the future to identify
opportunities for improvement.
--Since 2007, the Office of Compliance (OOC) has issued one citation
to the AOC. AOC has worked collaboratively with the Office of
Compliance to close older citations and has successfully closed
21 citations since 2007. Eighteen Citations remain open today;
four are scheduled for closure in 2010. The remaining address
longer term utility tunnel (6) and fire and life-safety (8)
matters.
--During the 111th Congress, the AOC increased its emphasis on
facility safety inspection, to include pre-inspections of
Members' offices prior to the OOC's biennial inspections. As a
result of the combined efforts of AOC and other employing
offices, the OOC is reporting a decrease of 41 percent in the
number of findings from fiscal year 2010 in the nine facilities
in which the OOC has completed inspections to date.
--The U.S. Botanic Garden (USBG) was recognized as one of
Washington's best tourist spots in August 2009, by Nickelodeon
Television. The USBG won its ``Parents' Picks Award,''
garnering more votes than several other area attractions. In
December, the USBG was voted one of the nation's best spots to
``catch the holiday spirit'' by the American Automobile
Association (AAA).
--The AOC team that managed construction of Modules 3 and 4 and four
Cold Storage Rooms at the Library of Congress Fort Meade High-
Density Storage Facility were honored with a national award in
October from the Construction Management Association of America
(CMAA), in the category of new construction for a project under
$50 million. The new storage units will house 33 million items
from the Library's special-format collections.
--Later this month the AOC will be recognized by the Washington
Building Congress with two awards that recognized special
building skills. The House Office Buildings Sprinkler
Installation Project will receive one award under the category
of ``Decorative Plaster'' and the second under ``Plumbing,''
which has also been nominated for a Star Award. The awards will
be presented on March 26, 2010.
conclusion
Mr. Chairman, as ``Snowmageddon'' has shown, the AOC is ready to
step up and do what is necessary to keep the Capitol complex open and
operating every day of the year--under any circumstances.
Today, we face a blizzard of deferred maintenance projects, and the
forecast is not sunny. We do appreciate the investment Congress has
made in our facilities over the past several years as we work to buy
down the deferred maintenance backlog. The AOC has been successful in
our work to be good stewards of the Capitol complex due to your
support.
We also have been able to accomplish much and experience numerous
successes because of the dedicated, professional men and women who make
up the AOC team. I have been 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 have been able
prevent system and facility failure due to their skills and ingenuity.
Once again, thank you for this opportunity to testify today. Mr.
Chairman, we look forward to working with this Subcommittee, the House
Subcommittee on Legislative Branch, and our Oversight Committees to
address the backlog of maintenance and repair projects, and continue to
protect and preserve the U.S. Capitol for generations to come.
I would be happy to answer any questions you might have.
OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE
STATEMENT OF TAMARA E. CHRISLER, ESQ., EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR
Senator Nelson. Ms. Chrisler.
Ms. Chrisler. Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Ms.
Murkowski.
I am honored to be here to appear before you today
representing the Office of Compliance in support of our 2011
fiscal year budget request.
OOC deg.CONGRESSIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY ACT 15 YEAR ANNIVERSARY
I would like to take a moment, though, before I go into the
highlights of that request and note that the Congressional
Accountability Act (CAA) celebrates its 15th anniversary this
year, and it is not just a celebration for the Office of
Compliance, but it is a celebration for the entire
congressional community. The successes that are achieved under
this Congressional Accountability Act are, in large part, due
to the work of the member offices and the agencies and
particularly this subcommittee. So we thank you for your
support in the area of the work of our agency.
OOC deg.SAFETY AWARENESS
Because of this subcommittee, the agency has been able to
raise awareness of safety and health on the Hill, resulting in
an increase of four times the Safe Office Awards in the 110th
Congress. And congratulations to you, Mr. Chairman, and you,
Ms. Murkowski, for being recipients of that award this
Congress. We appreciate your leadership in this area.
In addition, this subcommittee's active involvement in fire
safety issues has led the Office of Compliance and the Office
of the Architect of the Capitol to engage in collaborative
discussions regarding the prioritization of open fire safety
citations. These discussions have resulted in a prioritization
schedule that is cost-efficient, practical, and mindful of the
iconic nature of our environment.
I highlight these areas not just to show the progress that
has been made under the CAA, but to thank you for your support
and to emphasize that the OOC will be carrying out these and
other programs without asking for additional resources, except
where absolutely necessary.
OOC deg.FISCAL YEAR 2011 BUDGET REQUEST
There are three areas where the OOC has requested
additional funding for fiscal year 2011, one being safety and
health to develop a risk assessment approach to inspections;
two being IT infrastructure to update and enhance our IT
security; and three, human capital to provide mandatory salary
increases and minimal merit increases.
The technical guidance we provide in the area of safety and
health is well received and results in cost savings. We want to
continue this type of service and increase cost savings within
the legislative branch, and from the language in the fiscal
year 2010 legislative branch appropriations conference
committee report, you want us to continue that service too. In
line with the conference committee's report, we anticipate
developing a cooperative and cost-efficient approach to the
identification and correction of safety and health hazards.
This approach will be risk-based and, as the conference
committee report indicated, focused on those areas which would
yield the most reduction of risk to human health and safety. As
we see it, those areas are work places and work activities that
pose the biggest risk to safety. We will work very closely with
employing offices as we develop this approach.
OOC deg.COMMUNICATIONS--IT SYSTEMS
As my written statement indicates, our communications and
IT systems are antiquated and do not provide a cost effective
way of securing information. Our current system of two
computers per employee is an administrative burden on our
resources. It is not cost efficient and it is cumbersome for
staff. The funding we seek will allow us to migrate the two
networks into a single system while maintaining security of
confidential information.
The balance of our request is for mandatory cost-of-living
increases, minimal staff increases, and associate benefits.
We understand the fiscal constraints of our environment,
and in the spirit of cooperation, we have presented a budget
request which we believe only has minimal increases, only those
necessary to allow us to continue to serve you, to focus
attention on those hazards that are the riskiest, to protect
confidential and sensitive information, and to retain the
talented workforce that carries out the mandates of the CAA.
OOC deg.ADDITIONAL RESOURCE AVAILABILITY
Though we have a need for additional resources to assist
with our inspections of over 17 million square feet of space in
the D.C. Metro area alone, with an additional 1 million
expected in fiscal year 2012 and 2013, we are not seeking those
additional resources this year. Instead, we are working with
OSHA to secure nonreimbursable detailees to fill the need. We
are hopeful that a mutual exchange of services between the two
agencies will be of benefit to both agencies at no cost to the
Government.
PREPARED STATEMENT
So on behalf of the Board of Directors and the entire staff
of the Office of Compliance, I thank you for your support of
the agency, and I am happy to answers any questions that you
have.
Senator Nelson. Thank you.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Tamara E. Chrisler
Mr. Chairman, Ms. Murkowski, and distinguished Members of the
Subcommittee, I am honored to appear before you today on behalf of the
Office of Compliance (``OOC'' or ``Agency''). Joining me today are
General Counsel Peter Ames Eveleth, Deputy Executive Director Barbara
J. Sapin, Deputy Executive Director John P. Isa, Deputy General Counsel
Susan M. Green, and Budget and Finance Officer Allan Holland.
Collectively, we present to you the Agency's request for appropriations
for fiscal year 2011, and we seek your support for our request.
For fiscal year 2011, the Agency is requesting a total of
$4,675,491, a $298,491 or 6.82 percent increase over the Agency's
fiscal year 2010 appropriations level of $4,377,000. This funding would
provide the Agency with the bare minimum resources necessary to
continue its operations. This minimal increase includes funding for the
development and roll out of a risk-based assessment, essential
improvements to our quickly aging and increasingly inefficient IT
infrastructure, and salary increases required by Federal law.
Before I go into the details of our request, however, I would be
remiss if I did not acknowledge the Subcommittee's continued support
for this Agency. As you may be aware, the Congressional Accountability
Act is celebrating its 15th anniversary this year. As we embark upon
celebrating the successes Congress has achieved under this law, we must
recognize the important role this Subcommittee has played: its vision
and its support for this Agency and the work that we do. Because of
this Subcommittee's steadfast assistance, the Office of Compliance has
been able to continue to raise awareness of safety and health within
our covered community. Just 2 weeks ago, the OOC presented four times
as many Safe Office Awards as in the 110th Congress. These 154
Representatives and Senators ensured that their employees could work in
and that constituents could visit Washington, DC offices that are free
from hazards. These increased numbers are a result of the daily
education efforts of our staff, along with cooperation from staff of
the Office of the Architect of the Capitol, House and Senate Employment
Counsel, and the Chief Administrative Officer. Without the recognition
from this Subcommittee of the importance of the OOC's safety and health
services, and without substantial funding to provide these services, we
would not be celebrating these safe and healthy Congressional
workplaces.
Because of this Subcommittee's dedication to safety issues, a Blue
Ribbon Panel of architects and fire safety experts has been convened to
provide an independent assessment of fire safety issues in the Russell
Senate Office Building. This assessment will be instrumental in
ensuring that fire safety hazards are abated in an effective and cost-
efficient manner, while maintaining the beauty and history of the Halls
of Congress. Indeed, this Subcommittee's active involvement in fire
safety issues has lead the OOC and the Office of the Architect of the
Capitol to engage in collaborative discussions regarding the
prioritization of open fire safety citations. These discussions have
resulted in a prioritization schedule that is cost-efficient,
practical, and mindful of the iconic nature of our environment.
This Subcommittee's interest in the work performed by the OOC does
not end with its help in the area of safety and health. Because of this
Subcommittee's support, the Office of Compliance has increased its
educational workshops provided to sister agencies about our unique
dispute resolution system. Our colleagues have taken an interest in our
services because we implement and administer a dispute resolution
system that focuses on resolving disputes at the front end of a case
using mandatory counseling and mediation. This approach results in
lower costs for all parties and less workplace conflict.
We are providing training for new Congressional employees, and up-
to-date publications for Members, employing offices, and Congressional
employees about their workplace rights and obligations under the CAA.
Training and knowledge of the law are a central part of our job on
Capitol Hill. We are proud of the work we do for you, and we take pride
in the fact that we do it nimbly and efficiently.
In addition, the OOC has been working with the Office of the
Architect of the Capitol to implement a cost-effective approach to
improving public access to Capitol Hill facilities for persons with
disabilities. The goal is, in cooperation with the Architect of the
Capitol's Office, as well as other employing offices, to focus
resources on removing the barriers that will most improve access to the
facilities for the lowest cost.
I highlight these programs to showcase the work that has been done
and the progress that has been made in our legislative community
because of this Subcommittee: your interest in our mission, and your
support for our mission. We thank you. I also emphasize that we will be
carrying out these programs in fiscal year 2011 without asking for
additional resources except where it is absolutely essential.
strategic planning
As the Office of Compliance celebrates these and many other
accomplishments, we look forward to the next fiscal year, ready with a
new 3 year Strategic Plan. Although the Plan covers fiscal years 2010
through 2012, fiscal year 2011 will be the first fiscal year in which
the Agency has requested funding in support of this Plan. The Strategic
Plan focuses the efforts of the OOC on providing technical guidance to
agencies and employing offices, serving as a resource to the covered
community, expanding our outreach efforts to raise awareness of our
services, and strengthening our infrastructure to improve the quality
of service we provide to our constituents.
Our fiscal year 2011 request for appropriations supports the
initiatives in our new strategic plan. Specifically, our budget request
focuses on three major areas that are designed to support needed
technical assistance to employing offices, as well as upgraded
infrastructure for the Agency, and mandatory salary increases for
staff.
safety and health inspections
In line with the goals and initiatives in our Strategic Plan, the
OOC requests funding to continue its cooperative and cost-efficient
approach to the identification and correction of safety and health
hazards. If funded as requested, our 2011 budget would support the
ongoing development and implementation of the risk-based inspection and
abatement approach that the Conference Committee on fiscal year 202010
Legislative Branch Appropriations directed OOC to institute.
The OOC is completing its third successive wall-to-wall OSH
inspection of legislative branch facilities on Capitol Hill. The area
we inspect is vast: over 17 million square feet of property in the
National Capital Area, including locations in Maryland and Virginia. As
the covered community grows, so does the area we inspect. We do these
inspections with a small staff of inspectors whose role is critical.
You provided us with funds to hire them because you recognized that by
finding hazards and alerting employing offices about them, employing
offices can abate these hazards one-by-one. The abatement trends are
overwhelmingly positive and exemplify swift progress. The OOC has found
that the number of hazards has dropped substantially during the most
recent three Congresses: from 13,000 in the 109th Congress, to 9,000 in
the 110th Congress, to an estimated 6,000 in the present Congress.
As you have recognized, there is still much to accomplish. At our
last budget hearing, you challenged us, not just to point out hazards
that need to be abated, but to target the most significant risks. In
response to your directive, the Agency is developing an approach to
target the riskiest workplaces and work activities in the 112th
Congress. As we develop our risk assessment program, the OOC will be
working very closely with the Office of the Architect of the Capitol's
staff, as well as with other employing offices, to establish
appropriate parameters. The OOC will work with employing offices to
identify jobs and job sites that are inherently more dangerous: these
may include, for example, the Capitol Power Plant and construction
worksites. Our goal is to concentrate our limited resources where the
risks are highest, to improve our ability to provide technical
assistance focused on reducing on-the-job injuries and illnesses, and
to remedy violations that pose serious threats to workers' safety.
In light of the need to limit our appropriations request as much as
possible, OOC has not requested funding for an additional safety and
health inspector contractor, which we believe is needed. The
authorization and funding provided in fiscal year 2010 for an OSH
Program Manager to replace the retiring detailee equips the OOC with
necessary resources to continue supervising our safety and health
inspectors, working with outside OSH experts, and providing expert
technical advice to the General Counsel and guidance to OGC staff
regarding the application of OSHA standards. However, this position
alone will not provide the resources needed to fully handle
approximately one million additional square feet of Legislative Branch
work space that is expected in fiscal year 2011 and 2012. Ever-mindful
of the financial constraints facing our Government, and with an eye
toward being cost-conscious, the OOC is asking the Occupational Safety
and Health Administration to provide one or more safety and health
inspectors on a short-term, non-reimbursable basis, to provide
temporary inspection services at no additional expense to this Agency,
while simultaneously providing on-the-ground experience for OSHA
personnel.
ooc infrastructure
The Office of Compliance's other focus during fiscal year 2011 is
funding for OOC infrastructure. Communication and IT systems
replacement/upgrades are at a crucial stage for agency efficiency and
progress. Our IT systems impact all the programs discussed above, from
dispute resolution, to education and outreach, to the protection of
confidential information handled by our Agency. To ensure such
confidential information is protected, the Agency maintains a dual
computer network: an internal system which secures confidential
information, and an external system through a server administered and
maintained by the Library of Congress. The practice of maintaining two
computers for each employee significantly decreases efficiency and
increases costs and administrative burden on the Agency. In an effort
to work more productively and reduce administrative costs, we seek
funding to migrate the two networks into a single system.
The balance of the increase that is being requested is for
mandatory cost of living increases, minimal staff salary increases, and
the associated benefits which allow the Office of Compliance to retain
extremely high caliber employees to implement the programs described
herein pursuant to the Congressional Accountability Act.
conclusion
The Agency approaches fiscal year 2011 with heightened fiscal
responsibility and an understanding that only minimal funding essential
to meeting our mission may be available. We have examined our programs
in conjunction with our statutory mandates, and we have made
significant efforts to streamline our appropriations request to reflect
the country's and the Government's current economic difficulties. With
that understanding, we present to the Subcommittee only those items
necessary to meet our statutory mandates. The three items discussed
herein--risk-based inspections' approach, IT improvements, and
mandatory salary increases--are the three major items that comprise our
minimal increase of $298,491. Funding for these items will allow the
Agency to continue to provide needed services and technical assistance
to the covered community.
On behalf of the Board of Directors and the entire staff of the
Office of Compliance, I thank you for your support of this Agency. I
would be pleased to answer any questions.
AOC deg.FISCAL YEAR 2011 BUDGET IMPACT
Senator Nelson. Mr. Ayers, the subcommittee recently asked
you to look at the impact of holding your agency to fiscal year
2010 funding levels for fiscal year 2011. I know and appreciate
the effort you have already put forward on this task, and I
would like to ask you just a few questions about your efforts
to do that.
The first one, perhaps the most obvious one, is what would
be the impact of zero growth on your budget in fiscal year
2011.
Mr. Ayers. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As we approached that
analysis to keep our 2011 budget at the 2010 levels, it
required us to make a reduction of $154 million. So we took a
three-pronged approach.
The first part of that was to look at our existing budget
to see if there was any money we could drive out of that
existing portion of our budget, and we were able to drive $15
million out of that budget, which is equivalent to taking 11
projects off of the list of 46 projects that we have put forth.
The second thing we did was to look at the operations
portion of our 2011 request and see what made sense to reduce
there, and we were able to drive another $14.5 million out of
that portion of our request.
And of course, the most volatile portion of our request is
the projects budget that goes up and down every year depending
upon what projects are there, and the remainder of the required
reduction came out of the projects request.
So the net result of being held to those levels is a couple
of things. One, certainly with the rise in construction costs,
ultimately the projects that are on our list will need to be
done. They will simply cost a little more later.
Second, keeping at a zero percent growth is actually a
decrease because we have to pay mandatory price increases and
mandatory payroll increases instead of furloughing people, and
that would certainly be our objective to not furlough people.
There are a handful of projects that we think are in our
operations side that are not going to get done. There are a
series of full-time equivalents (FTEs) that we will defer to
next year or the year after. Refreshing our information
technology resources will not get done in 2011. Replacement of
security barriers on a regular interval will just be pushed out
in another year or two. So I think those are some of the
impacts that we could expect.
Senator Nelson. In that regard, what method did you use to
try to establish priorities there? Because obviously you are
prioritizing. Did you have any particular methodology you used?
Mr. Ayers. Mr. Chairman, the project prioritization process
that we have been working on for nearly 5 years has matured
year after year. It has really developed into an excellent tool
for the Congress to use to make important decisions on our
budget. So every one of those 46 projects that is on our list
goes through a rigorous prioritization process. In the budget
that we have put forth, they are in priority order. So
theoretically, if you needed to reach a certain reduction, you
could simply start at the bottom of that list and cut those
projects as you work your way up.
AOC deg.PROJECT PRIORITY RANKING
That process includes a number of factors. We look at
mission, economics, energy, security, historic preservation,
life safety. Every project gets a numeric score in each of
those six categories. We also look at how urgent a project is,
and every one of those 46 is measured against immediate, high,
medium, or low urgency. And last, with the theory of you need
to take care of what you have before you build new, every
project receives a classification of either deferred
maintenance, capital renewal, capital improvement, or capital
construction. In our prioritization process a deferred
maintenance project, which is something that is already broken
and needs to be fixed, will move to the top of the list over
new construction.
AOC deg.PRIOR YEAR BALANCES
Senator Nelson. In trying to establish the budget now in
terms of the zero growth, do you take into account what are
generally referred to as prior year balances? For example, I
believe there is somewhere in the neighborhood of $50 million
that was appropriated in fiscal year 2010 for the House
Historic Buildings Trust Fund. Do you take that into account as
well?
Mr. Ayers. We certainly did take that into account, and we
did a comprehensive review of our prior year funds. We did
drive $15 million out of what we thought was in excess to our
needs. We were able to apply that to 11 projects that were on
the list.
We do think that keeping the House Historic Buildings
Revitalization Fund at $50 million is a good thing for our
budget. We have been working very hard with Congress for the
last 3 years to make some seminal changes in our budget
profile. We now have the tools available to look out 20 years.
The future does not look good. So we have really been working
to make a seminal change, and I think that change enables us
not to cut off our nose to spite our face. So we make that
investment later on.
Senator Nelson. But as you do that, how do you choose then
to defer immediate-need projects involving roof replacement and
fire protection? How would that historic trust fund come ahead
of what seem to be more basic needs?
Mr. Ayers. It is making a down payment for the future. So
we know, coming up in a few years, that we have over $100
million in deferred maintenance in the Cannon House Office
Building, which is the next building that we believe needs a
top-to-bottom renovation. So we believe that we need to begin
making that investment in 2016 or 2017. So without that money
and building up a corpus of money, we are not going to be able
to do that come 2016 or 2017. We are going to have to take that
money out of the bandwidth that is available in this budget.
That will prevent us from doing the projects on the list that
given year. So we do think that the balance of projects we need
to do now, as well as making investments for the future, is the
right balance.
Senator Nelson. Well, I think part of the challenge we have
is the future needs and setting aside money, but I think the
American taxpayer will have a challenge understanding socking
away money for future needs if we cannot make ends meet on the
immediate needs that we face right now, such as roof repairs
and other deferred maintenance that may raise life and fire
safety issues. So I raise that as a question for your
consideration.
Senator Murkowski.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will follow
on here as it relates to the projects because I think it is
such an important part of what we are dealing with here in
terms of priorities and how we allocate the dollars that are
available.
AOC deg.SUBSTANTIAL PROJECT INCREASE
As I flipped through the various areas within the
jurisdiction of the Architect of the Capitol, looking at the
requests for general administration, you are looking for
funding for three projects. That is an increase of 38.9 percent
for those. Within the Capitol Building section, we have got
nine different projects. This is an increase of 703 percent. In
the category of Senate office buildings, you have got a number
of projects, including what the chairman has mentioned, roof
repairs, et cetera, waterproofing. But this is a 165 percent
increase. In other categories under Library buildings and
grounds, we have got 11 projects, a 279.7 percent increase in
the projects. With the Capitol Police buildings, grounds, and
security, we are looking at additional funding for six
projects, 106 percent increase. The Botanic Garden--there are
only three projects that are requested there. Still, that is an
87.8 percent increase.
I guess the question that I would have is, with these
projects and a pretty substantial increase in terms of
requested projects that now get on the to-do list, are these
projects driven by citations that are coming out of the Office
of Compliance or do they get on the list because they are
deferred maintenance projects that the AOC is trying to work
through? How do we get to this number of projects that are on
the list?
Mr. Ayers. Certainly primarily projects come from
independent assessments of all of the facilities on Capitol
Hill. So for the past several years, we have engaged an
independent company that specializes in this kind of thing to
review every piece of equipment, every building system, and
give us an honest, third party, independent assessment of its
condition and its useful and expected life, and to help us
classify whether it is broken, needs to be fixed, deferred
maintenance, or whether we really need to add onto a system or
capital improvement. This is developed into a significant
database that maps out what needs to be done in all of our
buildings across Capitol Hill for the next 20 years. That comes
into developing what projects are on the list.
AOC deg.WHAT DRIVES THE BUDGET REQUEST
Also, our 20-year Capitol complex master plan has projects
in it that drive what is in our budget request.
But certainly a small number of those--there are three of
them this year. In fact, the top three are driven by citations
from the Office of Compliance. So that will ebb and flow in any
given year.
Senator Murkowski. Are there only three that are driven by
the Office of Compliance?
Mr. Ayers. There are only three in fiscal year 2011 that
are driven by the Office of Compliance.
Senator Murkowski. And which are those projects?
Mr. Ayers. The first is the utility tunnels and the second
one is compartment barriers and horizontal exits in the Capitol
Building. The third is a new exit stair in the Thomas Jefferson
Building for the Library of Congress.
AOC deg.PROJECT LIST--SAFETY ISSUES
Senator Murkowski. Well, I guess I want to understand more
about the prioritization because I am engaged in overhaul of an
old home myself, and believe me, my to-do list looks a heck of
a lot different than my husband's to-do list who is doing all
the work. Then when we go and we consult the checkbook and how
we are going to pay for it, all of a sudden, the to-do list
looks entirely different, and we are constantly resorting and
reprioritizing.
So I guess I am a little concerned that knowing that the
chairman and I have been very specific in asking the agencies,
the departments to give us your lean and mean budget, that we
would be looking at a whole list of projects that while they
will be important to do at some point in time or they are
things that we want, that we really have not figured out how we
can present a very clean and doable list of projects that we
must address because of safety issues.
So to know that of the many different projects in these
various categories, we have got three that we have got Office
of Compliance issues with or some form of citation that is out
there, and that others that are on somebody's matrix of
something that we want to have on the schedule, it does not
give me a very clear picture of what we really think the
priorities should be. I would hope that we will all be working
together to perhaps give some more certainty as to where we are
really going to go with projects for this year.
AOC deg.BLUE RIBBON PANEL--FIRE CODE REQUIREMENTS
I know that there are some things that we can start, and it
does not foul the process if we do not have the full funding to
complete it, but I know that there are other things that you
need to be able to complete once you initiate those projects.
We need to know and understand which fall into those categories
as well.
Senator Nelson. We talked about the Russell Building stairs
and I think we were seeking a blue ribbon panel to review how
the fire code requirements apply to historic buildings. Do we
have the panel's findings with regard to the stairs in the
Russell Senate Office Building? Has that blue ribbon panel
study been completed?
Mr. Ayers. No, Mr. Chairman, it is not complete yet, but we
do expect it to be complete in April.
Senator Nelson. Do you expect it to be helpful in assisting
you in prioritizing the fire and life safety challenges that
you face?
Mr. Ayers. Absolutely. I think we have brought together a
really stellar blue ribbon panel, the best minds that we know
of in the country, to help us address this issue. We are
looking forward to their thoughts and suggestions and
recommendations.
AOC deg.PRELIMINARY FINDINGS
Senator Nelson. Have you had any preliminary feedback from
this panel?
Mr. Ayers. Yes, we have. They did come and present to us a
50 percent completion document, and the entire team got
together. They made a great presentation for us, and all of us
felt that they were on the right track. We were very encouraged
with the level of effort, the level of detail and the level of
professionalism and engineering judgment that they are bringing
to the table. So we are really looking forward to the report in
April.
Senator Nelson. Have you included Ms. Chrisler in the
development of the study and the preliminary findings? Ms.
Chrisler.
Ms. Chrisler. Yes. Actually the Office of Compliance was
provided a copy of the report. We also attended the briefing,
the 50 percent briefing. We were able to attend. We were happy
to attend, and we also gave some comments based on the analyses
that were conducted within the 50 percent report.
Senator Nelson. Did you find it helpful to be able to work
together in that sort of an environment with that kind of a
project?
Ms. Chrisler. Extremely helpful. As Mr. Ayers indicates,
the expertise that sits on the panel will absolutely be
instrumental to the addressing of these issues, and we
appreciate the opportunity to sit down and consult with them,
along with the Office of the Architect of the Capitol.
Senator Nelson. You did not find it necessary to be
adversarial in that environment, I am sure.
Ms. Chrisler. Absolutely not. It is an independent
assessment, and we appreciate the experts' opinion and we
appreciate the time that they have taken, their perspective
that they are bringing to the assessment of the issues, and it
is very collaborative.
Senator Nelson. Good, thank you.
AOC deg.UTILITY TUNNELS
In terms of the utility tunnel repairs, Mr. Ayers, the
request includes $14 million for the utility tunnel project and
$20 million in other citation-related projects. I am glad to
hear that things are pretty much on schedule to complete the
repairs in 2012. When the repairs are completed, do you
anticipate being in full compliance with the applicable health
and safety standards, as we might hope that you would be?
Mr. Ayers. Yes, we do, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Nelson. Maybe since some of the repairs were
considered to be an interim fix, how long do you expect those
interim repairs to last? Are they very short term or are they
intermediate term?
Mr. Ayers. Our objective is to get another 20 years out of
the utility tunnels. It is more of a longer-term approach we
are taking.
AOC deg.REVIEW OF REPAIRS
Senator Nelson. Ms. Chrisler, have you had an opportunity
to review the repairs or some explanation of the repairs?
Ms. Chrisler. We have consistent monitoring of the progress
that is being made within the utility tunnels. We have a
dedicated staff member who liaisons with the Architect's Office
and is kept up-to-date and reviews the information and has
weekly meetings and provides feedback. It is a very engaged
effort on both agencies' parts. So yes, we are very, very much
aware of the progress that is being made and the progress is
very good, right on schedule.
Senator Nelson. And then in terms of the other citations,
are there other citation-related projects included in the
fiscal year 2011 request?
Mr. Ayers. We have three citation projects that are in our
2011 request. The first, of course, is the utility tunnels, our
most important work. The second is compartment barriers and
horizontal exits in the Capitol Building, and the third is a
new stair in the Jefferson Building. It is important to note
that those three have risen to the top of our priority list,
but it is also important to note that those three are in
priority order. As you know, we worked together this summer to
develop a prioritization process where we can now prioritize
these citations. So what you see before you in our prioritized
list is in priority order.
OOC deg.PRIORITIZATION OF CITATIONS
Senator Nelson. Ms. Chrisler, are you comfortable with the
effort that has been made and the results of that
prioritization effort?
Ms. Chrisler. We, being the Office of Compliance and the
Office of the Architect of the Capitol, sat down pursuant to
the direction given by this subcommittee and engaged in some
very productive discussions regarding the prioritization of the
fire safety citations. And during those discussions, we
collaborated and agreed upon an applicable standard, and based
on that application of the standard, together reached this
prioritization that we have before us. So, yes, we are very
much in agreement and we think that it is right on point.
Senator Nelson. Well, I appreciate the collaboration and
the spirit of cooperation there because it seemed to me a year
ago that the Office of Compliance was more in the realm of a
referee or an umpire throwing a flag here and throwing a flag
there on a violation. And it is encouraging to see that there
is more cooperation and collaboration on these projects so that
the adversarial relationship is not necessarily helpful if you
can go forward and work together.
Ms. Chrisler. That is correct. And we see ourselves as a
service agency and as a resource, and we cannot be the only
ones that see ourselves that way. It is important for others to
see us that way as well, and we understand that that
perspective will only come from the work that we are doing and
not just the dialogue that we are engaged in. So we are very
much appreciative of the opportunity to be able to sit down and
not just act as referee but to offer technical advice and
technical assistance where necessary.
Senator Nelson. Great, thank you.
Senator Murkowski.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
AOC deg.FEDERAL ACQUISITION STREAMLINING ACT AUTHORITY--LEASE
AUTHORITY
Mr. Ayers, let me ask you some questions about the two
legislative language proposals that are contained within the
budget request. The first is the Federal Acquisition
Streamlining Act authority, the FASA authority, and long-term
lease authority. And I understand that it would provide for
procedures for commercial item acquisition, presumably to
result in efficiencies and savings whether it is janitorial
services or whatever.
I am trying to understand exactly what the budgetary impact
of something like these proposals would actually be and whether
or not there will be cost savings if, in fact, these
authorities are to be granted; whether there are savings in
operations and contracts immediately or whether we are going to
see this play out over time. Can you just kind of give me a
better picture so I can understand what it is that you are
anticipating with this authority?
AOC deg.FASA BUDGET IMPACT
Mr. Ayers. Absolutely, Senator Murkowski. The Federal
Acquisition Streamlining Act is an act that was enacted about
10 years ago and it is widely used throughout the executive
branch. We are looking to have that kind of procurement
flexibility with the Architect's Office. And you are absolutely
right. The purpose of this is to save money, save time, and
create efficiencies in our procurement office.
So what it does, is allows us to purchase commercial items
up to $5.5 million using simplified acquisition procedures.
Today we are only capable of using those simplified acquisition
procedures for procurements up to $100,000. Those procedures
are simply a purchase order, and maybe three or four or five
pages tops of procurement and contract language to procure a
commercial item today $100,000 and below. Today, above
$100,000, we have to go through a contract procedure which is
easily 100 pages of contract clauses to procure a commercial
item up to $5 million. This would really significantly save
time in our procurement office, allowing us to buy commercial
things in a very simplified manner. It saves us money and
prevents, I think the budget impact you were trying to get at.
It prevents us from, in the future, having to come to you and
ask for increases and increases in our procurement staff. We
are gaining some efficiencies there and will not need to do
that in the future.
Senator Murkowski. So do you actually spend over $100,000 a
year moving statues?
Mr. Ayers. That is just one particular item.
Senator Murkowski. I am just looking at it. I am thinking,
okay, bulk fuel, yes; light fixtures, yes. And I was looking at
the cleaning of the chandeliers----
Mr. Ayers. Like toilet paper, paper, all of those types of
things.
Senator Murkowski [continuing]. And I decided those
chandeliers have got to be really expensive to clean.
But you do anticipate--I am assuming you have done some
kind of a cost analysis that has said that consolidating these
procurement policies is going to be beneficial in the short
term and the long term.
Mr. Ayers. Absolutely. We did go back to all of our
procurements in 2008 and analyzed every one of them to
determine how many of them we could have taken from this 100-
page contract phase and used the simplified acquisition
procedures. There were 35 of them, and for those 35, we believe
we could carve out 20 man-days on each one. So it is a very
significant savings.
AOC deg.SENIOR EXECUTIVE SERVICE
Senator Murkowski. Let me ask you about the Senior
Executive Service (SES). Again, this is an area that has been
used within the executive branch, but I am trying to understand
why you believe within the AOC we need to have or we need to
create these Senior Executive Service, similar to executive
branch authority. You are talking about 37 positions here,
which seems like a lot of senior level positions for an agency
that has about a three-fourths blue collar, one-fourth white
collar workforce.
So can you explain to me why you are seeking this
authority, what you hope to gain from it, and give me a bird's
eye view of what the 37 positions are again, that is a lot of
folks here. What is the budgetary impact of converting 37
positions into Senior Executive Service positions? Can you just
speak to this issue for a moment, if you will?
Mr. Ayers. Absolutely, Senator. First, our objective and my
objective is to be the best. To be the best. To be able to
recruit and retain the best people. I know that it is certainly
your objective as well. We do not believe today we are poised
to do that at the senior executive level because our pay and
benefits package does not match those in the executive branch
of the Government.
Senator Murkowski. Should it?
Mr. Ayers. I am sorry?
Senator Murkowski. Should it?
Mr. Ayers. I think it should, absolutely. Certainly not on
the pay side. We recognize that our pay we cap below Member
pay. So we are not seeking authority on pay, and we do not
believe that this flexibility will have any impact in the short
term on funding.
I think it is important to note that when we go to recruit
someone from the executive branch there are disparities, a
great example of that is the amount of annual leave an
executive can carry over. Today our executives can carry over
240 hours. In the executive branch, all of them can carry over
720 hours. So why would one of them be enticed to come work for
the Architect of the Capitol when they are going to have to
give up that benefit that they have, that the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) has, that the Library of Congress
has, but the Architect does not?
So I think the facts are very clear that benefits packages
do not match and we think they should. We really think that
there should be this easy exchange of executive talent between
the executive branch and the legislative branch.
Senator Murkowski. What about the number, the fact that you
have got 37? It seems like a high number of senior level
positions, again in an area where most of your workforce is not
the senior level. It is more the blue collar level.
Mr. Ayers. Of those 37, all of them, I believe, are
existing positions, and they are already paid at the Senior
Executive Service level. The only thing that they would be
affected by is a change in benefits' package for the annual
leave carry over that I mentioned earlier. So they are not new
employees.
Senator Murkowski. These are existing people that you are
just changing their ability to accrue annual leave, carryover,
and bonuses. So what you are saying is that this does not cost,
in terms of what you will see with your budget. It is more of a
recruitment or a retention tool.
Mr. Ayers. That is exactly right. I think it is important
for transparency. There is no question in the first year it
does not cost us. In ensuing years, when employees retire they
are paid out for their annual leave that they still have on the
books. So this would enable an executive to accrue a larger
amount of leave on the books than one would normally have
today, but that is many years down the road.
Senator Murkowski. Would this have any impact on salary
increases in future budget requests?
Mr. Ayers. No, ma'am, it would not.
Senator Murkowski. Mr. Chairman, thank you.
AOC deg.CAPITOL VISITOR CENTER
Senator Nelson. The Capitol Visitor Center. You were
provided $621 million for the construction, but due to reduced
delay claims by sequence 2, a contractor, GAO currently
estimates that the total cost to complete the Capitol Visitor
Center is $591 million. This leaves you with a balance of
approximately $31 million. Are those facts correct, and is
there a remaining balance of $31 million from this project?
Mr. Ayers. I do not believe that that is exactly correct,
but there is no question----
Senator Nelson. There is some money----
Mr. Ayers [continuing]. That there will be at least $20
million available for other priorities. I think that is a great
testament to the team that negotiated the final claims on this
project, and they did just a terrific job and saved us
considerable money.
Senator Nelson. Well, anything that comes under the
ultimate price tag is a savings and it should be viewed that
way. There is no doubt. I appreciate that.
I guess the question I have is could the funding, that
additional $20 million that is there--could that be applied
toward your fiscal year 2011 needs?
Mr. Ayers. Yes, Mr. Chairman, absolutely.
AOC deg.CVC FTE INCREASE
Senator Nelson. Now, you request four FTEs for the Capitol
Visitor Center. Does that mean you are not adequately staffed
at the CVC now? For example, what are the duties of an
interpretive curator? Are they not already available? Or is
there a necessity to add that particular position or positions?
Mr. Ayers. We are requesting an increase of four FTEs for
the Capitol Visitor Center, and I view those in two groups. The
first group and the highest priority, the must-haves, are
converting our two congressional liaison positions that are
currently on board in a temporary capacity to permanent
positions. They really have shown that they are extremely
beneficial, not just for us but for Members, in working and
providing tours at the CVC. So we think those are must-haves.
The second two are in a second tier of more improving
operations and improving efficiencies. We think, certainly, a
curator could help improve our operations in interpreting the
things that are in the Exhibition Hall. But an interpretation
curator and a special assistant do not rise up to the must-have
level of our two congressional liaisons.
AOC deg.CAPITOL POWER PLANT FTE INCREASE
Senator Nelson. And then if we go to the Capitol Power
Plant, your request there includes 3 additional FTEs for that
plant, bringing the total to 98. Have you recognized any
savings that would apply to reducing the number of FTEs as a
result of the installation of a digitized control system at the
plant? In other words, further use of technology should be able
to help you reduce the reliance on human power. Have you
realized anything or can you realize anything there?
Mr. Ayers. Well, we do think that there are some savings to
be realized there. The numbers you mentioned are our FTE cap.
The FTE cap at the Power Plant is 95. These 3, which I will
address in a moment, would increase to 98. But on-board
strength, we have somewhere in the low to mid 70s. We have
purposefully, for the past 2 to 3 years, held recruitment very,
very low in the Power Plant to accommodate these efficiencies.
I know when I became Acting Architect 3 years ago, I think we
were at 85 on-board people and we are now about 10 less than
that. So I think we have been driving some efficiencies out of
there.
AOC deg.UTILITY METERS
The three new positions are, interestingly enough, a new
mission area for the Architect. The Energy Independence and
Security Act required us to install utility meters throughout
all of our facilities. That resulted in about 320 new utility
meters, very high-tech pieces of equipment installed in all of
our buildings. These three new employees would operate and
maintain those meters, do the preventive maintenance on those
meters, as well as read the results of those meters.
AOC deg.SUSTAINABILITY PROGRAM
Senator Nelson. In that regard, you are requesting $11.2
million worth of projects and $10 million in the operations
budget with an energy reduction focus. Is that different than
what we are talking about here with the Power Plant, or is it a
part of it, or is it separate from it? I will ask it that way.
Mr. Ayers. It is certainly separate from the Capitol Power
Plant appropriation, but it is part of our comprehensive
sustainability program to meet the Energy Independence and
Security Act goals of a 3 percent energy reduction per year.
Senator Nelson. Well, as you expect to use the $11.2
million worth of projects and $10 million in the operations
budget, if funded, what will that achieve in terms of overall
reductions in costs to the budget? In other words, I think you
are spending money to try to bring down the costs. What would
you expect in the way of energy savings in terms of dollars?
Mr. Ayers. In terms of dollars, I think a great example of
that is the energy savings performance contract that we have
awarded here in the Senate. This public/private partnership,
where a private company is investing $42 million in the Senate
office buildings, and ultimately, reducing energy by 36
percent, which is almost $4 million a year in energy savings
being driven out of the Senate office buildings. Of course,
initially that money goes to repay this company that is doing
the work and borrowing the money. In the end, we keep those
investments, we keep the upgrades and we reap the benefits
after they are repaid.
Senator Nelson. How long will it take us to recoup the $22
million? How many years do you think it is going to take us to
where we have recovered that? It is good to reduce energy use.
There is no doubt. And it is also good to reduce the cost that
you get from energy reduction. As you try to correlate those
two, how long will it take us to be neutral or have a net
reduction in our costs?
Mr. Ayers. I believe here in the Senate, the projection is
18 to 20 years.
Senator Nelson. What about other buildings or other
facilities? Do you have anything that might--in other words, is
this $22.2 million all in the Senate office buildings?
Mr. Ayers. It is. It is $42 million, the investment they
are making just in the Senate. We have a similar arrangement in
the Capitol----
AOC deg.PROJECTS BUDGET
Senator Nelson. Excuse me. That they are making. But you
have got $22.2 million in your operations budget in projects.
Maybe I am not understanding what those dollars are for.
Mr. Ayers. Those dollars are primarily for two things. One
is enabling us to manage these energy savings performance
contracts across Capitol Hill. For these contracts that we have
entered into, we are investing nearly $100 million. So we are
looking for contract help: engineers to help manage that work
and coordinate that work and be sure it is installed properly
and commissioned properly. That is primarily what much of that
money is for.
Senator Nelson. And then it would take us about 18 years to
get the full benefit of what it is we are trying to do in terms
of dollars.
Mr. Ayers. That is correct.
Senator Nelson. Senator Murkowski.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Chrisler, I do not want to have all the attention
focused on Mr. Ayers here, so we will ask you a couple.
OOC deg.HAZARDS DECREASE
You referred to the number of hazards that have been
identified and the fact that we have seen a decrease from
13,000 in the 109th Congress to 9,000 in the 110th to an
estimated 6,000 in the 111th. And I think that is good. I would
hope that given a level of outreach and education efforts, we
would see the number of hazards continue to go down, and I
think that is clearly the goal here.
Can you tell me how we count hazards? Is it every
overloaded outlet that is counted? And then when they unload it
or put the power strip in or what have you, is it still
counted? How do you account for these multiple hazards?
Ms. Chrisler. Thank you, Senator. It is a very good
question.
What we do is we have inspectors that go out and inspect
each office space and they identify the hazards, they identify
violations of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(OSHA) standards. Those are noted. Sometimes they are abated
right on the spot.
Senator Murkowski. And are they counted if they are abated?
Ms. Chrisler. Yes, they are, but they are counted--if they
are abated on the spot, no. So I am mistaken.
Senator Murkowski. So if you unplug it, then you are good.
Ms. Chrisler. You are good.
Senator Murkowski. All right.
Ms. Chrisler. If it takes something other than right on the
spot, then yes, that is counted as a hazard within the
findings.
[The information follows:]
During the hearing, I mistakenly indicated that the OOC
does not record hazards found during biennial inspections if
they are remedied immediately. In fact, OOC notes all hazards
identified during a biennial inspection, whether they are
abated on the spot or abated at a later time. This method of
recording hazards is consistent with the longstanding practice
followed by Occupational Safety and Health Administration
inspectors. The OSHA Field Operations Manual provides: ``Safety
and health violations shall be brought to the attention of
employer and employee representatives at the time they are
documented.'' Field Operations Manual, Directive No. CPL 02-00-
148 at 3-20 (Occupational Safety and Health Administration
November 9, 2009) (emphasis added). In addition, this method of
recording hazards allows the OOC to provide Congress with
consistent and reliable data, as explained below.
The CAA requires the OOC to inspect legislative branch
facilities for compliance with occupational safety and health
standards at least once each Congress and report those results
to the Speaker of the House, the President pro tempore of the
Senate, and employing offices responsible for correcting
violations. CAA Section 215(e), 2 U.S.C. 1341(e). As such, the
OOC is required to notify Congress of the violations it
identified irrespective of when those violations are remedied.
Alongside the hazard findings, the OOC provides abatement
information to provide context for the findings and establish a
clear picture of what hazards remain. Although OOC encourages
early abatement and applauds employing offices for their
efforts to immediately abate hazards, OOC does not note a
distinction in its identification of hazards if a hazard is
abated immediately or if a hazard is abated at a later time: at
the time of the inspection, a hazard that threatened workers'
safety and/or health was present, and the CAA requires the
identification of those hazards and a submission of same to
Congress. The OOC is pleased with the continuing decline in
hazards seen over the past three Congresses, and is hopeful
that the abatement process continues to progress as well.
OOC deg.COMPLIANCE EDUCATION
Senator Murkowski. Is it fair to say then that with
continuing education and awareness, we are able to do within
our own offices a significant level of compliance just on our
own and we are learning so that as the years progress,
hopefully, we will be near zero. I do not know if it is
possible to eliminate all hazards, but I am assuming that is
the direction that we are taking.
Ms. Chrisler. Sure, absolutely it is. And that is part of
where we are hoping to go in the future, as we see the decrease
in hazards. And as you mentioned, it is partly due to the
education efforts of our staff, the increased awareness of the
staff and the Members' offices and the employing offices, and
in part due to the employment counsel's offices as well in
assisting us in conducting the inspections and providing the
education that is necessary. So, yes, we are looking for the
employing offices to be able to spot some of these hazards
themselves and correct them right on the spot. That is part of
our goal is to equip the employing offices with that type of
knowledge so that they are able to utilize our office as a
resource, as a kind of checkpoint to make sure that they are
right on track.
Senator Murkowski. Good. I appreciate that.
I also appreciate the comment that you made in your opening
statement about working in collaboration with OSHA to provide
some assistance, rather than bringing on new or additional
staff working with them in a collaborative effort. I think that
that is good. If there are other opportunities to do similar
collaborating efforts, I would certainly encourage that.
OOC deg.IT SYSTEM
Let me ask you one more question about the IT system. You
mentioned that you have got a somewhat unique system in that
you are required to have two computers for each employee.
Clearly inefficient. It obviously adds increased costs to the
agency.
What do you anticipate your cost savings to be once the new
system is in place? What is the total request for the system
upgrade? And if the funding in fiscal year 2011 does not
support the full cost of the system, how much additional
funding do you figure you need in the out-years to kind of take
care of this?
Ms. Chrisler. Yes, thank you. The system that we have is
unique. Because of the confidential information that our office
maintains with respect to our dispute resolution program, we
have taken great steps to ensure that that type of information
remains protected and remains secure. The system that we have
currently in place provides that protection, but it also
inhibits employees from being able to work as productively as
they could. Literally, there is a switch box that is on
everyone's work station and employees literally have to
transfer back and forth between computers when they are wanting
to work. One of the systems is an internal system where we can
communicate internally and the other one connects to the
outside world, the Internet. And the two systems are not
compatible.
OOC deg.SYSTEM SECURITY
Ms. Chrisler. We have obtained the technical skills of an
IT staff who has developed a program and a system by which we
would be able to maintain that level of security but eliminate
the two computers. So that is something that will result in a
cost savings, will result in efficiency, will allow us to have
a complete COOP plan for teleworking purposes. The total cost
of the program is something that I can provide to you for the
record at a later date.
[The information follows:]
The total investment for new system upgrade equals
$110,000, which encompasses the following: equipment ($60,000--
fiscal year 2011 budget request) and installation ($50,000--
fiscal year 2012 budget request). We expect to recoup the new
system investment through cost savings over a 2\1/2\ year
timeline ($110,000 total upgrade/$43,475 total savings equals
2.53 years).
Ms. Chrisler. Should we not receive the funding for the
improvements, we will have to reevaluate how to go about
developing this plan. Of course, it is not just a 1 fiscal year
project. It is something that we can break into pieces, if we
have to. Some things will have to be delayed. The
implementation would be delayed, but perhaps the development
could continue on some levels.
Senator Murkowski. Well, if you could get that information
and kind of lay that out, that would be helpful.
Ms. Chrisler. Thank you.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you.
Senator Nelson. Thank you.
[The information follows:]
Ideally, OOC would purchase the equipment in fiscal year
2011 for $60,000 and perform the installation in fiscal year
2012 for $50,000. However, if funding is not provided in fiscal
year 2011, OOC would have to delay the implementation of the
new system. The cost would probably not increase dramatically
if the timeline for implementation was delayed; the delay would
simply move the cost to another fiscal year. However, not
receiving the full requested budget for fiscal year 2011 and
delaying the implementation increases the vulnerability of the
agency for disaster recovery planning (COOP), reduces any
efficiencies which could be gained through the ability to tele-
work, and impacts the agency's cybersecurity initiatives.
Because the new IT system will allow for the use of one
computer per work station as opposed to the current use of two,
the agency anticipates enjoying significant cost-savings, not
only in physical equipment, but in human resources as well.
The total annual estimated savings equals $43,475; $22,475
of which is attributed to equipment and software, $21,000 of
which is attributed to Human Capital. Because the new IT system
will require the agency to maintain only one computer per work
station, as opposed to the two it currently maintains, routine
upgrades will be fewer, resulting in significant savings.
Mindful of the costs associated with maintaining current
technology for hardware and software compatibility, the agency
looks to replace its employee PCs every 3 years. As such, once
the system upgrades are in place, and only one PC per work
station is being maintained, the agency will enjoy an annual
savings of $7,950 or $23,800 over the 3-year replacement cycle.
Annual software costs will result in a savings of $11,300; and
purchases of peripheral equipment will yield an additional
savings of $3,225.
The new IT system contemplated by the agency will result in
a $21,000 annual savings of IT staff resources. As the system
currently operates, IT staff allocates 25 percent of their time
annually for support and maintenance of the internal computer
system. Once the new system is implemented, the staff would be
able to utilize that 25 percent toward our IT Security and COOP
initiatives, which have gone understaffed due to the time
commitment necessary to maintain two computer systems.
OOC deg.HAZARD PRIORITIZATION
Senator Nelson. Ms. Chrisler, in establishing the 6,000
hazards, do you then categorize them as to priorities, priority
1, 2, 3, 4, 5? I assume that not every hazard is co-equal with
every other hazard. So do you have a system of prioritization?
Ms. Chrisler. Yes, Senator, we do. What we have is what we
call a RAC system, and it is R-A-C. It is a risk assessment
code. And when the hazards are identified, they are labeled
with this RAC: RAC 1 being posing life-threatening potential,
life-threatening issues; RAC 2 being dangerous and could cause
bodily harm; and 3 and 4 of lesser degree of severity.
The majority of the 6,000 violations that we saw are not
RAC 1. So that is very comforting to know. They fall more in
the range of RAC 3, which is they are significant but they do
not rise to the level of the immediate threat to life safety.
Senator Nelson. Well, I know that you pay close attention
to OSHA and their inspection programs. Do we know what changes
are being planned in the 112th Congress on OSHA inspection
programs?
Ms. Chrisler. That is something that we certainly will look
into, Senator, and be happy to provide to you for the record.
Senator Nelson. Sure. That would be helpful. Thank you.
[The information follows:]
The Secretary of Labor (``Secretary'') is responsible for
promulgating occupational safety and health standards under the
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, 29 U.S.C. sections
651 et seq. Executive Order 12866 requires the Secretary to
publish semiannually a Regulatory Agenda listing all
regulations the Department of Labor expects to have under
active consideration for promulgation, proposal or review
during the coming year. The Department's most recent Regulatory
Agenda was published on December 7, 2009 and can be found in
its entirety at www.reginfo.gov. The Department's Regulatory
Plan, which is a subset of the Regulatory Agenda, ``highlights
the most noteworthy and significant regulatory projects that
will be undertaken by its regulatory agencies,'' including the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (``OSHA''). 74
Fed. Reg. No. 233 at 52 (Dec. 7, 2009). The most recent
Regulatory Plan lists four OSHA regulations: a modification of
OSHA's Hazard Communication Standard; a rule setting
Occupational Injury and Illness Recording and Reporting
Requirements; a health standard regulating Crystalline Silica
exposure; and an update of the 1971 Cranes and Derricks
standard applicable to the construction industry. Id.
As certain OSHA standards apply in the legislative branch
pursuant to section 215(d) of the Congressional Accountability
Act (``CAA''), 2 U.S.C. section 1341(d), the OOC and its Board
of Directors will continue its close monitoring of OSHA's
regulatory activity in the coming year and assess its effect on
the legislative branch.
AOC deg.CAPITOL POLICE RADIO PROJECT
Senator Nelson. I do not know that I have any more
questions to ask. I guess I could ask about the radio system
here. I have got a question on that.
The Capitol Police radio project. Mr. Ayers, I know you are
responsible for the facilities portion of that project. Can you
give us an outline of how the facilities portion of the project
is undergoing--or how that is going on right now?
Mr. Ayers. I would be happy to, Mr. Chairman. In support of
the Capitol Police project, we are undertaking three activities
on that project. The first is the design and construction of
the primary site, which is where the radio operators and radio
infrastructure will be, in Manassas. We are right on schedule
and on track to complete that by December 2010. We have a
contract awarded, and we are going through the contract design
and submittal phase right now. So we see no issues there.
The second portion is the design and construction and
property acquisition of the mirror site, or the backup site,
here just off of Capitol Hill. We are currently in negotiations
with the leaseholder now, both negotiations on the lease, and
on the construction side. We do not see any issues meeting a
March 2011 completion date to enable the Capitol Police vendor
to begin installing their radio equipment.
And then last, and probably most importantly for me, is
helping the Capitol Police contractors install and navigate
through all of the office buildings and the Capitol Building
and to installing their infrastructure, electricity, antenna
wires, and antennas through the buildings. And we are working
very closely with them now. I know that they have completed the
design for the Senate office buildings. They are nearing
completion of the design for the Capitol and House office
buildings. We do not see any issues there as well.
So things are progressing well and we are very confident
about completing our three tasks on schedule.
Senator Nelson. Well, I appreciate the update. It is good
to know that it is on schedule and not slipping and staying
within the budget as well?
Mr. Ayers. Yes, sir.
Senator Nelson. Well, if there is nothing else to ask,
there is no reason to ask it. Right?
So I appreciate very much your being here today, your work,
and the work of all your associates who, together with you, are
doing such an outstanding job for us. Thank you for your candor
and for your willingness to work with us. I know with such
difficult times that we face right now with unemployment at a
high level, it has also been a very energizing time because
with all the snow and with everything else, it seems to come
all at one time when everybody is saying, well, we need to slow
down our costs at a time when the activity is increasing. It
seems like those should not cross. They should match. But we
are faced with difficult times, and I appreciate the fact that
everybody understands that and we will try to work our way
through it.
So thank you.
Senator Murkowski, do you have any closing comments?
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I look
forward to working with the Architect of the Capitol, the
Office of Compliance, and others as we kind of slog through how
we prioritize the needs again for those who are working and
visiting our capital. Thank you.
Senator Nelson. In addition to thanking our witnesses
today, I want to thank Robin Morey, the Senate Superintendent,
for keeping the room cool today.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
The subcommittee stands in recess until Thursday, April 15,
when we will meet again in this room at 2:30 to take testimony
on the fiscal year 2011 budget request of the Government
Accountability Office, the Government Printing Office, and the
Congressional Budget Office. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 4 p.m., Thursday, March 18, the subcommittee
was recessed, to reconvene at 2:30 p.m., Thursday, April 15.]
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011
----------
THURSDAY, APRIL 15, 2010
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 3:22 p.m., in room SD-138, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Ben Nelson (chairman) presiding.
Present: Senators Nelson, Pryor, and Murkowski.
GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE
STATEMENT OF GENE L. DODARO, ACTING COMPTROLLER GENERAL
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR BEN NELSON
Senator Nelson. The subcommittee will come to order.
Good afternoon to everybody, and welcome. We meet this
afternoon to take testimony on the fiscal year 2011 budget
request for the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the
Government Printing Office (GPO), and the Congressional Budget
Office (CBO).
I would like to welcome our witnesses here today--Gene
Dodaro, Acting Comptroller General; Bob Tapella, Public
Printer; and Doug Elmendorf, Director of the Congressional
Budget Office.
I also want to welcome my good friend and ranking member,
Senator Murkowski, as well as the other members of the
subcommittee who will perhaps be joining us, Senator Pryor and
Senator Tester. Senator Murkowski and I have enjoyed working
with one another on these items of the legislative branch, and
I know I look forward to continuing that effort.
This is our third budget hearing of this fiscal year, and I
would like to reiterate a few concerns that were raised during
our first two hearings. I am disappointed that this
subcommittee has once again been presented with a fairly large
budget increase request in fiscal year 2011.
And the fact remains that this country is in economic
turmoil, and the American taxpayers simply are not ready to
tolerate unnecessary Government spending. And some believe that
any kind of Government spending is probably unnecessary, but
particularly at a time of high major unemployment. And I have
said repeatedly that I intend to do my best to hold the
legislative branch flat this year.
I believe that spending restraints start at home. We need
to lead by example on this subcommittee, and we can't do that
by appropriating large increases to our agencies, even at a
time when they may be totally justified.
I think the President sent the message loudly and clearly
in his State of the Union Address this year, noting that
families across the country are tightening their belts and
making tough decisions. The Federal Government must do the
same, he said, and he announced a 3-year freeze on nonsecurity
discretionary Government spending. And I believe we must do the
same with this subcommittee as well.
Having said that, I want to also say that we still
appreciate the contributions made by each of your agencies in
assisting Congress in our service to the country. We are truly
grateful for the work you do, and we look forward to hearing
from you and to discussing your budget requests.
I must say that I doubt there has ever been a time that
staff for the Senate have ever had to work more lengthy hours
and weekends than recently, and I am sure it is true with your
departments as well. And so, at a time when we are looking to
reward, it seems like the rewards are sort of fleeting away
from us.
Mr. Dodaro, GAO is requesting an overall increase of 8
percent in fiscal year 2011, which includes funding for the
continuation of your mandated requirements under the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), which I understand
accounts for roughly one-half of your increase. And I look
forward to discussing the specifics of your budget request, as
well as GAO's latest findings on the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act effort.
Mr. Tapella, I understand that GPO will soon be celebrating
150 years of service to the Federal Government, and I would
like to congratulate you and your entire staff on this
accomplishment. GPO is requesting an increase of $19 million,
or 13 percent, over current year. And I understand that much of
this increase is directly related to the Federal Digital System
(FDsys) and a few other information technology upgrades and
infrastructure projects, which I look forward to discussing
with you a little later on.
Dr. Elmendorf, it is good to see you again. CBO is
requesting $47.2 million in fiscal year 2011, an increase of
roughly $2 million, or 4.7 percent, over the current year. And
I understand that you feel this number is somewhat skewed by
supplemental funding CBO received in fiscal year 2009, which
you feel impacted your fiscal year 2010 appropriation.
And I know better than to argue the numbers with you.
So I look forward to discussing your budget and other
obstacles that you face and your colleagues face.
Now I would like to turn over to Ranking Member Senator
Murkowski for her remarks.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR LISA MURKOWSKI
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And my remarks will be very brief this morning because they
mirror so closely those that you have just made.
I would like to begin by welcoming the three of you--Mr.
Dodaro, Mr. Tapella, Dr. Elmendorf. I think it is fair to say
that you each, within your respective areas, are doing well by
us, and we appreciate that. We do recognize that we task you
with a lot, and I know certainly, Dr. Elmendorf, the requests
that have been made on CBO just this past year with all of the
legislative initiatives as they relate to healthcare have been
daunting. And I don't know if you have any more hours in your
day than I do, but I commend you for the work that you and all
your staff have done.
As the chairman has mentioned, each of you are requesting
within your offices increases. The GAO increase at 7.9 percent,
GPO at 13 percent, and then CBO, an increase of $2.1 million,
or 4.7 percent. And we recognize that while you may feel that
they are entirely justified and may be much smaller than you
had wanted, that these are significant increases within the
legislative branch budget.
And the chairman's words, of course, come as no surprise,
that we are looking for ways to demonstrate leadership by
ensuring that our own budgets are tightened and trying to
reduce those costs. So I will be curious to hear this afternoon
how GAO, GPO, and CBO are prepared to make the adjustments in
the fiscal year 2011 budget requests that have been submitted
and do look forward to working with all of you to ensure that
we can arrive on some mutually agreeable solutions to how we
trim back the costs while at the same time providing the very
essential services that all of you and your staffs provide.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Nelson. Thank you.
I was going to call on Senator--my colleague to the right,
but he assures me that he wants not to be associated with the
skinflints to his left.
Now I would like to call on Mr. Dodaro for your opening
statement, followed by Mr. Tapella, and of course, then by Dr.
Elmendorf. And if it is possible to keep your opening
statements brief, around 5 minutes, we would obviously receive
the rest of your statement for the record if there are
additional statements to be made.
SUMMARY STATEMENT OF GENE L. DODARO
Mr. Dodaro. Thank you very much Mr. Chairman, Ranking
Member Senator Murkowski, Senator Pryor. I appreciate the
opportunity to be here today to discuss GAO's budget request.
As the investigative arm of the Congress and the auditor of
the Government's financial condition, I certainly appreciate
and commend your objectives toward fiscal prudence. And in that
light, GAO's budget request, as you mentioned, Mr. Chairman, is
really in two parts.
The first part of our request is a 4.1 percent increase in
our base appropriation that is intended to just maintain our
existing staff levels in order to support our work for every
standing committee of the Congress and about 70 percent of the
subcommittees.
When I came before this subcommittee in 2008, my first year
as acting Comptroller General, I mentioned we were at our
lowest staffing level in GAO's history. Thanks to the support
of this subcommittee, we have augmented that slightly over the
last couple of years. We are well positioned to help the
Congress deal with the range of domestic and international
challenges that it faces across the spectrum of its activities.
This increase is just to maintain our current staffing level to
support the Congress.
We also have been given new responsibilities in the
healthcare legislation. There will be many more
responsibilities in the financial regulatory reform
legislation. And in the latest increase to deal with the debt
ceiling increase, we were given an annual mandate to recommend
duplication and other areas where Government spending could be
eliminated.
In addition to GAO's normal responsibilities of responding
to about 1,000 requests a year from the Congress, in the
Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), we were given
responsibilities to report every 90 days. Since we were funded
through reimbursements from the Treasury Department, we will be
in good shape to follow all those activities through until AIG,
General Motors, and other arrangements work their way out and
the Government returns them to their normal status.
The Recovery Act is a little bit different. That act, as
you know, is now estimated to be about $862 billion. We were
charged with recurring responsibilities on bimonthly reviews of
the use of that money by selected States and localities and
quarterly reviews of the reports concerning the amount of jobs
that were created and retained. So these are recurring
responsibilities.
In recognition of the large amount of spending, and it
being out of the normal appropriation cycle when the
legislation was passed, Congress gave us $25 million. That
money expires at the end of fiscal year 2010, so by September
this year we will have spent that money.
Now the money to the States and localities will continue in
fiscal years 2011 and 2012 and beyond, out to almost fiscal
year 2019, according to CBO's estimates. That means that there
will be over $120 billion that will still flow to the States
and localities in fiscal year 2011 and beyond. The second part
of our request provides funds for us to be in a position to
continue to meet our mandates of bimonthly reviews.
I am also concerned that the risk level associated with
some of the spending in the next several years will be at least
as great as, if not a little bit higher than, the spending that
has occurred to date because there will be new programs and
greatly expanded amounts of money for other programs. So I
think it is important for us to be in a position to do what
Congress asked us to do, which is to be out in the States and
localities making sure the money is spent appropriately for its
intended purpose.
In closing, I know very well, as my colleagues do, the
difficult fiscal challenges that await the country and the
Congress, and there are a lot of difficult decisions. GAO is an
important resource in helping Congress eliminate waste,
increase revenues, and ensure programs are more efficient and
effective. My colleagues and I are committed to making sure
that whatever investment you make in GAO, that the dedicated
people of GAO will give you a good return on that investment.
PREPARED STATEMENT
I know you will give careful consideration to our request,
and I look forward to addressing your questions when
appropriate.
Senator Nelson. Thank you, Mr. Dodaro.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Gene L. Dodaro
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Murkowski, and Members of the
Subcommittee: I appreciate the opportunity to be here today to discuss
the U.S. Government Accountability Office's (GAO) budget request for
fiscal year 2011. At the outset, I want to thank all the members of the
subcommittee for your continued support of GAO. With your support of
our fiscal years 2009 and 2010 funding levels, we have been able to
address the steady decline in staffing that GAO had experienced since
fiscal year 2003 and begin to reverse this trend by restoring our
staffing capacity.
This has put us in a better position to assist the Congress in
confronting the many difficult challenges facing the nation. In fiscal
year 2009, GAO supported congressional decisionmaking and oversight on
a range of critical issues, including the government's efforts to help
stabilize financial markets and address the most severe recession since
World War II. In addition to providing oversight for the 2008 Economic
Stabilization Act and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of
2009 (Recovery Act), we continued to provide the Congress updates on
programs that are at high risk for waste, fraud, abuse, and
mismanagement or are in need of broad reform, and delivered advice and
analyses on a broad array of pressing domestic and international issues
that demand urgent attention and continuing oversight. These include
modernizing the regulatory structure for financial institutions and
markets to meet 21st century demands; controlling escalating healthcare
costs and providing more effective oversight of medical products;
restructuring the U.S. Postal Service to ensure its financial
stability; and improving the Department of Defense's management
approaches to issues ranging from weapons system acquisitions to
accounting for weapons provided to Afghan security forces. Overall, we
responded to requests from every standing committee of the Senate and
the House and over 70 percent of their subcommittees.
As a knowledge-based organization, our ability to timely assist the
Congress as it addresses the nation's challenges depends on our ability
to sustain our current staffing levels. We are submitting for your
consideration a prudent request for $601 million for fiscal year 2011,
which will allow us to maintain our capacity to assist the Congress in
addressing a range of financial, social, economic, and security
challenges going forward. This amount represents a 4.1 percent increase
($22.6 million) to maintain our fiscal year 2010 staffing level for
``base operations,'' cover mandatory pay and uncontrollable costs, and
reinvest savings from nonrecurring costs and efficiencies to further
enhance our productivity and effectiveness. We have also requested a
3.8 percent increase ($21.6 million) to maintain the current staffing
level of 144 FTEs to continue mandated Recovery Act oversight beyond
the expiration of the funding we received to help offset the cost of
this new responsibility. The total requested increase of 7.9 percent
will allow us to continue to be responsive in supporting congressional
mandates and requests.
the nation's challenges shape gao's fiscal year 2011 expected workload
GAO stands ready to continue assisting the Congress as it tackles
the wide array of challenges facing the nation. Our past performance is
evidence of the critical role our dedicated staff play in helping the
Congress and the American people better understand issues, both as they
arise and over the long term. These include:
--Assessing the government's continuing response to the current
economic situation, including: assessing the effectiveness of
financial and regulatory reform efforts and plans to ensure the
stability of the overall banking, housing, and financial
markets; conducting oversight of proposed programs to boost the
economy, including job expansion and investments in
infrastructure; and continuing to perform our responsibilities
under the Recovery Act, including bimonthly reviews of how
selected states and localities use the funds provided and
quarterly reviews of recipient reports on job creation.
--Reviewing the government's efforts to identify and act on credible
threats to homeland and border security, including to
commercial aviation and seaports as well as those involving
biological, chemical, and nuclear dimensions.
--Reviewing U.S. efforts related to Afghanistan, Iraq and other
regions in conflict, including reviewing the effect of drawing
down resources in Iraq, providing more resources to
Afghanistan, and retooling operations in Pakistan.
--Supporting health care financing and reform efforts through
analyses of Medicare, Medicaid, and other health programs.
--Identifying elements to help address the nation's financial
challenges including Social Security, tax reform, retirement,
and disability programs; opportunities to reduce spending; and
reducing the gap between taxes owed and taxes collected.
--Performing specialized studies and technology assessments of a wide
range of science and technology issues, such as climate change,
the challenges of developing sophisticated space and defense
systems, and green energy.
--Focusing on major areas that are at high-risk, including the U.S.
Postal Service's financial condition, oversight of food and
drug safety, and cybersecurity efforts.
GAO is uniquely positioned to support the Congress. For instance,
pressures to reduce the federal deficit following an economic recovery
will require a greater need for the type of analyses that are a
hallmark of GAO. We recently were tasked by statute to provide an
annual report addressing overlap and duplication among federal
programs. Also, through our long-standing focus on high-risk programs
and other activities, we can identify for policymakers the agencies and
programs that require priority attention. These include helping focus
on ways to help reduce improper federal payments, estimated at $98.7
billion in fiscal year 2009, and the $290 billion estimated tax gap. In
addition, our dedicated and multidisciplinary staff have substantive
agency and program expertise, as well as expertise in conducting
financial and performance audits, program evaluations, policy analyses,
and technology assessments.
In March 2010, GAO issued an exposure draft of our 2010-2015
Strategic Plan for serving the Congress, which describes our proposed
goals and strategies for supporting the Congress and the nation as the
United States undergoes a period of transformation, daunting
challenges, and opportunities. Our framework is attached as appendix I.
gao continues to be an employer of choice
Recognizing that GAO's accomplishments are a direct result of our
dedicated workforce, management continuously strives to maintain a work
environment that promotes employee well-being and productivity, and to
be a world-class professional services organization. In both 2007 and
2009, GAO ranked second in the ``Best Places to Work'' rankings
sponsored by the Partnership for Public Service. We are also proud of
the current results from our 2009 annual employee feedback survey which
indicate that employee satisfaction continues to increase. Importantly,
the results of the 2009 annual employee feedback survey--the highest
scores to date--provided GAO management with valuable information on
how we can continue to attract and retain top talent.
GAO regularly seeks and values the input we receive from our
employee organizations: the Diversity Advisory Council, Employee
Advisory Council, and GAO Employees Union, International Federation of
Professional & Technical Engineers, Local 1921 (the Union).
Collaboration with these organizations has resulted in a number of
improvements in GAO processes, including improved field-office working
conditions; enhanced quality-control documentation that help staff
ensure that our practices follow GAO policy and generally accepted
government auditing standards; and new demographic questions on the
annual GAO employee feedback survey that allow GAO management to track
the views of certain employee populations. Also, GAO and the Union have
made significant progress toward developing a master collective
bargaining agreement.
GAO continues to make progress toward our goal to create a more
inclusive work environment. The most recent data show that
representation of minority groups in our workforce equals or exceeds
the representation in the relevant civilian labor force. As of April
2009, minorities represented about 30 percent of GAO's total workforce
and women constituted nearly 60 percent. By comparison, in the civilian
labor force minorities represented about 27 percent and women about 47
percent. With our approach to continuous improvement, several areas
merit continued attention, such as increasing the representation of
Hispanics and the disabled in the total workforce. Looking forward, our
action plan focuses on three areas: recruitment and hiring, staff
development, and efforts to create a more inclusive work environment.
We will continue to consult with the Union and all employee groups as
we implement this action plan.
Our fiscal year 2011 budget provides funds to continue to
strengthen employee development and benefits programs. We have also
identified savings and efficiencies within our budget and plan to
reinvest these resources to implement enabling technologies, such as
energy improvements.
gao's fiscal year 2011 budget request
As a people-intensive organization, about 80 percent of GAO's
budget funds compensation and benefits for over 3,300 employees, with
the balance funding mandatory operating expenses, such as rent for
field office locations, security services, and other critical
infrastructure services required for ongoing operations.
GAO is requesting an increase of $22.6 million to maintain our
current capacity to provide timely, high-quality responses to
congressional requests for assistance, and $21.6 million to support
staff currently working on mandated Recovery Act oversight. About 90
percent of the requested increase supports mandatory compensation and
benefits.
A summary of our fiscal year 2011 request is shown in the following
table and explained in further detail below.
TABLE 1.--FISCAL YEAR 2011 SUMMARY OF REQUESTED CHANGES
[Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cumulative
percentage of
change from
Budget category FTEs Amount fiscal year
2010 to fiscal
year 2011
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal Year 2009 actual costs.................................. 3,141 $529,526 ..............
Fiscal Year 2010 enacted level................................. 3,221 556,849 ..............
Changes to the base:
Maintaining staff capacity................................. 49 20,444 3.7
Nonpay inflation and annualization......................... .............. 6,420 4.8
Change in offsetting collections/reimbursements............ .............. (4,225) 4.1
Efficiencies/savings and nonrecurring costs................ .............. (8,032) 2.3
Resource reinvestment...................................... .............. 8,030 4.1
------------------------------------------------
Subtotal--changes to the base............................ 49 22,637 4.1
================================================
Recovery Act (to maintain existing staff) \1\.................. 144 21,631 7.9
------------------------------------------------
Total appropriation--salaries and expenses............... 3,414 601,117 7.9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ These staff are funded in fiscal year 2010 by Recovery Act resources provided to GAO to help offset costs
for mandated oversight. While the oversight continues, the funds expire at the end of fiscal year 2010.
Source: GAO.
Maintaining staff capacity includes $20.4 million to maintain our
projected fiscal year 2010 onboard staff at a full-time equivalent
(FTE) level of 3,270 FTEs to enable GAO to continue to meet our
increased responsibilities in a timely manner. The requested increase
primarily includes: the full-year cost to maintain the workforce in
fiscal year 2011 resulting from fiscal year 2010 hiring and pay
actions; mandatory January 2011 pay increase at 1.4 percent based on
Office of Management and Budget guidance; and performance-based pay
increases in lieu of executive branch General Schedule within-grade
increases.
Nonpay inflation and annualization includes $6.4 million to
maintain purchasing power, sustain fiscal year 2010 operating levels,
and cover projected inflationary increases in common carrier
transportation costs, travel per diem rates, training, supplies and
materials, and other essential mission-support services based on
negotiated contracts, vendor notification, or historical trend data.
Change in offsetting collections/reimbursements reflects an
increase of $4.2 million in rental income and reimbursement from
financial audits that reduces our request for appropriated funds.
Efficiencies and nonrecurring costs reflect $8 million of
efficiencies and nonrecurring fiscal year 2010 costs resulting from:
technology consolidations, such as our new core human capital system
and integrated E-Gov travel solution; and enhanced building operations,
including the installation of a gas- and solar-powered water boiler to
improve energy efficiency.
Resource reinvestment reinvests $8 million of nonrecurring fiscal
year 2010 costs and operational efficiencies to: further enhance our
information technology programs to enhance productivity and
effectiveness; continue to address management challenges through
increased information and physical security, enhanced appraisal
systems, and retention incentives; continue cyclical building
maintenance and repairs and enhance energy efficiency; and bolster
support for audit engagements and technology assessments.
Recovery Act includes funds to continue the 144 FTEs necessary to
help offset the cost to conduct the mandated oversight of the use of
the funds provided in the Recovery Act to help ensure transparency and
accountability. No new staff would be hired.
concluding remarks
With the strong support of the Congress and this subcommittee, in
fiscal years 2009 and 2010 GAO increased our staff capacity. Our fiscal
year 2011 budget request is prudent and essential to ensure that we can
maintain this capacity and continue to provide timely, high-quality
assistance to the Congress in confronting the critical economic,
financial and security challenges facing the nation.
We have a proven track record of helping the Congress evaluate
critical issues of national importance and improving the transparency
and accountability of government for the American people. For example,
our work in the banking sector provided a framework that can be used to
help reform the financial regulatory system and to evaluate proposals
to ensure that any new regulatory system is sufficiently comprehensive,
addresses risks, and adequately protects consumers. Over the past 2
fiscal years our work yielded significant results. For example, during
this period we delivered expert testimony on average at about 250
congressional hearings. We also documented on average over 1,300
actions taken by agencies and the Congress in response to our
recommendations for improvements in government services and operations
and changes to law. In addition, we recorded on average about $50
billion in financial benefits, resulting in a return on investment in
fiscal year 2009 of $80 for every dollar the Congress invested in
us.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For additional information on GAO's fiscal year 2009
accomplishments, see GAO's Performance & Accountability Report, Fiscal
Year 2009, and Summary of GAO's Performance and Financial Information,
Fiscal Year 2009, available at [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/about/
strategic.html]. Examples of how GAO assisted the nation and selected
issues on which senior GAO officials testified at congressional
hearings in fiscal year 2009 are included in appendixes II and III.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We remain committed to providing accurate, objective, nonpartisan,
and constructive information to the Congress to help it conduct
effective oversight and fulfill its constitutional responsibilities. I
appreciate, as always, your careful consideration of our submission and
look forward to discussing our proposal with you.
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Murkowski, this concludes my prepared
statement. We would be pleased to respond to any questions that you or
other members of the subcommittee might have.
appendix i.--serving the congress and the nation: gao's strategic plan
framework
Mission.--GAO exists to support the Congress in meeting its
constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and
ensure the accountability of the federal government for the benefit of
the American people.
Trends.--National Security Threats; Fiscal Sustainability
Challenges; Economic Recovery and Growth; Global Interdependence;
Science and Technology; Networks and Virtualization; Shifting Roles of
Government; Demographic and Societal Change.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Goals Objectives
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Provide Timely, Quality Service to the
Congress and the Federal Government:
to Address Current and Emerging Health care needs; Lifelong
Challenges to the Well-being and learning; Benefits and
Financial Security of the American protections for workers,
People related to families, and children;
Financial security;
Effective system of
justice; Viable
communities; Stable
financial system and
consumer protection;
Stewardship of natural
resources and the
environment;
Infrastructure.
Respond to Changing Security Threats Homeland security; Military
and the Challenges of Global capabilities and readiness;
Interdependence involving Advancement of U.S.
Interests; Global market
forces.
Help Transform the Federal Government to Government's fiscal position
Address National Challenges by assessing. and options for closing
gap; Fraud, waste, and
abuse; Major management
challenges and program
risks.
Maximize the Value of GAO by Enabling Efficiency, effectiveness,
Quality, Timely Service to the Congress and quality; Diverse and
and Being a Leading Practices Federal inclusive work environment;
Agency in the areas of. Professional networks and
collaboration;
Institutional stewardship
and resource management.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Core Values.--Accountability; Integrity; Reliability.
appendix ii.--how gao assisted the nation, fiscal year 2009
Strategic Goal 1.--Provide timely, quality service to the Congress
and the federal government to address current and emerging challenges
to the well-being and financial security of the American people:
--Highlighted weaknesses in the Food and Drug Administration's
oversight of medical devices;
--Helped to improve the healthcare provided wounded soldiers
returning home;
--Investigated the death and abuse of children at public and private
schools;
--Recommended additional oversight and controls of voluntary
workplace safety and health programs administered by some
companies;
--Enhanced management at the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation;
--Enhanced federal efforts to combat drug trafficking;
--Identified ways the Department of Housing and Urban Development
could promote energy efficiency and green building in federal
public housing programs;
--Informed the debate on hardrock mining reform;
--Reported on the Environmental Protection Agency's reforms of its
toxic chemical assessment process;
--Informed the Congress about the U.S. Postal Service's deteriorating
financial situation.
Strategic Goal 2.--Provide timely, quality service to the Congress
and the federal government to respond to changing security threats and
the challenges of global interdependence:
--Recommended actions to improve the Department of Defense's (DOD)
management of contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan;
--Helped the Congress assess DOD's ability to provide trained and
ready forces for military operations;
--Recommended that the State Department develop outcome measures for
its capacity-building program in Iraq;
--Helped to improve DOD's accounting of weapons provided to Afghan
security forces;
--Helped to strengthen aviation security through improved passenger
watch-list matching;
--Developed a framework to help the Congress evaluate proposals for
revamping the U.S. financial regulatory system;
--Helped to assess the implementation of TARP;
--Informed the Congress about weaknesses in lender data that limit
regulators' ability to identify financial institutions at
higher risk of discriminatory lending practices.
Strategic Goal 3.--Help transform the federal government's role and
how it does business to meet 21st century challenges:
--Helped to track how states and localities are using Recovery Act
funds;
--Strengthened federal planning and preparedness efforts for the
influenza pandemic;
--Helped DOD and the Department of Veterans Affairs better share
electronic health records;
--Identified shortcomings in the Department of Homeland Security's
management of major acquisitions;
--Tested the adequacy of the complaint intake process at the
Department of Labor's Wage and Hour Division;
--Helped to reduce governmentwide improper payments;
--Recommended ways to reduce tax noncompliance.
Strategic Goal 4.--Maximize the value of GAO by being a model
federal agency and a world-class professional services organization:
--Mobilized staff quickly to conduct mandated oversight work and
ensure accountability of the federal assistance available
through the Recovery Act;
--Contributed to enhancing the ability of the domestic accountability
community to prevent fraud, waste, and abuse of federal funds;
--Helped enhance international accountability organizations' capacity
to implement strong professional standards by sponsoring
training and participating in international forums.
appendix iii.--selected testimony issues, fiscal year 2009
Goal 1.--Address Challenges to the Well-Being and Financial
Security of the American People:
--Auto industry bailout;
--Nonprime home loans and rising foreclosures;
--Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation financial challenges;
--Social Security Administration challenges with disability claims
processing;
--Wildland fire management;
--Mental health services for Hurricane Katrina's youngest victims;
--Clean water trust fund;
--Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare for women veterans;
--Corporate crime and deferred prosecutions;
--D.C. public school reform efforts;
--Limiting United States Postal Service losses;
--Reverse mortgages;
--Crime victims' rights;
--Federal Protective Service.
Goal 2.--Respond to Changing Security Threats and the Challenges of
Globalization:
--U.S. strategies and plans in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan;
--Reforming U.S. defense acquisitions;
--Planning future army combat systems;
--DOD's business transformation;
--Financial regulators' oversight of large financial institutions;
--Security and Exchange Commission enforcement resources;
--TARP;
--U.S. cybersecurity strategy;
--Screening air cargo on passenger aircraft;
--Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act;
--Climate change trade measures;
--Small Business Administration Disaster Loan Program reforms.
Goal 3.--Help Transform the Federal Government's Role and How It
Does Business:
--Recovery Act;
--Influenza pandemic;
--Health IT;
--Management of DOD contractors;
--Key National Aeronautics and Space Administration challenges;
--U.S. government financial statements;
--2010 Census preparations;
--Improper federal payments to suspended businesses;
--Offshore financial activity and tax enforcement;
--VA and DOD electronic health records;
--Illegal export of military technology.
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
STATEMENT OF ROBERT C. TAPELLA, PUBLIC PRINTER
Senator Nelson. Mr. Tapella.
Mr. Tapella. Chairman Nelson, Senator Murkowski, and
members of the subcommittee, thank you for inviting me here
today to discuss GPO's appropriations request for fiscal year
2011.
I have submitted my prepared statement for the record, and
I would just like to make a few brief remarks with your
permission.
I want to begin by thanking the subcommittee for your
support for GPO's appropriations request last year, fiscal year
2010. In addition to funding our congressional printing and
documents distribution operations, these appropriated funds
included working capital for critical IT projects, including
our Federal Digital System, and Oracle financial system, as
well as the initiation of our composition system replacement
project.
It also provided funds for the ongoing renovation of GPO's
elevators, both passenger and freight. Your recommendation of
these funds is deeply appreciated both by me and the 2,300
employees at GPO.
For fiscal year 2011, we are requesting a modest increase
of 3 percent for our congressional printing and binding funds
to cover projected volume requirements for a first session
year. As you are aware, GPO does not control the amount of
printing Congress requires. We simply fulfill your needs and
use historical data to project workloads.
For our Superintendent of Documents programs, we need to
fund mandatory wage and price level requirements, ongoing
projects supporting depository libraries, and operating
expenses for the Federal Digital System that are attributable
to this program. For this account, we have about $1.5 million
available in prior year unspent funds that could be transferred
forward with your approval. So we will be requesting your
approval. That transfer would reduce our requirement for new
funds to an increase of only 4 percent.
For our revolving fund, we are seeking an addition to
working capital that would cover a range of investments in IT,
continuity of operations, facilities repair, and workforce
retraining programs. As you know, our revolving fund was
created in 1953, and Congress periodically has provided working
capital to ensure the operation and maintenance of the
Government Printing Office.
In view of the state of the economy and the constraints on
the Federal budget, we fully understand there are limitations
on what this subcommittee can recommend. And so, I would like
to briefly discuss our priorities. Chief among these is the
need to continue the development of FDsys, our world-class
content management system, as well as our project to replace
the last of GPO's legacy automated systems with Oracle-based
systems.
Both of these investments are already yielding improvements
in service and cost reductions. Our project to implement a
digitally based advanced print technology at GPO, along with an
automated workflow management system, is critical to achieving
future economies in the production of congressional printing.
As GPO's experience has shown perhaps better than any
legislative branch agency, investments in technology made today
will yield significant and lasting savings tomorrow. We have
clearly shown that in the chart on page A2 of the budget
justification submitted to this subcommittee, and the
Congressional Research Service shared similar findings to
Congress in a report last year.
In addition to continuing repairs on our aging buildings,
especially our elevators, ensuring the continuity of
operations, or COOP, in support of congressional and other
agency activities is an important priority. Recently, we
brought a systematic approach to COOP planning, and we are
working very closely with the House and Senate, as well as
other entities like the Office of the Federal Register.
Our focus is to prepare GPO to respond to a spectrum of
emergencies from the purely local--such as severe weather, a
power outage, or a fire--to the catastrophic. Though not
specified as such in our original submission, I consider it a
top priority among our COOP projects to complete the work on a
full system failover capability for FDsys, a need that was
accurately pointed out during the public hearings before the
House Legislative Branch Appropriations Subcommittee in
February.
One final note. This is going to be another tough year for
GPO, as it is for other agencies and businesses across America.
We are continuing to cut costs and scale back expenditures to
ensure we live within our budget.
Last year, with your understanding and support, we finished
on a sound financial basis, generating a modest net income
before other operating expenses. We are targeting a similar
financial performance this year--positive, but very modest.
PREPARED STATEMENT
Chairman Nelson, Senator Murkowski, and members of the
subcommittee, this concludes my remarks.
Thank you.
Senator Nelson. Thank you.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Robert C. Tapella
Chairman Nelson, Senator Murkowski, and Members of the Subcommittee
on Legislative Branch Appropriations: It is an honor to be here today
to discuss the appropriations request of the Government Printing Office
(GPO) for fiscal year 2011.
results of fiscal year 2009
Fiscal year 2009 began with a flood of activity associated with
completing the necessary printing, binding, and related work supporting
the impending transition of Administrations. For the Presidential
inauguration, GPO completed a broad variety of printed materials, which
for the first time included the production of secure credentials for
law enforcement personnel involved with the event.
We also issued the quadrennially popular ``Plum Book'', known
officially as ``Policy and Supporting Positions'', which was printed on
behalf of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs. Following the inauguration, GPO printed the official portraits
of President Obama and Vice President Biden for placement by the
General Services Administration (GSA) in more than 7,000 Federal
Government installations around the globe. Rounding out this effort,
during the year GPO produced the Congressional Directory for the 111th
Congress, issued by the Joint Committee on Printing, which includes a
comprehensive directory to both the Senate and the House of
Representatives as well as the officials of the incoming
Administration.
Throughout the year, GPO worked to fulfill its pledge of support
for President Obama's Open Government Initiative. In February, we
launched our Federal Digital System (FDsys, at www.fdsys.gov), a world-
class information management system developed to authenticate,
preserve, and provide permanent public access to official Federal
publications. We also offered a number of suggestions to the
Administration to help implement the President's initiative, including
providing public documents housed on FDsys in XML format to facilitate
a greater range of user options. In partnership with the National
Archives and Records Administration's Office of the Federal Register,
we carried out this suggestion by offering the Federal Register in XML.
By the year's end we were poised to follow up making the Code of
Federal Regulations available in XML as well.
In addition to migrating the databases housed on GPO Access to
FDsys, GPO also worked with staff from the Library of Congress, the
Secretary of the Senate, and the Clerk of the House to develop a report
on bulk data downloads of legislative information, and during the year
we worked toward a plan for digitizing printed documents within the
Federal depository library collection for online public access.
To fully support the commitment to environmental sustainability
announced by the President and Congress, GPO is developing its future
based on environmental sustainability. This means more than just going
green: it means expanding our digital operations and making changes in
paper, inks, equipment configurations, and energy sources so that we
can support our customers in Congress, Federal agencies, and the public
in a more efficient and environmentally responsible way.
During the year, with the help of funding provided to the GSA
through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, we upgraded GPO's
vehicle fleet with more fuel efficient and environmentally friendly
vehicles. With the approval of the Joint Committee on Printing, we
increased the postconsumer waste content of the newsprint we use to
print the Congressional Record and the Federal Register from 40 percent
to 100 percent. We also began an evaluation of how digital printing
technologies can help us meet our production requirements in the 21st
century.
GPO continued making progress in providing new options to meet the
Government's secure credential needs. Along with the credentials
supporting the Presidential inauguration, we designed, printed,
encoded, personalized, and shipped more than 500,000 Trusted Traveler
Program cards (NEXUS, SENTRI, and FAST) for the Department of Homeland
Security's Customs and Border Protection, and developed additional
cards to support the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative, the Medicare
program in Puerto Rico, and other Federal identification programs. Our
smart card production operation is a rapidly growing segment of GPO's
Secure and Intelligent Documents business unit, building on the
expertise and capabilities we bring to our longstanding passport
production operations.
Historically, the events dominating Congress and the Administration
are reflected in the work produced by GPO, and 2009 was no exception.
During the year, GPO recorded the debates and printed the legislation
resulting in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, as well as the
documents associated with consideration of healthcare reform in the
House and the Senate and the various appropriations bills and other
business before Congress. We also completed production of the main
edition of the U.S. Code. GPO worked through the year to produce the
documents required for the upcoming decennial census, and also produced
thousands of traveler cards providing information on the H1N1 (swine
flu) virus on behalf of the Centers for Disease Control.
To help the public find access to these and other documents, we
created a new e-mail alert system that attracted thousands of
subscribers, and we upgraded GPO's online Catalog of Government
Publications to help users find documents in nearby depository
libraries. We also carried on a longstanding GPO responsibility by
updating and issuing a new edition of the GPO Style Manual, a
publication that has served as a guide to the form and style of Federal
printing for more than century.
GPO's process improvement initiatives focused on obtaining
certification under the International Organization for Standardization
(ISO) 9001, a quality management system, and the implementation of 5S,
a lean manufacturing program. ISO 9001 certification will ensure GPO's
continued delivery of products and services that meet customer
expectations, conserve agency resources, increase efficiency, reduce
waste, and improve quality. The 5S program instills employee process
ownership and communicates and maintains organization of workspaces.
I'm pleased to report that the audit of our financial reports and
systems for fiscal year 2009 conducted by KPMG LLP resulted in an
``unqualified,'' or clean, opinion for GPO. We completed the year with
a net income of $1.2 million on total revenues of $934.1 million,
excluding Other Operating Expenses of $4.1 million for an adjustment to
GPO's long term workers' compensation liability and $1.2 million for a
capitalized software impairment loss.
The change in business from the previous year was attributable
primarily to a reduction in overall passport production operations. The
adjustment to workers' compensation liability and the capitalized
impairment loss did not place GPO in an anti-deficiency position or
require additional appropriations, and the state of GPO's finances
remains sound, particularly as the result of increased new business
opportunities in the secure and intelligent documents arena and
continuing efficiencies achieved as a result of the sustained
transformation GPO has undergone over the past decade.
GPO made substantial progress in 2009. By the end of the year, we
began developing plans for the observance of our 150th anniversary,
dating to the enactment of the congressional resolution of June 23,
1860, which established the Government Printing Office, and to March 4,
1861, the day we first opened for business. We look forward to
celebrating a century and a half of accomplishment in the coming year.
fiscal year 2011 appropriations request
For fiscal year 2011, we are requesting a total of $166,560,000,
which will enable us to:
--meet projected requirements for GPO's congressional printing and
binding operations during fiscal year 2011 and recover the
shortfall in this account accumulated in fiscal year 2009 and
projected for fiscal year 2010;
--fund the operation of GPO's Superintendent of Documents programs
and provide investment funds for necessary information
dissemination projects;
--continue the development of FDsys and implement other improvements
to GPO's information technology infrastructure, perform
essential maintenance and repairs to our aging buildings,
undertake necessary continuity of operations (COOP)
initiatives, and provide funding for employee retraining and
workforce development.
congressional printing and binding
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2010 approved.............................. $93,768,000
Fiscal year 2011 request............................... 96,652,000
----------------
Change........................................... 2,884,000
================
Change includes:
Price level changes................................ 4,192,000
Volume changes..................................... (2,844,000)
Elimination of shortfall........................... 1,536,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This appropriation pays for the printing and binding for Congress
as authorized by Title 44, U.S.C., and related statutes. GPO produces
the daily and permanent editions of the Congressional Record, bills,
resolutions, amendments, hearings, committee reports, committee prints,
documents, stationery, and a wide variety of other products, in both
print and online formats, that are essential to the legislative process
in Congress. GPO provides Congress with immediate, reliable service in
a work environment under its direct control.
For fiscal year 2011, we are requesting $96,652,000 for this
account, representing an increase of $2,884,000 over the level approved
for fiscal year 2010.
Included in the increase is $1,536,000 to fund the shortfall in
this appropriation accumulated in fiscal year 2009 and projected for
fiscal year 2010. The shortfall occurred primarily due to increased
volume for bills, resolutions, amendments, and hearings over our
original estimates.
The balance represents a combination of price level increases that
are attributable primarily to existing wage contracts and projected
cost increases for materials and supplies, as well as estimated volume
changes in certain workload categories based on historical data for
first session years.
GPO projects an overall volume decrease due to projected workload
decreases for the daily Congressional Record, business calendars,
document envelopes and franks, and hearings. These decreases are offset
in part by projected increased volume for miscellaneous printing and
services, which will include funding for content management services
provided for congressional documents maintained on FDsys; committee
prints; miscellaneous publications including the Congressional
Directory for the 112th Congress; bills, resolutions, and amendments;
committee reports; details to Congress including funding for details to
House committees; documents; and the Congressional Record Index.
salaries and expenses of the superintendent of documents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2010 approved............................... $40,911,000
Fiscal year 2011 request................................ 44,208,000
---------------
Change............................................ 3,297,000
===============
Change includes:
Mandatory requirements.............................. 1,452,000
Investment requirements............................. 1,845,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the relevant provisions of Title 44, U.S.C., GPO carries out
its mission to Keep America Informed through the information
dissemination programs of the Superintendent of Documents. These
programs include the distribution of publications to approximately
1,250 Federal depository libraries nationwide (averaging nearly 3 per
congressional district), cataloging and indexing, distribution to
recipients designated by law, and distribution to foreign libraries
which provide the Library of Congress with copies of their official
Government documents in exchange. In addition, GPO's Government
documents Web site, GPO Access, and its successor, FDsys, provide free
online access to nearly a quarter million titles, including the
Congressional Record, the Federal Register, Supreme Court opinions,
congressional bills and reports, and other publications, from both
GPO's servers and links to servers in other Federal agencies.
For fiscal year 2011, we are requesting $44,208,000 for this
account, an increase of $3,297,000 over the level approved for fiscal
year 2010. The increase is requested to cover mandatory pay and price
level increases and continue improving public access to Government
information in electronic formats.
Of the total increase, $1,452,000 is for mandatory requirements,
which include $715,000 for pay and price level changes and $737,000 for
the level of overhead required to be distributed to Salaries and
Expenses programs (the pay raise as submitted was calculated at an
increase of 1.6 percent; an adjustment of this increase to 1.4 percent,
the amount included in the President's budget, would result in a
decrease of $26,000 from pay and price level changes).
The increase includes $1,845,000 for continuing investment
requirements. This includes $2,000,000 for FDsys annual operating costs
attributable to Superintendent of Documents programs, offset by a
reduction of $155,000 in the continued costs of specific projects
supporting the Federal Depository Library Program and the Cataloging
and Indexing program, including the modernization of legacy systems,
expansion of cataloging and indexing services, establishment and
utilization of outcomes-based performance measures for depository
libraries, and funds supporting the digitization of historical print
documents pending approval of a project for that purpose by the Joint
Committee on Printing.
GPO has the authority--with the approval of the Committees on
Appropriations--to transfer forward the unexpended balances of prior
year appropriations to the revolving fund, provided the funding is used
to carry out the purposes for which it was originally appropriated. At
this date there is approximately $1,500,000 remaining unexpended from
the Salaries and Expenses Appropriation from fiscal year 2005. These
funds could be transferred forward to offset part of the new funding
requested for this account for fiscal year 2011.
revolving fund
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2010 approved.............................. $12,782,000
Fiscal year 2011 request............................... 25,700,000
----------------
Change........................................... 12,918,000
================
Change includes:
Investments in information technology.............. (782,000)
Facilities maintenance and repair.................. 6,250,000
Continuity of operations (COOP).................... 4,200,000
Workforce retraining............................... 3,250,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
All GPO activities are financed through a business-like revolving
fund. The fund is used to pay all of GPO's costs in performing
congressional and agency printing, printing procurement, and
distribution activities. It is reimbursed from payments from customer
agencies, sales to the public, and transfers from the Congressional
Printing and Binding Appropriation and the Salaries and Expenses
Appropriation of the Superintendent of Documents. The basic purpose of
the revolving fund is to provide temporary financing for GPO operations
pending the collection of funds for work performed. Whenever GPO has
significant investment projects that require additional working
capital, we seek appropriations to the revolving fund to cover the cost
of those projects.
For fiscal year 2011, we are requesting $25,700,000 for this
account, to remain available until expended, to fund essential
investments in information technology development, facilities
maintenance and repair, COOP projects, and workforce retraining. This
represents an increase of $12,918,000 over the level of funding
provided for fiscal year 2010.
The request includes $11,000,000 for information technology
development. This is a decrease of $782,000 from the amount of funding
provided for this purpose for fiscal year 2010. It includes $6,000,000
to continue developing FDsys; $2,000,000 for our Advanced Print
Technology project, which is reviewing the potential for increasing the
use of digital printing and automated workflow technologies to meet
congressional and agency printing needs; $1,500,000 to continue work
with our project to replace GPO's aging automated composition system;
and $1,500,000 to continue replacing GPO's legacy business systems with
an integrated network of Oracle systems.
We are requesting $7,250,000 for facilities repair and related
projects, an increase of $6,250,000 over the amount provided for this
purpose for fiscal year 2010. It includes $2,000,000 for continued
elevator repairs; $2,000,000 initiate the process of relocating
production operations from GPO's building 4 to the main GPO complex;
$2,000,000 to begin the systematic upgrade of GPO's electrical,
plumbing, and structural infrastructure; $1,000,000 for utility
monitoring and controls to improve energy efficiency; and $250,000 to
design and install a public exhibit in support of the observance of
GPO's 150th anniversary in March 2011 and to serve as continuing
exhibit space.
We are requesting funding for COOP and workforce retraining
projects for fiscal year 2011, and have submitted the necessary
language changes for this purpose. For COOP, we are requesting
$2,200,000 to locate and begin equipping a remote COOP operating and
command center, pending approval by the Joint Committee on Printing,
and $2,000,000 for an onsite generator at GPO to supply power to the
data center supporting production of congressional and agency
requirements.
We are requesting $3,250,000 for several workforce retraining and
development programs, including $1,000,000 for a Plant Operations
Curriculum to build digital competencies; $500,000 for supervisor
development; $500,000 for continuing education for basic skills
development; $500,000 for certification programs in finance and
accounting; $500,000 for a marketing curriculum; and $250,000 for a
technology integration program for training needs assessments and the
provision of specialized training to operators and users of business
support technology programs.
Chairman Nelson, Senator Murkowski, and Members of the
Subcommittee, we look forward to working with you, and with your
support we can continue GPO's record of achievement. This concludes my
prepared statement, and I would be pleased to answer any questions the
Subcommittee may have.
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE
STATEMENT OF DOUGLAS W. ELMENDORF, Ph.D., DIRECTOR
Senator Nelson. Dr. Elmendorf.
Dr. Elmendorf. Thank you, Chairman Nelson, Senator
Murkowski, and Senator Pryor. I appreciate the opportunity to
testify today about the CBO's budget request for fiscal year
2011.
We are celebrating our 35th anniversary this year. It seems
like a long time to us, although it pales next to my colleague
from the Government Printing Office.
This has been a very challenging congressional session for
us. We have produced hundreds of written cost estimates and
reports, had uncounted conversations with congressional staff
about the analysis we are doing on proposed legislation and on
the budget and economic challenges that face the country.
CBO deg.HEALTH
In particular, as you know, and Senator Murkowski
mentioned, we have devoted a vast amount of time and energy to
analyzing alternative proposals for reforming the Nation's
healthcare and health insurance systems. In all of that work,
the people who are the Congressional Budget Office have
enhanced CBO's reputation as a provider of analysis that is
objective, insightful, timely, and clearly explained.
For fiscal year 2011, we are requesting an appropriation of
$47.3 million. I have brought along some pictures I think you
have in front of you to put that request in the context of the
past few years' appropriations.
CBO deg.SUPPLEMENTAL
For fiscal year 2009, you appropriated $44.1 million to
CBO. Last year, I came before you and requested $46.4 million.
While that request was working its way through the
appropriations process, certain Senators proposed a
supplemental appropriation for CBO of $2 million. This was not
our idea. It was intended to bolster our ability to complete
health estimates rapidly, and the money was put to that
purpose.
Because it came late in the fiscal year, we spent just
$300,000 in fiscal year 2009 and are spending the remaining
$1.7 million in fiscal year 2010. With this supplemental money
on the table, our regular appropriation was cut back to $45.2
million.
We entirely understand that the supplemental should not be
a mechanism for CBO to have a permanently higher level of
appropriations. However, we are concerned that if this year's
appropriation process begins from last year's regular
appropriations amount, which was reduced in light of the
supplemental, then CBO will end up with a permanently lower
level of appropriations.
For example, if our budget for fiscal year 2011 were set at
last year's regular appropriations level of $45.2 million, we
would need to cut our staff.
To remove the distorting effect of the supplemental, our
perspective on this year's request was to begin with our
request to you last year. Relative to that request of $46.4
million, this year's request of $47.3 million represents an
increase of $900,000, or about 2 percent.
Apart from the complications introduced by the
supplemental, we view this year's request as the culmination of
a multiyear plan presented to you 2 years ago to increase the
size of the agency by roughly 10 percent. The goal, as my
predecessor described it to you, was to enable CBO to better
meet the needs of the Congress for analysis related to
healthcare, financial issues, and other policy areas.
Indeed, that increase in staffing has been absolutely
critical to our ability to provide sufficient analyses of these
topics and others in the past couple of years. Our aim now in
completing this plan is to increase our full-time equivalents
(FTEs) from 254 to 258, roughly in line with the 259 that my
predecessor suggested to you 2 years ago.
One might wonder why we are not reducing our staff if a
central rationale for the increase was the demand for analysis
of health proposals and the current cycle of health reform
efforts appears to have drawn to a close. One reason is that
congressional demand for health analysis remains strong. We
need to incorporate the recently enacted legislation in our
baseline projections this summer and in all subsequent baseline
projections.
We also need to analyze proposed changes in the law, and we
have already received such proposals from both sides of the
aisle. The other reason that we cannot reduce our staff without
hampering our ability to produce analysis is that we simply
cannot maintain the quantity and the quality of analysis we
have produced over the past year on an ongoing basis with the
existing number of people.
The extraordinary pressure and 7-day a week nearly around-
the-clock workload of the past year will soon drive good people
away and diminish the effectiveness of those who stay. It
really is a choice for us of having additional people or
reducing the amount of output that we can provide on a year-to-
year basis.
PREPARED STATEMENT
In closing, though, I would like to thank all of you for
your strong support of CBO's work in the past. Your support of
our budget request this year will help us to continue to meet
our responsibilities to the Congress to the high standards that
we and you expect.
Senator Nelson. Thank you.
Thank you very much.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Douglas W. Elmendorf
Mr. Chairman, Senator Murkowski, and Members of the Subcommittee,
thank you for the opportunity to present the fiscal year 2011 budget
request for the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).
CBO's mission is to provide the Congress with timely, objective,
nonpartisan analyses of the budget, the economy, and other policy
issues and to furnish the information and cost estimates required for
the Congressional budget process. In fulfilling that mission, CBO
depends on a highly skilled workforce. Approximately 90 percent of the
agency's appropriation is devoted to pay and benefits; the remaining 10
percent is for information technology, equipment, supplies, and other
services.
The proposed budget for fiscal year 2011 totals $47,289,000, a $2.1
million or 4.7 percent increase over CBO's regular appropriation for
fiscal year 2010. CBO also received a supplemental appropriation in
2009 that was intended to cover additional costs in both 2009 and 2010
related to the analysis of healthcare legislation. After accounting for
the portion of that supplemental appropriation that is being used in
2010 (about $1.7 million), the 2011 request amounts to an increase of
0.9 percent over CBO's total 2010 funding.
The proposed $2.1 million increase in CBO's regular appropriation
is the net of changes in three broad categories:
--$2 million is for rising mandatory pay and related costs for
existing staff (including the costs of added staff funded
through the supplemental);
--$0.7 million results from CBO's request to increase its number of
full-time-equivalent positions (FTEs) by 4, from 254 to 258;
and
--$0.6 million is cut from nonpay expenditures, made possible
primarily because CBO will no longer be represented on, and
providing resources to, the Federal Accounting Standards
Advisory Board (FASAB).
growing demand for cbo's analyses
The proposed increase in FTEs is the culmination of a multiyear
plan to enable CBO to better meet the needs of the Congress for
information and analyses related to healthcare and a broad range of
other policy areas.
Between fiscal year 2001 and fiscal year 2008, the number of FTEs
at CBO averaged 230, and the number varied little from year to year. In
2008, however, the agency became concerned that it did not have
sufficient resources to analyze policy changes regarding the delivery
and financing of healthcare, which were emerging as a critical issue in
the Congress. In addition, the agency was providing an increasing
number of testimonies and formal cost estimates and engaging in a
growing amount of informal analyses for Congressional staff on a wide
range of topics, so redirecting a significant number of positions
toward analyzing healthcare did not seem feasible. Accordingly, CBO
proposed to the Congress a multiyear plan to boost the size of the
agency to 259 FTEs, an increase of a little more than 10 percent.
The First Phases of the FTE Increase
The Congress approved the first phase of the proposed increase for
fiscal year 2009, and CBO averaged 242 FTEs that year. Analysis of
competing healthcare proposals absorbed a huge share of the agency's
resources, and CBO analysts in that area have worked flat out for more
than a year. At the same time, the financial crisis led to a jump in
the Federal government's involvement in the financial sector (including
the creation of the Troubled Asset Relief Program, the conservatorship
of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and expanded activities of the Federal
Reserve and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation), which increased
Congressional demand for pertinent analysis, budget projections, and
cost estimates. Therefore, CBO proposed a further increase in staffing
for 2010, and the fiscal year 2010 appropriation included an increase
in funding sufficient to provide for 249 FTEs.
The 2009 Supplemental Appropriation
The Congress later approved a 2-year supplemental appropriation
totaling $2 million, which was designed to enhance CBO's ability to
provide faster analysis of complex healthcare proposals. That
supplemental funding covered 5 additional FTEs for 2010, bringing the
total for this year to 254 FTEs. On the basis of staffing to date, CBO
appears to be on track to have roughly 254 FTEs, on average, this year.
The Proposed FTE Increase for Fiscal Year 2011
For fiscal year 2011, CBO is requesting funding to support 258
FTEs, 4 more than are funded in fiscal year 2010. That level of
staffing would essentially complete the multiyear increase that CBO
proposed 2 years ago.
In developing its request for 2011, CBO recognized that the current
surge of demand for analysis of healthcare proposals would probably not
be sustained. Taken by itself, that point might justify a reduction in
the number of positions devoted to analyzing healthcare. However, the
agency is actually requesting a small increase in the number of such
positions--three FTEs. That request reflects two considerations--first,
that considerable Congressional interest in analysis of healthcare
issues is likely to persist, and second, that the almost round-the-
clock schedule maintained this past year by CBO's current staff cannot
be maintained.
Let me elaborate on those points. Now that comprehensive health
legislation has been enacted, CBO will need to make regular budget
projections for the new and expanded Federal healthcare programs, and
it will need to estimate the budget costs and other consequences of
contemplated changes to those programs. In addition, CBO will probably
need to respond to Congressional interest in exploring other possible
changes to the healthcare system. Continued large Federal budget
deficits and the key role of rising Federal healthcare spending in
boosting future deficits ensure that health issues will remain central
to the Congress's deliberations.
With the current staffing level, CBO cannot continue to produce the
quantity of health analysis that it completed under the extraordinary
pressure and almost round-the-clock, 7-day-a-week workload of the past
year. That work schedule cannot be maintained if CBO is to retain the
skilled and knowledgeable staff that have been working on health
analyses. And even with the extraordinary effort of this group during
the past year, the quantity of analysis that has been produced has not
been sufficient to meet the needs of many Members of Congress.
The additional staff CBO is requesting will go, in some
combination, to the Budget Analysis Division and the Health and Human
Resources Division. If the needs for health analysis permit, CBO might
reallocate some analysts in the Health and Human Resources Division
from work on healthcare to work on income security and education--an
area in which CBO has fewer analysts than necessary to meet
Congressional needs.
The fourth additional FTE requested is for the Management,
Business, and Information Services Division. That group includes
information technology (IT) personnel, editors, Web personnel,
financial managers, and others. As CBO has expanded its analytic staff
in the past couple of years, the agency has added some staff in those
support functions as well. The additional position would provide
administrative support to enable senior members of the staff to focus
more effectively on their core responsibilities.
some details of cbo's fiscal year 2011 budget request
In fiscal year 2011, CBO will continue to focus on its core
functions of providing budgetary information to the Congress, including
budget and economic outlook reports, cost estimates, mandate
statements, and scorekeeping reports. CBO expects to continue its work
on healthcare, government interventions in financial markets, and
climate change--providing major policy studies on those topics and
others--and to further improve its long-term analyses of legislative
proposals for healthcare and Social Security through the continued
development of budgetary and economic models.
CBO's request would fund the following:
--A workload of roughly 600 formal cost estimates (most of which
include both estimates of Federal costs of legislation and
assessments of the cost of mandates included in the legislation
that would affect state and local governments, Indian tribes,
or the private sector) and hundreds of informal estimates,
approximately 100 analytical reports, a variety of other
products, and a substantial schedule of Congressional
testimony;
--A projected 7.3 percent, or $2.2 million, increase in base pay, of
which $0.5 million would support the four new FTEs and $1.7
million would support a combination of across-the-board
increases, promotions, performance bonuses, and merit increases
for current staff (the across-the-board increase is budgeted at
1.6 percent for staff earning a salary less than $100,000,
which is consistent with the pay adjustment requested by most
other legislative branch agencies);
--A projected 4.8 percent, or $0.5 million, increase in the cost of
benefits, of which $0.2 million would go toward the four new
FTEs and $0.3 million would go toward current staff;
--The replacement of obsolete office equipment, desktop computers,
and network servers, at $0.6 million--a decrease of $0.7
million, based on CBO's current replacement cycle;
--The acquisition of commercial data necessary for CBO analyses and
studies, at $0.6 million--an increase of $0.5 million over the
2010 funding level (partially due to the fact that a portion of
the agency's current needs in this area are being met through
the 2-year supplemental appropriation provided in fiscal year
2009);
--IT system development, at $0.3 million--the same amount as in
fiscal year 2010, based on anticipated requirements;
--Essential software purchases, at $0.3 million--about the same sum
as in fiscal year 2010, based on anticipated requirements;
--Telecommunications and telephone services, at $0.3 million--an
increase of roughly $50,000 to support expanded requirements;
--Equipment maintenance, at $0.3 million--a little above the fiscal
year 2010 funding, based on current contracting data;
--Temporary IT and clerical support, at $0.2 million--the same amount
as in fiscal year 2010;
--Expert consulting, at $0.3 million--about the same funding as in
fiscal year 2010;
--Purchases of office supplies and subscriptions, at $0.6 million--an
increase of roughly $70,000, primarily attributable to an
increase in costs for online subscriptions;
--Financial management services, including support for auditing,
payroll, and financial systems, at $0.4 million--a small
increase from 2010, primarily because of anticipated price
hikes when renewing option-year contracts (I am pleased to
report that CBO received its sixth consecutive clean opinion in
the latest audit of its financial statements);
--Office furniture and equipment, at $0.3 million--a slight decrease
from the fiscal year 2010 funding;
--Travel, at $0.2 million--the same level as fiscal year 2010; and
--Management and professional training, at $0.2 million--roughly the
same sum as in fiscal year 2010.
Because CBO withdrew from the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory
Board in fiscal year 2010, CBO's request incorporates a savings of $0.5
million in support previously provided to that body.
One further consideration in this request for funding for four
additional FTEs is the capacity of CBO's assigned space in the Ford
House Office Building. CBO currently has only a handful of unused
offices, which must accommodate temporary workers (like contractors,
auditors, and interns). During the past few years, CBO has created a
number of additional offices by reconfiguring underutilized space, and
the agency is currently undertaking further modifications in its
configuration and utilization of space. As a result, a sufficient
number of new workspaces can be created for all of the FTEs that CBO is
requesting in this budget.
In closing, I would like to thank the Committee for the support it
has provided CBO, enabling the agency to carry out its responsibilities
to provide information and analysis to the Congress as it grapples with
the critical issues facing the nation.
GPO deg.FACILITIES REPAIRS
Senator Nelson. Let me start with Mr. Tapella. Your request
for revolving funds totals $25.7 million and includes
everything from workforce retraining to building repairs. Are
any of these items a matter of life and health and fire safety
priorities that can't be put forward into another year?
Mr. Tapella. I would say----
Senator Nelson. Like the elevators in the past, yes.
Mr. Tapella. What I would say is the continued elevator
repair is a life and safety issue. GPO has 33 elevators, 31 in
current operation. Several of them we have shut down over the
years. We just reopened the first two from funding two cycles
ago, and it is a serious issue.
We manufacture on multiple levels. So the freight elevators
moving congressional work up and down are important. And also,
as we experienced this year, when we have an emergency
situation, for example a medical emergency, being able to get
personnel in and out of the building in a timely fashion is
absolutely critical.
And so I would put, in terms of the building projects, the
elevator repair as our highest priority.
GPO deg.INCREASING REVENUES
Senator Nelson. In terms of increasing revenues, what
actions have you taken that would result in increasing
revenues? In other words, getting paid for certain publications
in the past that have perhaps been free or subsidized as to
their costs, what actions have you been taking?
Mr. Tapella. Our greatest area for revenue generation has
been in our security and intelligent document business, which
is where we produce the United States passports. We also
produce the trusted traveler cards for Customs and Border
Protection. We have made some significant investments in
infrastructure and equipment for so-called ``smart cards'', and
among other things, we produced the credential used by law
enforcement officials for the 2009 inauguration. We are working
right now with the Department of State to produce credentials
for diplomats.
We are working to try to get into the HSPD-12 business,
which is the identification cards for Federal Government
employees, and I see that as our greatest growth business. In
fact, a small piece of it, we have also produced a credential
for inspectors general in Government.
I believe that credentials are something that are
inherently governmental and belong in a Government-owned,
Government-operated secure facility, and that is where we have
been focusing. And we have been seeing great results.
GAO deg.GAO'S REQUESTED FTE INCREASE
Senator Nelson. Okay. Mr. Dodaro, can you explain why the
fiscal year 2011 request includes 49 additional FTEs to
maintain current staffing levels? I am not sure I understand
why additional FTEs are necessary to maintain current staffing
levels.
Mr. Dodaro. My understanding is that we are requesting
enough to keep our existing staffing onboard for our base
request. We are not asking for additional support. Let me just
clarify that with my team to make sure I give you the proper
answer.
Senator Nelson. Okay. Sure.
Mr. Dodaro. The 49 FTEs are needed to annualize the hiring
and attrition that will occur throughout the year. It is just
for the people that we project to have onboard in fiscal year
2010, to annualize their time through next year. It is not
needed for additional people, Senator.
Senator Nelson. So it is not a net increase of FTEs. It is
what it takes to replace as you have turnover, and is that it?
Mr. Dodaro. Yes. We have had a little less turnover than we
had in the past this year due to the economy and the other
issues, as I am sure you are aware of. But that is just to
annualize those people that we will have onboard.
Senator Nelson. Okay. So the attrition rate has declined as
a result of the economy, and----
Mr. Dodaro. Yes. And we have adjusted our hiring
accordingly.
GAO deg.GAO'S INVOLVEMENT WITH ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUES FACING
THE CAPITOL POLICE
Senator Nelson. Sure. Okay. And let me say that we
appreciate your work for the subcommittee and helping us with
your sister legislative branch agencies. For example, I know
you have done extensive work on the challenges facing the
Capitol Police, particularly in identifying weakness in the
Capitol Police's financial management operations.
What would you say from your standpoint is the biggest
challenge facing the Capitol Police at the present time, and
particularly in terms of the accounting issue that they have
had?
Mr. Dodaro. We are looking at that issue a little more
carefully to identify exactly what the root causes of the
problems are. There are budget formulation issues that we have
identified in terms of how they prepare the budget, but there
are also questions about how they execute and keep track of the
budget and issues that have been raised by their financial
auditors in the past.
We are working with their inspector general very carefully.
We are also going to be meeting with their financial auditors.
We discussed this with the House Appropriations Committee, and
I agreed that we would look at this and try to advise the
Congress on exactly what to do.
I am confident that over the next couple of months, we can
figure out exactly what the root causes of the problems are.
They will need to have the issues documented so they can get
the proper procedures and controls in place. They also will
need the proper people to execute those controls to make sure
there aren't breakdowns again as they have had over this past
year.
I am committed to helping the police and you make sure that
these issues are addressed.
Senator Nelson. So you would conclude that it is
essentially an accounting and process and procedures challenge
that they face, rather than something that would be criminal
activity?
Mr. Dodaro. I am not aware of anything right now that would
fall in that category. I mean, some of our early findings were
that they had misclassified some things as benefits instead of
salaries, and because of that, you didn't have the compounding
of the salaries plus the benefits. And that accounted for some
of it.
But we are going to be looking more carefully at it, and if
there are issues like that, obviously, we would pursue them
with the inspector general over there. But so far, there is no
indication of that type of activity.
Senator Nelson. Thank you.
Senator Murkowski.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And I will just be a little bit sarcastic here, but I think
that we could have avoided some of these budget increases had
we not been dealing with healthcare reform. Because you look at
it, Mr. Tapella would not have had to be printing multi-
thousand pages bills. Dr. Elmendorf would not have to be
staying up every single night, 7 days a week, analyzing this.
And Mr. Dodaro would not be having to do the auditing. So I can
help you with how we deal with the budget increases.
Senator Nelson. Well, we learn from the past.
Senator Murkowski. Yes, we do. Well, I think it was you,
Mr. Dodaro, that said that you anticipate that you will have
more on your plate in terms of the assessments, the analysis,
whether it is ongoing with healthcare or what may come ahead
with financial regulatory reform. I think, again, that is why
we recognize the importance of all that they do within their
respective offices.
GAO deg.RECOVERY ACT OVERSIGHT
Mr. Dodaro, let me ask you about the ARRA dollars that you
received, recognizing that you got the $25 million to help
offset this additional workload. Did I hear you correctly that
that either has all been obligated or will be obligated by the
end of this fiscal year? Is that correct?
Mr. Dodaro. That is correct. So far, we have obligated
about $14 million of the $25 million, and we expect to use the
rest of the money throughout the year. We have also used some
of our base appropriation.
Senator Murkowski. Right.
Mr. Dodaro. But, yes, that money expires, and we will have
used it all.
Senator Murkowski. So then with the $21.6 million that you
are now requesting, do you believe that this is going to be
sufficient to carry you through 2014, or do you see that there
is going to be a need for an additional request to help you
bridge that?
Mr. Dodaro. Yes. The money we requested this year was for
the 2011 budget cycle. We will probably need some additional
bridge money later, given the fact that there is going to be
money spent beyond fiscal year 2011. But we will have to see in
terms of the spend-out rates.
The estimates from CBO, which have been fairly reliable so
far, are that the outlays for 2011 would be about $63 billion
additional, and then from 2012 through 2019, another $60
billion. I think most of that will occur in 2012.
Senator Murkowski. Let me ask you then----
Mr. Dodaro. Yes.
Senator Murkowski [continuing]. Because it speaks to an
issue that Dr. Elmendorf is dealing with in CBO. You want to
make sure that these not necessarily one-time, but short-term
dollars that you had received through ARRA are not going to be
a permanent part of your base funding and your FTE level.
So how can we ensure that that is not the direction that we
are going? Because essentially, here you have got a couple of
years going forward now with these increased levels. Does that
then not become your base?
Mr. Dodaro. We are not intending for that to happen,
Senator. From the very beginning, what we have done is we have
brought back some reemployed annuitants. We have had term
appointments. So we have, from the beginning, structured it so
that most of the people who we are bringing back to work on
this are temporary people who will go away as the work goes
away over time.
That is why we segregated it in our budget submission. We
wanted to be very transparent. We are not intending this as a
backdoor way to increase the base for our appropriation.
GAO deg.GAO'S OVERSEAS PRESENCE
Senator Murkowski. Okay. Let me ask about the engagement
support costs. I understand that you are working with the State
Department to establish these field presences in Afghanistan,
Iraq, and Pakistan. Will these be permanent presences in these
countries then? And if so, what is that arrangement, and are
you getting any contribution from the State Department with
these particular engagement supports?
Mr. Dodaro. They are not intended to be permanent. They
will only be there during the buildup in Afghanistan, and the
drawdown in Iraq. We have had three people on 6-month
rotational assignments in Baghdad now for about a year or so.
We are getting security support, obviously, from State
Department and the Department of Defense (DOD). They have been
very cooperative. We don't get any financial support.
Senator Murkowski. But any money?
Mr. Dodaro. No.
Senator Murkowski. Should we, in your opinion?
Mr. Dodaro. Well, it is really a policy issue. The Congress
granted us authority to be reimbursed for our oversight of the
TARP program. We have to be careful that we don't go too far in
receiving financial support from agencies we audit, rather than
funding from the Congress. This could compromise our
independence.
But in extraordinary circumstances we have received
additional financial support. For example, now that aid will be
going to Haiti. I am sure we will be asked to audit that
assistance over the next few years. In the past, when we were
auditing the recovery from Hurricane Mitch in Central America,
we were given travel money separately in an appropriation from
the State, Foreign Operations Appropriations Subcommittee.
So sometimes we are given these special appropriations. I
certainly would welcome your support in this regard because it
is really intended to just provide a base. A lot of our travel
is done because we need to go where the money is being spent,
and we have had teams going back and forth to Iraq and
Afghanistan for a while now.
Senator Murkowski. Do you have any permanent presence in
any of these countries where you are involved?
Mr. Dodaro. No. Many years ago, we had offices in
Frankfurt, and we based out of there. We also had an office in
Honolulu to do the travel in Asia. But we don't anymore. We
have consolidated, so we only have domestic locations.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Nelson. Senator Pryor.
Senator Pryor. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to thank all of you for all of your help last year
because healthcare was a very, very tough strain on all the
resources around here. So I want to thank all of you.
And I know, Dr. Elmendorf, you were in the bull's eye for
quite a bit of that process. So I just appreciate what
everybody has done and everybody's team did to get us through
that.
CBO deg.COMPUTERS
Let me ask you, Dr. Elmendorf, if I can, about your
computers. I don't know how accurate this is. But either on
this subcommittee or just in conversations in the past, we have
talked about maybe you have a computer system that maybe takes
longer to do some of the calculations, and I know you do a lot
of complex modeling and all that kind of thing.
But tell me about your IT needs right now. Are you in good
shape, or do you need to modernize what you have?
Dr. Elmendorf. Senator, I think at this point, we are
actually in good shape. We did buy faster computers last
summer.
Senator Pryor. And did that make a difference?
Dr. Elmendorf. And that made a real difference. These very
complicated proposals, we often would set a computer running
overnight, and if we set it up--the program up wrong, we could
not discover until the next day. And we shortened the time
required for some of those estimates for a computer run very
dramatically. So it made a real difference in what we did.
We also, in the request that you approved for us beyond the
supplemental, just the regular appropriations enabled us to
catch up on what had been a large amount of deferred IT work.
So we have replaced the entire network that we have, which had
not been done for a number of years. And we have replaced a
number of the machines on people's desktops.
So, at this point, we think we are doing pretty well. And
in fact, our request for IT support is coming near, for
purchases of equipment is below what we are spending in fiscal
year 2010.
Senator Pryor. When you have technology improvements like
you have had, does that help you in terms of your man-hours
needed to do the various tasks that you are asked to do?
Dr. Elmendorf. It doesn't--not really. It is not really a
substitute for our staff. It is a complement. It is a tool that
they use. Ninety percent of the CBO budget is staff. We luckily
don't have some of the problems of the physical plant that the
Government Printing Office does. Ninety percent of our budget
is for staff, about 6 percent for IT, and 4 percent for
everything else.
So the computers don't really--that is what the people need
to work with. I mean, it is better to have them working, not
sitting, waiting for a program to finish. But the programs
still sometimes finish in the middle of the night, and we have
people get up and pass results on to somebody else in the
middle of the night.
CBO deg.WORKLOAD
Senator Pryor. Do you--I know last year, the last couple of
years with healthcare reform have just been extraordinary in
terms of your workload. Do you think you will go back down to
kind of a pre-2009 workload, or do you think the Congress will
continue to do complicated pieces of legislation, and they will
continue to need more and more of your expertise and time?
Dr. Elmendorf. I think it is unlikely that we will face a
year again like this past year, and I can only express my
gratitude for that.
But, of course, once a program is in place, the Congress
rarely leaves it alone. The passage of Medicare and Medicaid
many years ago did not--CBO didn't exist at the time, but of
course, much work has been done after that on those programs.
The passage of the Children's Health Insurance Program
(CHIP) did not end our work analyzing CHIP proposals. We hired
people who became experts in that program, and we analyze a
vast number of proposed changes to it. So this large new
program that has been put in place will require us to do
ongoing work in our baseline projections and also in analysis
of proposed changes to it and some changes one might think of
as additions and some changes that are being proposed in the
public sphere at least at this point are taking away some of
what is there.
What exactly will happen, I don't--what will come to us in
legislative terms, I don't know. But I expect a significant
amount of ongoing work. In addition, for all of the health
changes in that legislation, projected Federal health spending
is very high and growing very rapidly, and the Federal budget
deficit is large and projected to be large. The debt projected
to grow rapidly, and the growth in Government health spending
and the growth in the Federal debt are related phenomena, of
course.
So I expect even beyond analysis related to this
legislation that was enacted to have a lot of congressional
interest and a lot of work on our part in pursuing further
changes that might be made in the Government's budgetary
commitment to healthcare.
CBO deg.FOREIGN NATIONAL HIRING
Senator Pryor. Mr. Chairman, I had one last question for
Dr. Elmendorf, if I could? And that is a little different track
here. But in section 704 of the 2010 omnibus appropriations
bill, there is a restriction on the hiring of foreign
nationals. Can you tell me why that is detrimental to your
agency?
Dr. Elmendorf. About two-thirds of people getting Ph.D.s in
economics in the United States today are foreign nationals.
About 40 percent of CBO staff are economists, people with
Ph.D.s in economics.
Now, in a number of fields in economics, there are most of
the job candidates, people we look to hire, are U.S. citizens.
But there are some particular fields where the proportion of
foreign nationals is especially high. And if you look at the
CBO staff today, a good share of the people we have working on
finance and in some areas of macroeconomics, especially when we
try to model the effects of growing Federal debt on the economy
and alternative policies for addressing that growing debt, a
lot of the people we have now are foreign nationals.
Now this legislation grandfathers existing employees. So it
doesn't affect them. But as we try to hire people to work in
those areas, not being able to hire foreign nationals
significantly restricts the pool of people we can look to and
hampers our ability to hire the very best available people.
And before this change was made, we, and other parts of the
Government, were able to hire foreign nationals not from every
country, but from a significant set of countries, essentially
those with whom the United States has a defense agreement. So
there were certain limitations, but the pool was large enough
that we could do the hiring we thought we needed. And this
restriction really does hamper our ability to maintain the
highest-quality staff in some of those very critical areas for
us.
Senator Pryor. Thank you.
Dr. Elmendorf. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Nelson. Thank you, Senator Pryor.
CBO deg.SHIFT RESOURCES
Dr. Elmendorf, in addition to hiring or besides hiring
additional FTEs and the faster computers, has there been any
other--have there been other efforts to try to shift internally
resources within your agency where you get better results with
lower costs?
Dr. Elmendorf. So, Senator, we work very hard to try to
move resources to where the greatest need is and not to just
stay stuck in existing patterns of spending or resource
allocation. And in fact, over the past few years, more of the
existing slots for staff at CBO have moved in the health
direction, anticipating demands in that area.
I think our ability to do that, though, is limited by the
demands of Congress in other areas. Over the past--during this
congressional session, the past year and a quarter, we released
more than 600 formal cost estimates, which only a few are
actually in health. Much of the work that we did was informal
developmental work. So most of that, those estimates are in
other areas.
With the Government's increasing involvement in the
financial sector, we have, over the past few years, devoted
additional resources so we can provide you with appropriately
high-quality estimates of the effects of TARP, of the effects
of the Government's conservatorship of Fannie Mae and Freddie
Mac, of the greater demands on the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation (FDIC), the Federal Reserve, other aspects in which
the Government is engaged in the financial system.
Congress is considering very important changes in climate
and energy policy. We have a large group of people who have
been devoted to analyzing various different approaches that
have been proposed. They are dealing with a set of energy
problems and climate problems. And we are being asked to do
increasingly sophisticated analysis of the effects of those
sorts of proposals in terms of their effect on overall economic
output, the effect on the well-being of households in different
parts of the country, different income levels, and different
years.
So we feel that we are pressed on a whole range of fronts,
on national security work that we do. I promise you, Senator,
there is nobody at CBO who is just sitting and waiting for
something to come across their desks. We take very seriously
the stewardship of the resources that you provided to us.
GAO deg.GAO HIRING FOR RECOVERY ACT OVERSIGHT
Senator Nelson. Mr. Dodaro, how many people have you hired
using the stimulus funding, the special additional funding to
deal with the ARRA expenditures?
Mr. Dodaro. We have hired about 70 people as term employees
and reemployed annuitants. We have tried to hire people who are
living in some of the States that we are auditing in order to
reduce our expenditures even further, and make the money go
further.
We then increased our normal hiring by about 70 people with
the belief, and we still believe this, that we will be able to
absorb them through normal attrition over time. We also used
some additional people within GAO because we had to get started
right away. As soon as the act was passed our first report was
due 2 months after the law was passed, and so, we redeployed
some of our people. So collectively there is the equivalent of
144 FTEs that were charged to this account, but the number of
people that we hired was about 70.
Senator Nelson. In recognizing that after these initial 2
years, the actual amount of money that will be going out is
reduced significantly, as you point out. It is still a
significant amount of money, but as a percentage, it drops.
What would you estimate your hiring needs or your staffing
needs for, let us say in terms of numbers of people, FTEs, in
fiscal year 2011 and fiscal year 2012?
Mr. Dodaro. We have proposed 144 FTEs during that period of
time. I think that would be the appropriate level for fiscal
years 2011 and 2012. After that, I think we can clearly phase
down because there will be fewer programs at that point in
time, and the money is spread out over a number of years.
What I am concerned about, Senator, is the fact that States
are under a lot of fiscal stress at this point, and we have
seen them cut back in the management of the programs and also
their auditing capacities over a period of time. For instance,
the weatherization program is almost quadrupling the amount of
money that would be spent there. There are new programs that
are getting started. We have urged the OMB to use their power
to require better audits of money through the single audit
approach that is used over Federal programs.
But I am just concerned that a lot more money is flowing
directly to the localities. And so, the States need to have the
ability to track these funds. We have made a lot of
recommendations to the Federal agencies that they monitor the
use of the money at sub-recipients and sub-award levels. And
so, I think the risk is there.
States, as well as the Federal departments and agencies,
are going to remain under fiscal stress collectively for the
next couple of years. I think that attention needs to be paid
to this money to make sure it really achieves the desired
effect and is used appropriately. And so, I take that
responsibility very seriously, and that is why we are asking
for these resources and help.
GAO deg.STATES' ABILITY TO MANAGE RECOVERY ACT FUNDS
Senator Nelson. And I would agree with you on that as well.
Have you had or found many instances where the State thus far
wasn't managing or supervising the delivery of the funds and
programs that were under their control?
Mr. Dodaro. I have been pleased early on that they have
taken it seriously and responsively. But a lot of the monies in
the early years are being delivered through existing programs
such as the Medicaid program. They have rules and procedures in
place. The highway programs have well-established procedures.
And so, in the first couple of years, given the fact that the
money is going through existing programs, it hasn't proven to
be yet as stressful as it will be in the coming years.
Now, that being said, when we find occasions where things
are going to ineligible recipients or there are ways the States
could tighten up their programs, we are giving them
suggestions. We also created a special hotline where any
citizen can call in with complaints or allegations of fraud. We
are currently following up on about a dozen of those examples.
We have referred many others to the inspectors general.
We are looking at contracts both at the Federal level and
at the State level. We are looking at whether or not the
reporting coming back is accurate. I mean, this is a huge,
decentralized set of programs and activities throughout the
country. And so, I think our presence there also has had a
deterrent effect to some extent because the States know that we
are there.
We picked 16 States and the District of Columbia. They are
going to receive two-thirds of the amount of money, and we
announced to them we were going to be there for 2 or 3 years
while the money was being spent. So they know we are there, and
we have got good cooperation. I am pleased with that. But we
need to keep a wary eye on the expenditures, and that is what
you fund us to do.
Senator Nelson. I appreciate that.
Senator Murkowski.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
CBO deg.FLAT BUDGET
Dr. Elmendorf, I would like to go back to you. Your
increase here is primarily for salaries and benefits. Six-
point-five percent of it is for that. The balance then is for
other nonpay-related expenses and information technology that
we have talked about here.
The question is if we were to move toward a flat budget
from last year, how do you do that? Because you clearly need
the employees. You have already trimmed the funding level for
the nonpay and related expenses. Tell me what your operations
look like if we go flat funding.
Dr. Elmendorf. So can I ask back first, flat relative to
just the regular appropriations or flat----
Senator Murkowski. Well, that was how you started at your
opening statement.
Dr. Elmendorf. It makes, as you know, it makes a
significant difference.
Senator Murkowski. Sure, it does.
Dr. Elmendorf. If you fund us at our regular, the same
level as the regular appropriations from last year, then we
would reduce staff. We have hired people using some of the
supplemental money, and we would not, I think, have to lay them
off. There is attrition at CBO. But we would end up reducing,
taking those slots back, and we would go back to a level that
was below the level we have today.
And we would set priorities in our work, and we do that
now. Of course, in the health reform process for all of the
work, I had an awful lot of angry phone calls from your
colleagues asking why we couldn't do their--analyze their
proposal, and they were right to be unhappy about that. And I
kept telling them we were doing the best that we could.
So it is always a matter of prioritizing, but the
constraints, of course, get much tighter if we end up going
backward in the number of people that we have.
Senator Murkowski. So would you lose four? Is that what you
would anticipate? Because that is what you are asking for in
this----
Dr. Elmendorf. So I think we have hired five. I think we
have hired five people. I think that supplemental, with the
part of supplemental devoted to personnel amounted to five
additional FTEs. So we would go backward by five FTEs from
where we are now. That would be nine FTEs below where we would
be if you funded our full request.
Senator Murkowski. I see. Okay, I understand that. Thank
you.
GPO deg.REVOLVING FUND PRIORITIES
The chairman asked you, Mr. Tapella, about the revolving
fund and if there were any projects on here that are life/
safety, and you discussed a little bit about the elevator.
Recognizing that this funding request represents over 100
percent increase over the fiscal year 2010 enacted level, you
have got 17 projects. Some I am assuming are ongoing, some
perhaps are new.
If you were held to the fiscal year 2010 level of $12.8
million for the revolving fund, how do you prioritize this list
of projects? Because you kind of got off easy on the last one,
talking about the elevator.
And I am sure that we have got to have those elevators
working to move those documents up and down. But how would you
make this a prioritization?
Mr. Tapella. I would look at our total budget request and
not look at the individual ones the way that we have them
segregated into the three accounts.
And so, looking at that, I would request full funding for
congressional printing and binding. For salaries and expenses
of the Superintendent of Documents, I would request full
funding less the $26,000 adjustment because we used the
original rate of 1.6 percent for the mandatory pay increases,
and the President announced 1.4 percent. That is roughly
$26,000 that we could reduce. And if we can, with your
permission, move forward the prior year funds of $1.5 million,
we basically request a reduction of $1.526 million from the S&E
appropriation.
When we go to the revolving fund, flat funding would
provide $8.127 million. With that, as I look at our priorities,
I would request roughly $5.127 million for FDsys development,
$1 million for our advanced printing technology initiative, $1
million for COOP, and $1 million for the continued repairs of
elevators because that is a life and safety issue.
GPO deg.NEW VERSUS CONTINUING PROJECTS
Senator Murkowski. Are there any new projects that are on
this list? And I really appreciate what you have just run down
there because you were really able to give some definition
there. Are most of these ongoing, or do you have some new that
we can look to at a later point in time?
Mr. Tapella. When you look at the Government Printing
Office's appropriation for fiscal year 2010, at $147 million,
that represents roughly 12 percent of our gross revenue. The
remainder we receive from the executive and judicial branches
as reimbursement for the products and services we provide to
them, as well as the general public through GPO's publications
sales.
When we fund initiatives, typically the revolving fund is
paying for a portion of it, if it is a congressional
appropriation, and then the remainder coming out of our
retained earnings. Last year our retained earnings were $1.234
million, very, very slim. The prior year, it was in the $30
million range, which means that our ability to self-generate
investment capital has gone down considerably.
For the Federal Digital System, to date, roughly two-thirds
of the spending has come from appropriations, primarily from
unspent appropriations that were moved forward from previous
years. The remainder came out of our revolving fund from
retained earnings from all of GPO's operations.
The advanced printing technology assessment is new.
However, GPO has always had continuous improvement in our
technologies, whether we funded them from the revolving fund or
asked for direct appropriations. And so, while that is a new
initiative, I think it is absolutely critical if we want to
continue driving the costs out of our congressional printing
budget moving forward.
Up to this point, GPO has funded COOP through our revolving
fund. We have significantly stepped up our COOP efforts. This
past year has been a very rough year for GPO. We have had three
fires, which we had to deal with, and we had a power outage in
our data center, which threw off production by nearly a full
day.
And that affected Congress. It particularly affected the
House of Representatives because we were many, many hours late
with the Congressional Record. And so, when you ask the
question about new versus old, I don't think it works the same
way as it does when Congress completely funds an initiative
fully with appropriations.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Nelson. Senator Pryor.
Senator Pryor. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
GPO deg.ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
I would like to start with you, Mr. Tapella, about the GPO
and a little bit on the money, but also just on your policy.
And I am curious about what your agency is doing to support
environmental sustainability? Because it seems to me that you
have a lot of opportunities there with the volume of paper that
you are using, the types of ink, the energy required to do all
the printing, the recycling.
The fact that a lot of this is available online now, and
you may not have to print as many copies, like you did in the
old days. Your vehicles, building modifications, you have an
old building. I mean, do we need to talk about the HVAC system
there? Do we need to do like an energy contract there to try to
save some money through that?
So could you give us just a few minutes on what you have
got going on your environmental sustainability side?
Mr. Tapella. Thank you for the question, Senator Pryor.
Sustainable environmental stewardship has been one of my
top priorities since becoming Public Printer in October 2007.
And this past year, GPO made history by working with the Clerk
of the House and the Secretary of the Senate, as well as the
Speaker and Majority Leader, to increase the amount of recycled
fiber in the newsprint used to produce the Congressional Record
to 100 percent. And that was significant.
We are also now working on looking for more sustainable
copier papers, seeing what we can have available. When it comes
to Congress and the letterhead we can make available for
Congress to use, it can be 100 percent recycled. It is a
combination of rag, plus pulp, and that is new this coming
year.
When we look at, for example, other items----
Senator Pryor. I don't want to interrupt you on that, but--
--
Mr. Tapella. Yes?
Senator Pryor [continuing]. As you are going through this,
give us a sense of--I know all that is good for the
environment, but does that also save money to do that, or is it
more expensive to do that? Or give us a sense of how that
works, too.
Mr. Tapella. Okay. When it comes to the Congressional
Record, we were able to negotiate the exact same price for the
paper that had been 40 percent recycled for what is now 100
percent recycled newsprint. So that does not cost Congress any
more.
When it comes to the one-star, I think it went up just
marginally, but not much. I would call it a relatively
insignificant amount.
GPO deg.SUSTAINABILITY ACHIEVEMENTS
Some of the areas where we are seeing significant success
is in the area of recycling. GPO has been recycling since 1861,
when we opened our doors for business.
When we look at diverting waste that would ordinarily go to
the landfill, back in fiscal year 2008, my first full year as
Public Printer, we were able to divert roughly 65 percent of
the waste from GPO from going to the landfill. This past year,
we were able to divert 87.5 percent of the waste leaving GPO,
right down to the desks. Old wood desks are now ending up in
Maryland and are being converted to mulch.
We have seen a reduction in volatile organic compounds, and
that has to do with some changes we have made in the solvents
we are using on our presses. We have removed all of our
underground storage tanks, and we had fuel under there as well
as solvent, and those have been removed.
The Environmental Protection Agency has lowered GPO status
from being a large quantity producer of hazardous waste to a
small quantity producer of hazardous waste. In fact, even
though we are a 1.5 million square foot factory, probably the
13th largest printing house in the world, we are producing less
hazardous waste than the typical mom-and-pop shop on the
corner. And I am very, very pleased about that.
I want to thank the subcommittee for some of the funding
for our new roof. We have replaced the majority of the roof on
GPO, all of the flat portions of the roof. It doesn't cover
elevators and a few appendages to GPO, but roughly 100,000
square feet are new, and that is a new biomass roof that is
white. It is reflective.
It will not only have twice the life expectancy of a
standard roof, but it also will reduce our energy consumption.
And so, those are some of our sustainability achievements.
We have over 40 vehicles in our fleet, which includes
trucks, vans, and cars. Thanks to funding provided to the
General Services Administration, we were able to replace 21 of
our vehicles. Eighteen of them are Flex Fuel E-85, and 2 of
them are hybrid. These are what we use to make deliveries to
and from the Hill.
That was at no cost to us. It was funded through the
Reinvestment Act, and I am sorry I can't get the name correct.
But we were able to take advantage of that.
Senator Pryor. So it sounds like a lot of that will save
the taxpayers money, if not in the first year, but in the out-
years you will save?
Mr. Tapella. Absolutely. I have appointed an executive to
be in charge of sustainable environmental stewardship at GPO,
and everything we are doing we are looking at the return on
investment. We are typically looking for a less than 5-year
return on investment in any investment we make when it comes to
sustainability.
With the Federal Digital System, when we bought the servers
for it, instead of the standard 80-watt processor servers, we
used 50-watt processor servers to significantly reduce energy
consumption without losing any of its capacity.
Senator Pryor. All right. Good.
Well, I am glad I asked that question then because you have
a lot going on there, and it is good for us to be aware of
that.
GAO deg.GAO'S DIVERSITY PLAN
Mr. Dodaro, I do have a question for you about diversity
there in your office, in your agency. And I guess I would like
to ask all three if you have a diversity plan, but specifically
for you, I would like to know how your efforts at diversity are
going?
Mr. Dodaro. We are very committed to diversity at the GAO.
Right now, 30 percent of our workforce are minorities. Women in
our workforce are approaching 60 percent of the workforce. We
have produced a diversity plan over the last 2 years which has
goals that we set for ourselves in terms of focusing in on
additional training.
Right now, most of the workforce at the GAO either equals
or exceeds the relevant labor force numbers in those areas. We
need to increase the number of Hispanics that we have in the
organization, particularly in the administrative areas, but
also throughout the rest of the organization. We are focused on
that. We are focused on people with disabilities as well. We
just entered into an agreement with the Library of Congress to
use some of their facilities for testing out devices to help
people who are disabled to go forward. I am personally
committed to it. I am very committed to it. I think the effort
is going well.
We created a diversity advisory council at GAO that has
representatives from all the different employee groups. We are
working very well with our union on collective bargaining
agreements. We have an employee advisory council for people who
aren't in the bargaining unit within GAO. We are making
headway.
We have hired trainers and have developed diversity
training programs that will become an integral part of our
training curriculum at the GAO. I think it is very important
for us to be reflective of the society of the American people,
and their elected representatives and so I think we are doing
well. But like everything else, you have got to keep working at
it, and we intend to do so.
Senator Pryor. And are you seeing your management workforce
becoming more diverse as well?
Mr. Dodaro. Oh, definitely.
Senator Pryor. Now I would like to hear from the other two
as well, but since I have way exceeded my time, maybe we could
just submit those for our review. But I would like to see that.
Thank you.
Dr. Elmendorf. Yes, Senator, we will do that.
Senator Nelson. Thank you, Senator Pryor.
GAO deg.GAO LABOR RELATIONS AND PAY
Mr. Dodaro, I understand that the GAO and the union
recently reached an agreement on fiscal year 2010 performance-
based pay increases. How will this agreement affect the
performance-based pay increases already awarded to, let us say,
the non-union workforce within the agency?
Mr. Dodaro. We have a commitment that everybody is treated
equally. So we are going to adjust the pay increases of the
people in the nonbargaining unit to be the same as the people
in the bargaining unit. It is important to be equitable, to be
fair to all our employees, and we are committed to that.
Senator Nelson. What impact will that have on your budget?
Mr. Dodaro. According to the agreement, some of the costs,
such as permanent pay increases will roll forward to the budget
for fiscal year 2011. And a lot will depend on what the
Congress and the President agree for the across-the-board
increase for fiscal year 2011. Part of the issue is not only
what we carry forward, it is what we are going to be obligated
to give by law next year in the 2011 budget.
So a very important principal that we had in the union
negotiations was to not carry forward more cost than need be to
get an agreement, and we achieved that goal.
Senator Nelson. And as you say, that will apply equally to
those who are outside the union, as well as those in the union?
Mr. Dodaro. Yes.
Senator Nelson. And will depend on what the budget of 2011
truly applies to?
Mr. Dodaro. Yes. In terms of what the pay increase will be
for next year. In our budget submission we are assuming a 1.4
percent across-the-board increase and then some other
incremental increase for performance on top of that. But the
across-the-board figure will be determined by the Congress and
the President, and that was what was assumed in the budget.
For next year we have got to pay 9 months of the cost of
the across-the-board increase. And by law, we have to give the
same across-the-board increase to our employees as is set for
the executive branch, which will be a compounding factor. That
is why in terms of your questions about a flat budget for next
year, a lot of that would have to be absorbed in addition to
carrying the costs forward from employees.
In an organization like ours where 80 percent of our costs
are people costs, a flat budget would have an impact in terms
of hiring. We would have to scale back our hiring dramatically.
We would have to release all of our temporary employees and
even consider some furlough days next year if we were flat-
lined.
GPO deg.GPO'S PERFORMANCE SYSTEM
Senator Nelson. Mr. Tapella, how would it affect you? I
mean, I don't know that you have the same union issue, but do
you have any performance-based plans in place that you have to
account for as well?
Mr. Tapella. We do have performance plans in place. Do I
understand the question correctly in terms of the flat-lining
of the budget?
Senator Nelson. Yes.
Mr. Tapella. The only program that is funded directly with
appropriations is our salaries and expenses appropriation of
the Superintendent of Documents. We have a few vacancies there.
So any reduction we would basically have to flat-line and not
allow hires in that area.
The rest of GPO is covered under the revolving fund. So we
can manage it appropriately.
Senator Nelson. Dr. Elmendorf.
CBO deg.PAY INCREASE
Dr. Elmendorf. Senator, CBO employees who are paid less
than $100,000 a year receive an across-the-board increase and
potentially also merit-based increases. Employees above that
level receive only merit-based increases. We believe very
strongly in rewarding the performance of the top performers the
most. And people who are not--luckily, at CBO, we have a
terrific group of people. But people who, for some reason or
other, do not perform don't receive increases.
I think it is vitally important for us to continue to
reward the people who are putting their hearts into this work.
When we are hiring people, we are competing, of course, with
other potential employers. We try very hard to keep CBO as a
desirable place to work. I think we, in fact, won an award for
being the third best small agency to work for, and the work is
very exciting and important.
But at some point, people do take account of what they are
getting paid. The starting salaries for new Ph.D.s in
economics--again, Ph.D.s in economics represent about 40
percent of our workforce. The starting salaries on average in
the country for that group has increased 5.7 percent per year
for the last 4 years. Our salaries have not increased at that
rate.
So we are losing ground as it stands, and we lose people to
other--to the private sector or to universities. We just lost a
terrific person to the IMF, International Monetary Fund, where
she is being paid a substantially higher salary. So I think we
could not maintain the quality of our work without maintaining
the quality of our people, and that requires not falling too
far behind too quickly what they can get paid other places.
Senator Nelson. Senator Murkowski.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I think that is an important consideration for us. And it
is difficult at a time when we are trying to crank in on the
budget and expenditures. But I think we realize that we are
asking an awful lot from these professionals, and you could
probably work some better hours out in the private sector there
and probably make comparable or well beyond.
So I think that is important for us, and I think that is
one of the issues that we are seeing with the reality that we
are facing or that we are hiring as many foreign nationals as
we are. We can't keep our own here.
Mr. Tapella, I have one last question, and this is as it
relates to the Federal Digital System, the FEDsys. I don't know
what they call it, FEDsys or FDsys, just to understand a little
bit more about what you are doing with this digital repository
for all Federal documents.
With the $6 million that is requested now, will this get
this system up and running? Where are we in understanding what
it is going to cost us to maintain on an annual basis? Do we
have all the technology in place to capture all that we are
looking to with this system? Just give me an assessment of the
readiness of this digital system.
GPO deg.FEDERAL DIGITAL SYSTEM
Mr. Tapella. I call it FDsys, other people call it FEDsys.
Senator Murkowski. Okay.
Mr. Tapella. We launched it this past year. So it has been
in operation now for more than 1 year. We are doing it in
phases. We have release 1, release 2, and then we will have
some future releases beyond that. And as much as my inspector
general hates the idea of it, we actually don't believe that
FDsys will ever be done.
When you have an electronic system that you are going to
use as a system of record, you need to always keep it current
and flush. As we look at technology, for example, who uses a
floppy disk anymore? The same thing is true as we build the
Federal Digital System. And we are building it with technology
that can regularly be refreshed as technology changes.
The funding that we are looking at right now for this year
will just about what we call ``finish'' the Federal Digital
System. We will still need one more infusion after that. The
total cost would be $49 million we believe to ``finish the
system,'' which is release 1, release 2, and will allow us the
ability to submit, as well as the output.
There are other things that we could be doing with the
Federal Digital System, such as digitization, bringing in more
content, and making certain that the search capabilities
continue to improve. The Federal Digital System is replacing
GPO Access, which was built in 1993. That was viewed as a
closed system, and nobody thought about what would happen when
you need to do technology refreshes. We have actually built
that into our design map for the Federal Digital System.
Senator Murkowski. So we have got the technologies now, but
the technologies tomorrow may be changing is what you are
saying. So we have got to stay on top and current with----
Mr. Tapella. Correct. We believe that we must stay on top
and current as we move forward with the Federal Digital System.
And it is one of the greatest concerns I know that is facing
many in the library community, and obviously, one of our
programs is the Federal Depository Library Program. We know
today that a book will last 500 years if it is properly cared
for. What happens to electronic systems?
And so, we have purposely built the system to make certain
that it will never die. We have the responsibility under title
44 to make certain that the documents of our democracy are made
widely available to the public and kept in perpetuity. That is
the reason why I don't believe the system will ever ``be
done.'' However, we have designed it in such a way that we can,
with each release, declare success.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
That is all the questions that I have.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
Senator Nelson. I believe I have asked all the questions
that I had wanted to ask. And so, I want to thank you for being
here today, for your continuing service to the many taxpayers
who support our Government and to our colleagues as you support
them as well.
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
were submitted to the agencies for response subsequent to the
hearing:]
Questions Submitted to Gene L. Dodaro
Questions Submitted by Senator Ben Nelson
fiscal year 2011 request
Question. Mr. Dodaro, I have made it clear that I intend to hold
the Legislative Branch to fiscal year 2010 levels in fiscal year 2011.
What will be the effect of a flat funding rate on the operations of
GAO?
Answer. A flat funding rate would significantly impair GAO's
ability to serve the Congress on the full range of issues and
negatively impact our timely provision of services. In order to operate
at a flat funding level (fiscal year 2010 level) in fiscal year 2011,
GAO would need to significantly reduce planned hiring and staffing
levels by up to 150 staff through fiscal year 2011, beginning in fiscal
year 2010. This staffing reduction will negatively impact our ability
to respond in a timely manner to continuing and new mandates, such as
the Recovery Act and the annual report to the Congress on duplicative
and wasteful programs. This would not only reduce the staffing
resources devoted to Recovery Act oversight by almost 60 percent, it
would also severely impact staff available to support other
congressional engagements. In order to even maintain this reduced
staffing level and absorb mandatory pay and non-pay inflationary
increases in fiscal year 2011, we would also need to reduce or defer
critical infrastructure investments including security improvements in
our field locations and potentially implement up to 6 furlough days in
2011.
Question. It is not my intention to fund additional FTE during a
flat budget year. How much additional funding would you require in
fiscal year 2011 to maintain your current workforce--that is the number
of employees you currently have on board?
Answer. Our fiscal year 2011 budget request seeks only the funds
needed to maintain our fiscal year 2010 workforce, including $579.5
million for base staffing and $21.6 million for Recovery Act oversight.
The requested fiscal year 2011 FTE level represents annualization of
fiscal year 2010 activity (the full-year equivalent of maintaining our
current staffing level in fiscal year 2011), not an increase in the
number of employees.
Question. Can you explain why your fiscal year 2011 request
includes 49 additional FTE to ``maintain current staffing levels''?
Once again, I do not intend to increase our agencies' workforces during
the next fiscal year.
Answer. Our fiscal year 2011 budget submission seeks only to
maintain our fiscal year 2010 workforce. The additional 49 FTEs
represent the annualization of fiscal year 2010 activity. There is no
increase in staffing planned for fiscal year 2011.
When staff come on board and leave the agency at various times
throughout the year, this results in less than a full year's cost and
associated FTE usage in the year that the activity occurs--in this case
fiscal year 2010. In fact, as most of our entry level staff start in
the 4th quarter after graduation, while our attrition occurs throughout
the year, this usually equates to a lower FTE in the first year of
hiring, but requires a funding and FTE increase in the follow-on year,
to ensure we have full costs/FTEs for the on-board workforce.
Question. Has GAO's attrition rate declined as a result of the
current economic situation and unemployment rate? Have you taken any
discrepancy in your attrition rate into account since putting together
your fiscal year 2011 budget request?
Answer. Yes, attrition has declined over the last few years and we
have considered this in our budget request. GAO experienced an annual
attrition rate of 10 percent of our staff between fiscal years 2004 and
2008. In fiscal year 2009, attrition dropped to 6 percent (190 staff).
Our fiscal year 2010 operating plan assumed a slight increase in
attrition to 225 staff and our fiscal year 2011 budget request assumed
an increase in attrition to 235 staff. However, based on current
activity in fiscal year 2010, we have revised our attrition assumptions
and reduced the fiscal year 2010 estimate to about 200 staff. This
change increases our costs by about $2 million a year and we've taken
appropriate steps to adjust for this in our operating plan. Our fiscal
year 2011 estimate remains at 235 staff.
gao's work on capitol police issues
Question. Mr. Dodaro, we appreciate your agency's work for this
subcommittee in assisting us with your sister Legislative Branch
agencies. Your staff has done extensive work on the many challenges
facing the Capitol Police, particularly in identifying weakness in the
Capitol Police's financial management operations.
What would you say is the biggest challenge facing the Capitol
Police right now?
Answer. The Capitol Police currently face three significant
challenges--
--Effectively managing its workforce and other resources to satisfy
security requirements and protect members and the Capitol
Complex within available resources.
--Effectively formulating, approving, and executing reliable and
supported budgets.
--Establishing and maintaining an effective internal accounting and
administrative control framework.
Question. Did your review of the Capitol Police's fiscal year 2011
budget request, conducted at this subcommittee's direction give any
indication that they had under-budgeted their personnel needs in fiscal
year 2011?
Answer. GAO's review detected indications of problems with under-
budgeting for salaries for fiscal year 2011. During the course of our
work, we detected three errors: (1) a discrepancy between the budget
request Capitol Police submitted to Congress and what it submitted to
OMB to be included in the President's budget, (2) a calculation of
salaries that did not include pay differentials, and (3) a potential
compounding of these errors across fiscal years.
--After comparing information provided by USCP as support for what
was reported in the President's Budget Appendix, we identified
a discrepancy between the two documents. The amounts reported
in the President's budget were $5 million higher for benefits
and $5 million lower for salaries than what were shown in the
supporting information provided by the USCP. The Capitol Police
officials's February 17 explanation was incomplete and, after
we asked further questions, we were told that the information
reported in the President's budget was wrong.
--We found a second error when we reviewed a breakdown of benefits
for fiscal year 2009 which was used in developing the fiscal
year 2011 budget request. The benefits information provided to
us by the USCP included amounts for night, Sunday, and holiday
pay differentials that should have been reported as salary.
This error resulted in an under-budgeting for salaries. In
addition, since amounts requested for certain benefits are
calculated as a fixed percentage of salaries, understating the
amount requested for salaries also leads to understating the
amount needed for benefits.
--The error in fiscal year 2009 information raised questions about
whether it was repeated and carried forward into fiscal years
2010 and 2011. To the extent this occurred, the understatement
would have been repeated.
Question. What can you do to further assist us in straightening out
the Capitol Police's financial issues?
Answer. GAO has several efforts underway to assist the Congress and
the Capitol Police Board in overseeing the Capitol Police's efforts to
assess security requirements, manage its workforce, and identify and
resolve internal accounting and administrative control weaknesses and
deficiencies.
--GAO is assessing how the Capitol Police plans, tracks, and manages
use of its sworn officers, including overtime and the Capitol
Police's process to determine security requirements. GAO will
also identify what existing security technologies could enhance
the Capitol Police's ability to protect the Capitol Campus. In
a related effort, GAO will review the processes and controls
associated with authorizing, recording, and approving employee
time charges, including overtime charges, and how resulting
salary amounts are charged to available appropriations and
accounted for and reported by the Capitol Police.
--GAO in coordinating with the Capitol Police Inspector General will
monitor and review the Capitol Police Inspector General's
ongoing audit of problems and related weaknesses with the
Capitol Police's process for formulating and approving its
fiscal years 2010 and 2011 budget requests.
--GAO will review recently identified internal control weaknesses and
deficiencies to determine their current status and to identify
underlying causes for their often persistent and pervasive
nature. In doing so, GAO will consider the Capitol Police's
internal accounting and administrative control framework;
evaluate the status of corrective actions to deal with control
deficiencies, including those associated with prior GAO
recommendations; and explore systemic reasons why control
weaknesses and deficiencies are not promptly resolved.
arra funding
Question. When we included $25 million in the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act, it was not intended to permanently augment GAO's core
base. It appears that your request for $21.6 million to cover ARRA-
related work is moving us in the direction of expanding your base.
How did you arrive at the $21.6 million figure to continue ARRA-
related work?
Answer. GAO's staffing strategy to meet the ARRA mandates
recognizes the temporary nature of these oversight responsibilities and
assumes that there will be no increase in base resources. While the $25
million included in the Recovery Act is only available through
September 30, 2010, our statutory oversight responsibilities for
billions of dollars of funding to the states and localities continue
until all funds have been distributed--estimated through 2019. For that
reason, about 50 percent of the staff devoted to ARRA work are
temporary staff (reemployed annuitants and term hires) who can be
released once the mandates are completed. The remaining staff are
permanent GAO staff. Our staffing strategy in the out-years assumes
that the permanent GAO staff will be reabsorbed in our base by not
fully hiring behind future attrition.
Our fiscal year 2011 request includes funds to maintain the current
staffing level of 144 FTEs consistent with the funds provided in fiscal
year 2009 and spent in fiscal year 2010. GAO expects to maintain this
staffing level through fiscal year 2012 to address the mandatory
oversight of the largest amount of the remaining Recovery Act funds
estimated to be outlayed during that time. As approximately 85 percent
of Recovery Act funding to programs administered by the states and
localities is estimated to be paid out by the end of fiscal year 2012,
GAO would start to reduce the staffing below the 144 FTE level by
absorbing GAO staff back into the base behind attrition and phasing out
the staff necessary to address the changing nature of the Recovery Act
funding. Our expectation is that by the end of the required mandates,
all permanent GAO staff will have been absorbed back into our base with
no increase to the base resources to accommodate this approach.
Question. How much of the $25 million included in the ARRA
legislation have you already spent? My understanding is around $4
million. Can you realistically spend the remaining $21 million by the
end of this fiscal year?
Answer. In fiscal year 2009, GAO spent $4.2 million. Through the
2nd quarter of fiscal year 2010, we have spent $13.7 million and expect
to spend the remaining $11.3 million to cover costs through the end of
fiscal year 2010.
Question. How much of the ARRA workload could you absorb within
your own workforce?
Answer. GAO could not absorb any of the ARRA workload within our
own workforce without severely impacting our current workload to meet
other congressional mandates and requests. We would need to seek
legislative relief to the existing mandates in the Recovery Act to
align with available staffing and funding.
Question. What will you do if this Committee does not provide the
$21 million for recovery-related work?
Answer. We are happy to work with the committee to identify
alternative funding vehicles. In the event that we do not receive
funding for the statutorily-mandated recovery-related work, GAO would
first reduce the FTEs devoted to Recovery Act oversight by almost 60
percent by eliminating temporary staff. This would negatively impact
our ability to meet the reporting requirements of the Act and require
that we seek legislative relief to the Recovery Act mandates to align
with available staffing and funding.
We would also need to absorb the permanent GAO staff currently
devoted to Recovery Act oversight back into the GAO base which would
impact our ability to maintain our planned workforce levels necessary
to be responsive to other congressional requests and mandates.
Question. How many people have you hired using stimulus funding?
How many of these hires do you anticipate bringing onboard as permanent
GAO staff?
Answer. We have hired 74 temporary reemployed annuitants and staff
under term appointments. A handful of temporary staff have been
identified as potential candidates to fill existing GAO vacancies
behind attrition. However, it is not our intention to bring the
majority of these staff onboard as permanent GAO staff nor grow the
base.
Question. You identified $8 million in savings from non-recurring
items funded in fiscal year 2010 which you assigned to ``reinvestment
of savings'' in your budget request. These items include upgrades to
your information technology systems and repairs to your building. Could
this funding be assigned to ARRA mandated work instead?
Answer. We do not believe this to be in the best interest of the
agency. In order to maintain the technology infrastructure supporting
our staff and to address our management weaknesses in information
security, human capital and physical security, it is essential that we
be able to reinvest savings from non-recurring items and efficiencies
in these areas. Planned investments will allow us to protect the safety
and security of field-based staff, further enhance our information
technology programs to gain productivity and increase effectiveness,
and continue our efforts to enhance the energy efficiency of our
facilities.
gao union
Question. I understand that GAO and the Union have recently reached
an agreement on the fiscal year 2010 performance-based pay increase.
How will this action affect the performance-based pay increases already
awarded to your non-union workforce? How much will this additional
increase cost?
Answer. To treat all employees equitably, GAO extended the
provisions of the Union agreement on fiscal year 2010 performance-based
pay increases to non-Union staff. This will cost GAO an additional
$724,000.
______
Questions Submitted to Robert C. Tapella
Questions Submitted by Senator Ben Nelson
budget
Question. Mr. Tapella, how will GPO respond to no funding increase
in fiscal year 2011? Can you continue to run your agency on the fiscal
year 2010 level?
Answer. GPO will be able to conduct operations with funding at the
fiscal year 2010 level, or $147.5 million. At this level, full funding
should be provided for our request for the Congressional Printing and
Binding Appropriation. For the Salaries and Expenses Appropriation of
the Superintendent of Documents, our request could be reduced by
$26,000 to reflect a pay raise factor or 1.4 percent as requested in
the President's budget, instead of the factor of 1.6 percent we used.
Our request for this account could also be reduced by $1.5 million if
the Appropriations Committees approve our request to transfer forward
this amount in the unexpended balance of this account from fiscal year
2005. Funding at the fiscal year 2010 level would provide approximately
$8.1 million for GPO's revolving fund.
Question. Your fiscal year 2011 request for the revolving fund
totals $25.7 million and includes everything from workforce retraining
to building repairs. Are any of these items critical needs for your
agency given that we're trying to maintain a flat budget this year?
Answer. With approximately $8.1 million for the revolving fund for
fiscal year 2011, we would fund the Federal Digital System (FDsys) at
$5.1 million and provide $1 million each for our advance printing
technology, continuity-of-operations (COOP), and elevator repair
projects.
Question. Please explain the $3.2 million request for workforce
retraining and development programs. Can this be deferred?
Answer. Our request for employee retraining projects includes $1
million to ensure that all personnel involved in the printing process
receive training to maintain core competencies in related crafts and to
build on new competencies as emerging technologies are identified;
$500,000 for provide a curriculum for supervisors to hone leadership
and management skills and incorporate the latest trends from throughout
public and private sectors; $500,000 provide basic-skills training for
our workforce. as we modernize our technology and implement our vision
of GPO's digital future; $500,000 for courses to develop specialized
experience and technical skills in financial management; and $500,000
to equip employees with the skills needed to communicate GPO's mission
in the production of secure and intelligent documents, identify
potential revenue streams, identify future trends within the industry,
and offer these new products to congressional and agency customers, and
$250,000 to provide annual training needs assessments and program and
curriculum evaluation for all training provided, develop models to
target specific training modules for just-in-time instruction, and
provide specialized training to operators and users of business support
technology programs. These programs have not been identified as
priorities under GPO's flat funding scenario for fiscal year 2011.
federal digital system
Question. GPO is requesting over $6 million in fiscal year 2011 for
the Federal Digital System--its new online data system. What is the
status of the implementation of this system?
Answer. Release 1, which is the foundational content management
system assuring preservation and permanent public access to online
Federal information, is nearing completion. The content from GPO Access
will be completely migrated to FDsys in the next 2 months and a
failover instance for continuity of access, or backup system, will be
completed in August. At that point, we will start decommissioning GPO
Access, making FDsys the system of record, with shutdown of GPO Access
targeted for December 2010.
Question. How much has been spent on this effort so far?
Answer. Approximately $37.5 million has been spent so far, with a
projection of $41 to $42 million to complete Release 1 by the end of
fiscal year 2010.
Question. How much more funding does GPO need to complete this
system?
Answer. Approximately $8 million will be required to complete
Release 2, which is the submission functionality of the system, by the
end of fiscal year 2011. However, if the current team cannot be
maintained due to budget constraints, the time to develop Release 2
will extend and the total cost may increase as a result of retraining.
Assuming availability of the necessary funds, the total investment in
FDsys by the end of fiscal year 2011 will be $49 to $50 million.
Question. Why has 20 percent of your information still not been
migrated to the new format?
Answer. The process to migrate content to FDsys is complex. We have
been migrating content in phases to ensure that the process is without
errors and meets the requirements.
Question. Wasn't the original estimate for this system $29 million?
What is causing the cost overrun?
Answer. The initial cost estimate for the core functionality of
FDsys was estimated in 2004 to be $29 million. The primary cause of the
cost overrun is a result of data migration activities to move GPO
Access collections to FDsys. These were not a part of the original cost
estimate and the effort has been much more difficult than anticipated.
The cost of this effort alone will be about $11 million by the time we
complete the migration from GPO Access to FDsys.
Question. What will the annual operating costs be for this system?
Answer. Initially, the annual operating cost will be about $3.25
million. These costs consist of software license maintenance as well as
the labor to maintain the system, at approximately $1.75 million per
year, plus the costs of replacing aging hardware and software over
time, at approximately $1.5 million per year. The annual operating
costs could go down in 2-3 years as GPO staff assume work currently
performed by contractors. Future development costs, which are optional,
could run in the neighborhood of $4.75 million per year.
passport production
Question. How is GPO's current demand for passport production? Are
you fully implementing your production capability?
Answer. The State Department initially requested that GPO produce
11 million passports during fiscal year 2010. Since then they have said
they plan to order an additional 2 million passports for the remainder
of fiscal year 2010, bringing the total to 13 million books. The
Department has also notified the GPO that they intend to budget and
order 15 million passports in fiscal year 2011. GPO has the capacity to
produce 20-24 million passports annually given the equipment and
personnel on hand without resorting to overtime. As GPO's security and
intelligent document business grows, particularly in the smart card
area, we intend to utilize any available labor resources to staff the
card equipment and processes.
Question. As a follow up to a conversation we had during last
year's hearing, have you given any further consideration to the
production of foreign passports?
Answer. We have explored the possibility of producing passports for
foreign nations and have found several challenges that need further
consideration before we can proceed.
Question. What challenges do you face in this undertaking?
Answer. Currently, there are statutory limitations on GPO producing
non-U.S. Government printing. We have not been able to determine
whether a Federal agency with the capability to conduct bilateral
international agreements would be willing to act as a broker for our
services with foreign nations. There also are unresolved questions
concerning the acceptability of providing foreign nations with access
to GPO's passport production facilities and proprietary processes.
gpo building issues
Question. You are requesting $2 million to initiate the process of
relocating production operations from GPO's building 4 to the main GPO
complex. Why are you doing this?
Answer. The primary benefit is avoiding one-time building 4
infrastructure improvement costs and investing those resources in more
energy-efficient equipment and system upgrades within the main GPO
complex to support passport operations. Infrastructure investment of
one-time facilities costs to building 4 would be for utility and HVAC
upgrades, new windows, and general building maintenance improvements.
The passport operation within the main GPO complex would utilize more
energy-efficient enterprise and lower operating costs from variable
speed drives, energy efficient lighting, and variable speed air
handling units with savings realized year-over-year.
Question. What will this investment buy us?
Answer. GPO could offer building 4 space under space-sharing
agreements to other legislative branch agencies for storage or light
industrial use, offsetting the annual operating cost to idle the
building and recover costs. A full return-on-investment study would be
necessary to completely analyze the cost benefit of renovations to all
floors into class A office space for lease purposes.
Question. What is the total cost of this proposed relocation?
Answer. In addition to the initial $2 million appropriation, which
would cover relocation of current operations in the main GPO building
to accommodate the move, costs would be incurred for passport and
warehouse operations equipment relocation, estimated at $2 to $6
million (depending on whether one or both passport production lines are
moved); construction of new office space for training and bindery
operations estimated at $850,000; and construction of a new wastepaper
facility to house the secure waste processing system within the main
GPO complex, at an estimated cost of $500,000 to $1 million. Other
variables are the requirements and schedule of the State Department and
costs to install equipment through an exterior building window that is
too big for the freight elevator.
Question. What is your agency doing to support environmental
sustainability?
Answer. GPO has been involved in environmental sustainability
activities for many years regarding paper, ink, emissions reduction,
energy efficiency, digital dissemination, waste management, recycling,
and related measures. Some of the highlights of GPO's recent
sustainability activities include the following:
--With the approval of the Joint Committee on Printing (JCP), in 2009
GPO increased the recycled content of the newsprint to print
the Congressional Record and the Federal Register to 100
percent from 40 percent with no runability or printability
problems. The 100 percent recycled paper is being supplied at
no increased cost over the previously supplied 40 percent
recycled paper. GPO is also evaluating responses to a request
for proposal for the most sustainable copier paper available in
today's market.
--GPO has established a voluntary partnership with EPA's WasteWise
program to baseline and monitor waste reduction and prevention
activities. We have reduced our landfill waste by issuing a
contract to ensure all of our wood waste (pallets, skids, and
old furniture) is recycled. Currently, GPO's wood waste is
being used for mulch in Maryland.
--Over the past year, GPO has reduced VOC emissions in plant
operations by 86 percent from the previous rate, which also
reduced our purchasing costs for fountain solution by 22
percent.
--Using appropriations to the revolving fund provided for fiscal year
2009, GPO installed roughly 100,000 square feet of an
environmentally sustainable roof on its main complex buildings.
The highly reflective roof coating provides a cool roof
environment that not only reduces cooling demands inside the
building but improves the life expectancy and efficiency of
rooftop equipment. Additional roof repairs will be carried out
as necessary using available funds in the revolving fund.
--This past year, GPO received 21 new vehicles including 18
alternative flex fuel (E85) vehicles and two new hybrid
vehicles through funding provided to the General Services
Administration as part of the stimulus bill.
--FDsys utilizes 50-watt processors instead of the standard 80-watt
processors. This decision will realize more than $12,000 per
year in energy savings, as these servers operate at a much
higher efficiency.
--GPO has established an Environmental Protection and Regulatory
Affairs Committee consisting of key leaders from each business
unit to ensure attention to top sustainability initiatives.
Question. What is the most pressing infrastructure challenge you
face at your building?
Answer. Currently we are continuing with our program of elevator
repairs. The elevators are essential to movement of personnel and
materials in our 8-story main complex, and are a life/safety measure
where the rapid evacuation of persons with critical medical conditions
is concerned.
coop plan
Question. Can you explain the $2.2 million for Continuity of
Operations funding you are requesting in fiscal year 2011? Given our
current budget situation, is this something that can be deferred?
Answer. GPO has identified continuity-of-operations (COOP) funding
as a priority for fiscal year 2011, at a level of $1 million. The $2.2
million originally requested included funding for a distant site as
well as enhancements to GPO's offsite computer systems. Recently GPO
received feedback from Senate staff that a mobile strategy that does
not rely on fixed sites to support the production needs of Congress
should be considered. We are beginning to assess the costs and
implications of supporting Congress through so-called ``fly-away''
kits. This would require GPO to establish production capabilities from
pre-packaged equipment and supplies that would be unpacked and an empty
facility set up for that purpose. Of the $1 million identified as COOP
priority funding, approximately half would be dedicated to this
purpose.
Additionally, there is a requirement to complete the needed
redundancy for GPO critical operations at the Legislative Branch
Alternate Computer Facility (ACF) in support of Congress, including
completion of a backup system for FDsys. The other half to of the
funding provided to COOP would be devoted to this purpose.
______
Question Submitted by Senator Mark Pryor
Question. Mr. Dodaro, I do have a question for you about diversity
there in your office, in your agency. And I guess I would like to ask
all three if you have a diversity plan, but specifically for you, I
would like to know how your efforts at diversity are going?
Answer. In compliance with the directive in the Joint Explanatory
Statement accompanying H.R. 1105, providing omnibus appropriations for
fiscal year 2009, GPO has adopted a formal written policy, in
accordance with all applicable Federal laws, to develop and institute
an affirmative action plan with specific goals and objectives to
further the ability of women, minorities, and individuals with
disabilities to achieve balanced representation within the Legislative
Branch workforce and management. GPO's Affirmative Employment Plan has
adopted many of the elements set forth in the Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission's Management Directive 715 to ensure that all
employment decisions are free from discrimination.
GPO has made substantial gains in diversity in its management
ranks. Employees at the Grade 15 level currently are 65 percent white
and 35 percent minorities. In the last report to Congress submitted in
2008, 32 percent of positions at the Grade 15 were held by females;
females now represent 36 percent of the employees at this grade. This
demonstrates small but steady strides that GPO is making to increase
its diversity at the higher grade levels.
Grade 13 supervisors are the feeder group for managerial positions
and this grade has experienced a significant change. The placement of
qualified minorities and females into supervisory grade 13 positions
will prepare them to become GPO's future leaders. Presently, 51 percent
of Grade 13's are white and 49 percent are minorities. In this grade 36
percent of employees are male and 67 percent are female.
During my tenure I have made a personal commitment to increasing
diversity. I have conveyed this commitment in a meeting with senior
management, and I have issued a policy statement to all employees
indicating the importance of diversity. To further implement GPO's
support of diversity, diversity has been included as an element in
GPO's Strategic Vision.
GPO has continued its policy of outreach to colleges and
universities that will strengthen our applicant pool with highly
qualified diverse candidates. These colleges include Florida A&M
University, the University of Texas at El Paso, the University of New
Mexico, and the University of California at Berkeley.
GPO also recruits at the National Technical Institute for the Deaf
for qualified employees, to include persons with disabilities in our
diversity program. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
has indicated that the percentage of people with disabilities in the
Federal Government is decreasing. However, GPO continues to rank as one
of the top Federal employers for people with disabilities. As of
September 30, 2009, GPO had a workforce of 2,322 employees. Of these,
almost 7 percent are individuals with a reportable disability, and of
them approximately 1.5 percent are individuals with targeted
disabilities. By comparison, most Federal agencies have fewer than 1
percent of their employees with targeted disabilities. These employees
work in business units throughout GPO.
In addition to our recruitment plan, we have entered into a
strategic alliance initiative with California State University at Los
Angeles, which is a Hispanic Serving Institution. This initiative
allows university seniors to develop an actual design project that
prepares them for the job market and provides the organization with an
actual product.
Where veterans are concerned, GPO continues to be involved with the
Coming Home to Work Initiative. Through this initiative with the
Department of Veterans Affairs, eligible service members and veterans
are placed in positions at GPO to gain work experience.
GPO carries out a number of efforts to ensure that supervisors and
managers know the agency's perspective on diversity and equity in the
workplace. GPO's Director of Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) and
Deputy EEO Director meet with business unit managers semi-annually to
discuss their organizations' diversity and other EEO-related issues.
During these meetings we discuss their current workforce statistics and
possible strategies to address any noted imbalances.
GPO supervisors and managers are also required to participate in
training on EEO and Discriminatory Harassment. I personally address
each of these sessions to inform supervisory personnel of my commitment
to EEO, and I use these classes as a mechanism to impart the
significance of diversity and equality in GPO's workplace.
GPO clearly recognizes the significance of attaining diversity at
GPO and we are firmly committed to achieving this goal.
______
Questions Submitted to Douglas W. Elmendorf
Questions Submitted by Senator Ben Nelson
fiscal year 2011 flat budget
Question. How will your agency cope with a flat budget in fiscal
year 2011?
Answer. Fiscal year 2011 funding equal to the 2010 appropriation of
$45.2 million would represent a reduction in funding for CBO because
the agency's 2010 operations are being financed, in part, by funds from
a 2009 supplemental appropriation. In total, CBO's 2010 funding comes
to about $46.4 million.
Most of CBO's budget is devoted to personnel. Because a flat fiscal
year 2011 budget would, in practical terms, represent a reduction in
CBO's funding, the agency would need to reduce its full-time
equivalents (FTEs) by 9 from the 258 proposed in its fiscal year 2011
budget request--eliminating the 4 additional positions requested for
next year and another 5 that are funded this year. Those reductions
would save about $1.5 million. They would, however, represent a setback
in terms of CBO's ability to provide estimates and analysis for the
Congress as it addresses major issues on the legislative agenda. With
the support of the Congress, CBO staffing has expanded in recent years,
especially in the health area. But the needs for estimates and analysis
have continued to expand as well, and despite extraordinary efforts by
CBO staff, the agency could not satisfy all the requests for estimates
for healthcare proposals. A reduction in staffing below the current
level would make it more difficult to meet future needs of committees
and Members. Congressional deliberations on topics such as climate
change, immigration, the defense budget, financial reform, and deficit
reduction, the new statutory Pay-as-You-Go requirements, new issues
that cannot even be foreseen now, and CBO's ongoing responsibilities to
produce hundreds of formal cost estimates and even more informal
estimates will require substantial efforts on CBO's part. Faced with
reduced staffing, CBO would work with the Congress to prioritize
requests for analysis to ensure that the most critical requirements
were addressed in a timely way.
In addition, CBO would have to reduce information technology (IT)
spending by $0.5 million--primarily in the areas of communications,
software development, disaster recovery, equipment replacement, and
commercial data. Also, library operations would be reduced by $0.1
million--primarily in the area of online subscription services.
healthcare staff
Question. Over the past few years, CBO has increased its capacity
in the healthcare area. Now that the legislation has passed, do you
expect to transition back to less staff in that area? How do you
envision managing that transition? What happens to staff hired for
healthcare expertise?
Answer. CBO was able to meet the incredible demands placed on the
agency for healthcare analysis and cost estimates over the past 2 years
only because many of the agency's health staff frequently worked 7 days
a week, often 12 to 15 hours a day (and sometimes more), for a
significant portion of those 2 years. Even so, CBO struggled to keep
pace with the demand for cost estimates and other analyses related to
healthcare. As the Congress grapples with the long-term budgetary
pressures facing the nation, stemming to a significant degree from
rising healthcare costs, and with the issues that will arise regarding
implementation of the new healthcare legislation, the need for CBO
analyses of health issues is likely to remain great. We anticipate that
the staff will be quite busy responding to requests for estimates and
analyses, and carrying out the research necessary to produce such
responses--but, hopefully, at a more measured pace than what was
necessary in recent months.
There are still many unanswered requests from Members of Congress
about various policy proposals and their potential effects on both the
budget and the private health insurance market. In addition to
preparing analyses for specific Congressional requests, CBO hopes to
conduct modeling and research to address a variety of health policy
questions that will allow the agency to provide useful information to
the Congress for future legislative efforts in 2011 and subsequent
years. Because the healthcare arena is complex, significant lead time
is necessary to prepare for a broad range of potential legislative
action. For example, a key reason that the agency was able to prepare
several dozen estimates of major health insurance proposals in 2009 is
the fact that CBO spent considerable effort in 2008 and prior years to
develop its health insurance modeling capability.
CBO expects that the analysts at the agency who work on health
issues will be busy and fully engaged for the remainder of this year
and in fiscal year 2011. A few of the contributors to CBO's health
team's work over the past year were doing ``double-duty'' while they
were also working on their ``regular'' responsibilities of covering
issues besides healthcare. Some of those members of the large 2009-2010
health team may return to working solely or primarily on legislative
issues unrelated to healthcare. CBO expects that its full-time health
analysts--whether recently hired or long-time CBO staff members--will
not face any shortage of interesting and challenging work in the near
future.
role in new healthcare legislation
Question. How do you see your role during the implementation of the
new healthcare legislation? What, if any, difference in required
expertise do you envision needing?
Answer. As a Congressional support agency, CBO does not have a
direct role in implementation of the new law. However, the agency
recognizes that there is very keen interest in the Congress for
information about how the law will be implemented and how the
combination of regulatory actions and the behavior of states, private
organizations, and individuals will affect spending and receipts for
the Federal government through the Medicare and Medicaid programs,
through the new private insurance exchanges, and through other health-
related programs created or modified by the legislation. As part of its
Congressionally mandated efforts to prepare baseline projections of
spending and receipts under current law, CBO will need to gather data
and update a large number of budget projection models. Those efforts
will require an extensive amount of work over the next few years; and
the focus of that work will evolve as CBO analysts learn more about how
the Department of Health and Human Services is carrying out the myriad
provisions of the new law.
CBO has worked hard to hire and develop a diverse staff of health
policy analysts. The current group of such analysts is well suited to
conducting research and developing budget-oriented models related to
the implementation of the new law and any potential legislative
revisions that might be considered by the Congress.
supplemental funding spent
Question. Of the $2 million provided in the fiscal year 2009
supplemental appropriations bill, how much has CBO spent?
Answer. CBO has spent $1.5 million of the $2 million in
supplemental funding. The agency anticipates spending the remaining
balance by September 30, 2010.
benefits of work for congress
Question. What changes were implemented at CBO with the
supplemental funding which benefits your work for Congress?
Answer. One significant use of the supplemental funds was to
replace or upgrade computers used by health analysts. CBO analysts
utilize a variety of computer models to help estimate the impact and
cost of various healthcare proposals. Numerous iterations are typically
required to assess the effect of changing multiple variables, and
before receipt of the supplemental funds, model runs for a particular
proposal consumed many hours. The new computer equipment acquired with
the supplemental funding significantly reduced turnaround time for
model runs, enabling analysts to respond to inquiries from the Congress
much more rapidly. Health models that previously ran in 10 hours took
only 2 hours to run, and models that took 2 hours finished in 15
minutes.
CBO was also able to accelerate the hiring of additional staff,
which enabled the agency to respond more quickly to Congressional
inquiries on health issues. In addition, the agency was able to reward
its employees who were engaged in the health efforts with performance
bonuses for the grueling almost around-the-clock, 7-days-a-week work
that was necessary to meet the legislative schedule. Those bonuses
boosted morale and thereby helped CBO to sustain that intense effort
over a period of many months.
Also, CBO purchased actuarial services that enabled the agency to
consult with experts in the areas of actuarial science and health
insurance. That assistance was valuable to CBO in estimating the
effects of options involving differing packages of insurance benefits
and variations in their actuarial value or scope of covered services,
and proposals to reshape the delivery of healthcare.
new ftes for fiscal year 2011
Question. Why are you requesting four additional FTEs in fiscal
year 2011?
Answer. Now that comprehensive health legislation has been enacted,
the nature of healthcare analysis at the agency changes some, but it
does not go away. CBO will now need to make regular budget projections
for the new and expanded Federal healthcare programs, and it will need
to estimate the budget costs and other consequences of contemplated
changes to those programs. In addition, CBO will probably need to
respond to Congressional interest in exploring other possible changes
to the healthcare system. Continued large Federal budget deficits and
the key role of rising Federal healthcare spending in boosting future
deficits ensure that health issues will remain central to the
Congress's deliberations.
With the staffing level as it was, CBO's health analysts produced
the quantity of health analysis that they did only by adopting an
almost round-the-clock, 7-day-a-week schedule, which could not have
been maintained. And even with that extraordinary effort, the quantity
of analysis that was produced was not sufficient to meet the needs of
many Members of Congress. The formidable work that still remains to be
done in analyzing heathcare is something that CBO hopes to undertake in
a sustainable fashion.
Three of the four additional staff that CBO is requesting would go,
in some combination, to the Budget Analysis Division and the Health and
Human Resources Division. If the needs for health analysis permit, CBO
might reallocate some analysts in the Health and Human Resources
Division from work on healthcare to work on income security and
education--an area in which CBO has fewer analysts than necessary to
meet Congressional needs.
The fourth additional FTE requested is for the Management,
Business, and Information Services Division. That group includes IT
personnel, editors, Web personnel, financial managers, and others. As
CBO has expanded its analytic staff in the past couple of years, the
agency has added some staff in those support functions as well. The
additional position would provide administrative support to enable
senior members of the staff to focus more effectively on their core
responsibilities.
biggest challenge moving forward
Question. What do you see as CBO's biggest challenge moving
forward?
Answer. CBO faces a number of significant challenges that we are
working hard to meet. One such challenge is a growing demand for
analyses of impacts of legislation beyond just budgetary effects. For
example, in the case of the recently enacted healthcare legislation,
there was great interest in proposals' effects on health insurance
premiums and on the nation's total spending on healthcare. (We were
able to address questions on the first but not on the second.) There
has also been much interest in the effects of climate policies on
employment and economic growth. (CBO has produced reports on both of
those topics.) But producing such information on the basis of careful
research and analysis can be both difficult and time-consuming, which
makes it particularly challenging to produce useful results in time for
Congressional consideration of the legislation in question. In order to
accomplish that objective, we need to anticipate the issues that will
arise and the types of analysis that will be requested far enough in
advance to allow us time to build a proper analytical foundation so
that CBO's analysis can be both well-thought-out and timely. We
regularly seek guidance from the budget committees and others as to the
particular issues that are likely to need CBO's attention.
Another significant challenge is recruiting and retaining high-
quality staff, a vital ingredient to CBO's success. This is not a new
challenge, but is one that has to be met every year if we are to
maintain or enhance the quality of CBO's work. It is a difficult
challenge to meet, however, and especially so for Ph.D. economists. The
market for economists is very competitive; salaries are higher in the
private sector, in academia, and at the Federal Reserve and some other
government agencies; and many economists do not think of working for
the government when they first start job-hunting. We continue to
recruit aggressively and to strive to maintain a workplace environment
that will be attractive both to the current staff and to potential new
hires.
shift resources internally
Question. Besides hiring additional FTEs, have you been able to
shift resources internally to better meet Congress's growing demand for
your services?
Answer. CBO frequently adjusts staff assignments in order to
respond to changing legislative priorities--sometimes for a period of
weeks or months, sometimes for longer periods. In the case of
healthcare, the agency shifted the responsibilities of numerous staff
members during the past 2 years in order to meet the great need for
analysis in that area. In the past year, we have also shifted resources
into work on the government's involvement in financial markets,
nutrition assistance, climate change, and student loans. In fact,
because of the growing need for analysis of the government's financial
commitments, we are establishing a separate Financial Analysis Division
in order to more effectively focus resources in that important area.
restrictions in hiring foreign nationals
Question. Please describe why section 704 of the 2010 Omnibus
Appropriations bill, relating to restrictions on the hiring of foreign
nationals in government agencies, is detrimental to your agency. Is
there not enough talent within the United States to support your
agency's needs?
Answer. Section 704 effectively eliminates the ability for CBO to
hire foreign nationals who are not permanent residents. This
restriction has a particular effect on CBO's ability to hire recent
graduates with Ph.D.s in economics, because more than half of such
graduates are foreign nationals. In 2008 (the most recent data
available) 1,091 people received Ph.D.s in economics in the United
States; of those, only 405 were citizens or permanent residents of the
United States. Eliminating access to the majority of these graduates
makes it tremendously difficult to recruit qualified candidates.
This market is particularly important to CBO because approximately
40 percent of the agency's staff members hold Ph.D.s in economics.
CBO's Ph.D. economists conduct economic research and policy analysis of
Federal activities with the objectives of assessing the risk, costs,
and consequences of these activities for the Federal government and for
the economy.
The market for Ph.D. economists is very competitive. Most new Ph.D.
economists, 60 percent, go to academia, and 18 percent go to industry
and business, including financial institutions. The government garners
only about 13 percent. Compensation is generally greater in academia
and industry, and CBO, like other government agencies, is constrained
in the salaries that it can offer.
Another challenge of the market for economists is that recent
graduates have skill sets that are separate and distinct from the skill
sets of more experienced economists. Specifically, recent graduates
have been trained in cutting-edge quantitative techniques, making them
particularly suited to developing and maintaining complex economic
models. In the past CBO has had success recruiting foreign nationals
who contributed to our work while holding various types of visas and
then converted to permanent residency or moved to other positions.
Hence, CBO's Macroeconomic Analysis Division (and specifically the
Fiscal Policy Studies Unit and Financial Markets Unit) has been
particularly reliant on the work of foreign nationals.
______
Question Submitted by Senator Mark Pryor
diversity status
Question. I would like to know how your efforts at diversity are
going?
Answer. As part of the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009, CBO,
like the other legislative branch agencies, was asked to write a plan
related to workforce diversity. CBO first enunciated a policy of
maximizing diversity in recruitment and then completed a statistical
analysis of its workforce to identify areas in which greater diversity
efforts should be focused. The agency is in the process of writing its
plan to address those areas; the plan should be finished by the first
of June.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
Senator Nelson. So thank you. We will stand in recess.
[Whereupon, at 4:40 p.m., Thursday, April 15, the
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of
the Chair.]
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011
----------
THURSDAY, APRIL 29, 2010
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 3:33 p.m., in room SD-138, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Ben Nelson (chairman) presiding.
Present: Senators Nelson, Pryor, and Murkowski.
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES H. BILLINGTON, LIBRARIAN OF
CONGRESS
ACCOMPANIED BY:
JO ANN JENKINS, CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER
DANIEL P. MULHOLLAN, DIRECTOR, CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE
ROBERTA SHAFFER, LAW LIBRARIAN
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR BEN NELSON
Senator Nelson. Good afternoon, everyone. I think what we
will do is we will get started, and when my ranking member
arrives, then we will have her give any opening statement she
would like to make.
I want to welcome all today. We meet this afternoon for our
fourth and final legislative branch budget hearing for fiscal
year 2011. Today, we will hear from the Library of Congress
(LOC) and the Open World Leadership Center.
It is my pleasure to welcome in short order my ranking
member. We have worked very well together, and I know we will
continue to be able to do that, as well in the future. And I
welcome her right now.
And I also want to welcome our witnesses--Dr. James
Billington, the Librarian of Congress, and Ambassador John
O'Keefe, Executive Director of the Open World Leadership
Center. It is good to have you, as well as Ms. Jo Ann Jenkins.
It is good to have you gentlemen and lady here this afternoon,
and we look forward to hearing from you.
If it is possible to keep opening statements brief, around
5 minutes, it would be very helpful. And of course, the rest of
the testimony would be received for the record.
One thing that we have established at our first three
hearings--and I think it bears repeating--is that we intend to
hold the legislative branch flat this year. I believe that
spending restraints start at home, and we need to lead by
example on this subcommittee. We can't do that by appropriating
large increases to our agencies.
I think the President sent the message so loudly and
clearly in his State of the Union Address this year, noting
that families across our country are tightening their belts and
making tough decisions, and the Federal Government must do the
same, he said, and he announced a 3-year freeze on nonsecurity
discretionary Government spending.
The President said, ``Like any cash-strapped family, we
will work within a budget to invest in what we need and
sacrifice what we don't.''
And he warned further, ``If we don't take meaningful steps
to rein in our debt, it could damage our markets, increase the
cost of borrowing, and jeopardize our recovery--all of which
would have an even worse effect on our job growth and family
incomes.''
Dr. Billington, I want to welcome you and your Chief
Operating Officer, Jo Ann Jenkins. Sadly, I understand that Ms.
Jenkins has accepted a position as the executive director of
the American Association of Retired Persons Foundation. When I
say ``sadly,'' I am not sad that you are accepting that
position, I am sad that you will be leaving the Library next
month.
We appreciate the 15 years that you have been a steadfast
presence at the Library, and of course, we wish you the very
best. Among her many accomplishments are her work on the
Library's Bicentennial Celebration, management and oversight of
nine National Book Festivals, the opening of the new Library of
Congress Experience at the Jefferson Building, and the
completion of the Library of Congress and the U.S. Capitol
Police merger.
So, on behalf of the Senate, and in particular this
subcommittee, I want to thank you for your service to the
Library of Congress and very much wish you success and
happiness in your future.
Thank you.
The Library this year is requesting $670 million for fiscal
year 2011, an increase of $31.4 million, or 4.8 percent, over
the fiscal year 2010 enacted level, as well as 30 additional
full-time equivalents (FTEs). I understand about one-half of
these new FTEs and around $5 million are for expanded research
capabilities at the Congressional Research Service (CRS). So I
look forward to hearing your testimony and discussing the
particulars of your request.
As a brief aside, I continue to hear from a number of
organizations concerned about the performance royalties bill
that would affect local radio stations. And I make this brief
note here only because of the Copyright Royalty Board's
potential role under this legislation. And along with many of
my colleagues, I continue to oppose this bill and wouldn't
support an attempt to attach such legislation to an
appropriations bill, whether it is this one or any of the
others, for that matter.
And I also want to welcome Ambassador O'Keefe of the Open
World Leadership Center. Ambassador O'Keefe and I had a
pleasant experience in Lincoln, Nebraska, where he conducted an
evening discussion of the work of the Open World Leadership
that was not limited to Nebraskans, but many from Iowa, Kansas,
and the surrounding areas were there as well. I thought it was
an excellent presentation. I appreciate that.
Ambassador O'Keefe, your budget request totals $14 million,
an increase of $2 million, or 16.6 percent, above current year.
I strongly support the important work done by Open World and
its commitment to Congress and the legislative branch, and I
look forward to hearing your testimony as well.
Now it is my pleasure to turn to my ranking member, Senator
Murkowski, for her opening remarks. And as I said at the
beginning, we have enjoyed a wonderful working relationship,
and I know that is going to continue well into the future.
So the podium is all yours.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR LISA MURKOWSKI
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate
it.
And as we have gone through these series of discussions
with the various entities that are under the oversight of the
Legislative Branch Subcommittee, you have been very consistent
in conveying the message that we do need to be conscientious
about our budgets. We do need to be setting the standard, and
we have been working together well in that regard.
I welcome you this afternoon to the subcommittee and join
the chairman in his comments of welcome to you, Dr. Billington.
It is always good to see you.
Mr. Chairman, you might not have known, but Dr. Billington
was the star in one of our Alaska reports where he was able to
highlight some of the collection that is housed over there in
the Library of Congress that relates to the history of my
State. And I think it was one of our more popular programs in
terms of the viewership. So I commend you for that, and it was
a wonderful learning opportunity.
I also extend my warm welcome to you, Ambassador O'Keefe,
and appreciate your leadership over at the Open World
Leadership Center. Appreciate both of you being here today to
discuss how your agencies are planning to move forward in this
upcoming fiscal year.
Ms. Jenkins, I join the chairman in commending you on your
15 years of service. We greatly appreciate it and wish you well
in your coming endeavors over at the AARP. I know that everyone
who has had an opportunity to work with you will miss you, but
they have appreciated all your years of service.
Mr. Chairman, you have provided the assessment or the
overview, if you will, of the Library of Congress budget
request and mentioned the increase in additional full-time
equivalents, the FTEs, 30 FTEs. I look forward to hearing why
the Library needs these additional FTEs at this time, whether
or not this is a permanent expansion of the Library or perhaps
a temporary solution to a shorter-term situation.
As far as the Open World Leadership Center fiscal year
request, I do understand that the fiscal year 2011 budget
request is only $100,000 over the fiscal year 2009 enacted
level of $13.9 million, but the Center is currently living
within the fiscal year 2010 enacted level of $12 million. So I
am anxious to hear why the Center feels that it needs to return
to the previous funding level. So I will look forward to
hearing your response to that.
And again, welcome both gentlemen and Ms. Jenkins to the
subcommittee.
Senator Nelson. Dr. Billington.
SUMMARY STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES H. BILLINGTON
Dr. Billington. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Senator
Murkowski.
It is really an honor to be here to present the fiscal year
2011 budget request of the Library of Congress just 5 days
after the 210th anniversary of its birth as the Nation's oldest
Federal cultural institution.
I am accompanied, as you both noted, for the last time by
our outstanding Chief Operating Officer, Ms. Jo Ann Jenkins,
who will leave, as you pointed out, to become on June 1, in
fact, president of the AARP Foundation. That happens to be my
birthday, June 1. This is an unusual type of negative present.
But we are grateful for all that she has done.
Now, among those with me today for the first time are
Roberta Shaffer, the new Law Librarian of Congress. Ms. Shaffer
has much experience in the Library and the broader legal
community. And two who have served the Library well for 20
years and will assume new responsibilities in June as members
of the Executive Committee--Robert Dizard, who will become
Chief of Staff, and Lucy Suddreth, who will become Chief of
Support Operations. They are both here as well.
Now, Mr. Chairman and Senator Murkowski, recognizing the
difficult budget environment that you have both mentioned, we
are presenting a lean funding request, a 4.6 percent increase
over fiscal year 2010. Fifty-eight percent of the increase is
for required pay raises for our excellent staff and price level
increases. Sixteen percent is for addressing urgent
congressional needs in CRS. And the smaller remaining requests
are largely to strengthen staff management capabilities and to
support clear Library-wide priorities.
These requests are mainly for people, which are urgently
needed by an institution doing many times more work than in
1992, but with 1,076 fewer employees. Our workforce has become
ever more skilled and creative in order to remain the ``library
of last resort'' and to acquire, as we have, our national and
international leadership role in building a new electronic
library while sustaining a traditional one and the values of
the book culture itself.
Mr. Chairman, the Congress of the United States has created
and, thanks to your subcommittee and your leadership, sustained
the largest, most inclusive, best-preserved record in one place
of both the world's knowledge in 460 languages and America's
creativity in all kinds of fields. In many ways, the Library of
Congress contains our Nation's strategic information reserve,
preserves the cultural patrimony of our free and diverse
people, and is a lighthouse to the world for a whole concept of
a knowledge-based democracy.
We are now nearing completion of a focused effort that I
initiated 10 months ago collaboratively to address Library-wide
management requirements--a mid-course review of our strategic
plan, strengthening governance and processes in information
technology, and integrating the Library's Web presence into the
central core of our work and our management structure across
the entire Library.
In the last 20 years of, in effect, superimposing an
entirely new digital library on top of our traditional
artifactual one, we have created an education-focused National
Digital Library of 19 million items, almost all of which are
original documents of American history and culture. We put
online just 1 month ago in Paris a World Digital Library with
UNESCO support, including some material from the cultures of
all 193 United Nations (U.N.) nations.
We now have enormous digital content and work with 170
partner institutions in this country and 44 different States in
leading a national program to archive important materials
online, in accordance with our congressional mandate.
But in the past 10 years, global book publishing has also
increased by 40 percent. Digital information is proliferating
virally, as we say, but it will never replace our heritage
assets or, indeed, other new physical records that continue to
be added to our often one-of-a-kind collections.
FORT MEADE MODULE 5
Our most critical material need and highest mission
priority this year is for Fort Meade Module 5, as requested in
the Architect of the Capitol's fiscal year 2011 budget. We are
already 8 years behind in the storage schedule for Fort Meade
that we established with Congress and began implementing in
1997. The already functioning modules are efficiently
compacted, magnificently controlled for preservation, and have
provided prompt, 100 percent delivery to our Capitol Hill
reading rooms of all materials so far requested.
This fifth module is essential if we are to sustain our
core mission of preserving and making accessible collections
needed both for present and for future generations. The Library
of Congress is the only institution in the world capable of
sustaining collections on this scale. Our key role for America
in the information age could be compromised, perhaps
irretrievably, if we cannot continue to acquire original
written and published materials.
These artifactual materials often provide the only near-
permanent records of human creativity and, unlike digital
materials, cannot be tampered with, censored, or rendered
inaccessible by technological obsolescence.
Thanks to this subcommittee's wonderful support, in
conclusion, Mr. Chairman, we already have state-of-the-art
preservation storage not only at Fort Meade, but also in
Culpeper at the world's biggest and best facility for audio-
visual conservation. We must continue to grow, preserve, and
provide access to our artifactual collections if they are to
remain usable for Congress, and we will need space to store
them.
PREPARED STATEMENTS
Thank you again for your support for the Library and for
your consideration of our fiscal year 2011 budget.
[The statements follow:]
Prepared Statement of Dr. James H. Billington
Mr. Chairman, Senator Murkowski, and other Members of the
Subcommittee: I am pleased to present the Library of Congress fiscal
2011 budget request.
Mr. Chairman, I am grateful to you and the subcommittee for your
outstanding support for our fiscal 2010 request, which included a major
investment in an initiative to renew and restore the Library's
technological infrastructure. Through the 2009-2010 Management Agenda
process, which I initiated last July, we are enhancing the governance
and internal oversight of information technology investments to assure
the most effective use of, and maximum accountability for, these funds.
In recognition of the difficult budget environment, we are
requesting a total fiscal 2011 budget of $715.5 million, a lean
increase of $31.4 million or 4.6 percent over fiscal 2010. Fifty-eight
percent of this request is for mandatory pay and price level increases.
The largest program element in the modest requested increase for
critical operations is the $4.9 million needed to address urgent
Congressional needs in the Congressional Research Service budget. Our
requested increase of 30 FTEs is necessitated by the greatly increased
workload of the Library during the period from 1992 to 2010, in which
an entire digital library has been added to the traditional library
while the level of FTEs has fallen by 1,076 FTEs to 3,770.
The details of the Library's budget request are described in this
statement. At the start, I want to address a subject of paramount
importance: the Library's collections. Our most critical need and
highest priority this year is Fort Meade Module 5--for which funding is
requested in the AOC's fiscal 2011 budget.
The increased importance of this unique repository of human
knowledge is solidly based on its history. Over two centuries, the
Congress has built its Library into the largest and most diverse
collection of human knowledge ever assembled by one institution. The
Library also preserves the closest thing to a mint record of America's
creativity thanks largely to its exclusive status as the depository of
copyrighted works. It annually collects significant world cultural and
scholarly resources in more languages and formats than any library in
the world. Sustaining Congress' support for the mission of this unique
American cultural institution is more important than ever before in
this ``information age,'' when our economy and leadership depend more
and more on usable knowledge.
When the original library, housed in the Capitol, was burned by
British troops in 1814, Thomas Jefferson within a month offered his
personal library as a replacement. The Jeffersonian concept of
universality argued that all subjects are important to the library of
the American legislature, and this has guided the comprehensive
collecting policies of the Library.
The Library of Congress is the only institution in the world
capable of sustaining collections on this scale. We cannot foresee all
that will be important to those who come after us. But we have
innumerable examples of how past items we saved have proven useful
later in unforeseen ways. We are inspired as well as informed by
preserving the thoughts, anxieties, achievements, and aspirations of
past generations. If we collect less and the Library's collections
diminish, future generations will know that we deprived them of that
open window into their past.
I have been asked, ``When is this going to stop?'' If we want the
Library of Congress to exist for future generations as it does for us
today and has for generations past, it cannot, should not stop. Our
request for Fort Meade Storage Module 5 is not about another building.
It is about preserving our collections and protecting the very essence
of the Library of Congress.
I can assure you that the Library of Congress does not keep
everything. We have carefully thought-out acquisitions policies,
developed and updated regularly by our curators and other experts. We
continually work to improve our collections management, including
inventory management, and with the Congress' great support, we now have
storage modules at Fort Meade to secure and preserve our most valuable
items. We will continue to do everything we can to be more efficient;
but we will continue to need more space to store the Library's growing
collections, and we are heartened by having a 100 percent retrieval
rate from the Fort Meade repositories to our reading rooms.
I have also been asked why we need to sustain collections when so
much content is available electronically. It is a myth that as digital
content has exploded onto the scene, hard copy materials are
significantly declining. In fact, in the past 10 years alone, global
book publishing has increased by 40 percent, and published books are
increasing in number everywhere except (and for the first time this
year) in the USA. The Library has enormous digital content holdings,
but digital information will never replace our heritage assets, the
physical record of knowledge and creativity represented in the
collections. And there is a need to keep hard copies of many materials
in view of the risks of tampering and the impermanence of much digital
material.
The Library of Congress was established out of our forefathers'
conviction that knowledge is important to governance. Jefferson in
essence established our collections policy. I believe that he would
understand why we must continue to build the collections even though we
face challenges in being able to store them, preserve them, and make
them accessible. For the past 210 years, the Congress has made it a
priority, through good times and bad, to allocate resources to properly
fund the Library of Congress--to meet its acquisition and related
storage needs. As a result, people living today have access to an
incredible record of knowledge and creativity.
If we succeed in our mission, our descendents--25, 50, and 200
years from now--will be able to benefit from what we found important to
acquire and preserve in 2011.
Facing both relentless technological change and ever-increasing
demands on the Federal budget, the Library has to be both disciplined
and creative to fulfill its historic mission of service to the Congress
and to the American people.
This budget request is informed by an ambitious 2009-2010
Management Agenda that I launched in July 2009 to ensure that the
Library's investment priorities are focused even as its programs
reflect new ideas and solutions. We have instituted a Library-wide
approach to updating the Library's strategic plan and aggressively
developed coordinated plans for information resource management,
enterprise architecture, human capital management, facilities
management, website content, the acquisition of electronic works
through mandatory deposit, and the creation of a culture of innovation
at the Library.
The Management Agenda also addresses findings from a number of
recent internal management-related studies, including a report from an
internal Library Committee on Strategic Direction, an Inspector General
report on information technology strategic planning, and a Library-wide
employee survey. The agenda will help the Library's Executive Committee
continue to strengthen Library decisionmaking, allocation of resources,
and accountability.
Since its July launch, the Management Agenda has emphasized the
development of results-oriented outcomes, broad involvement from all
levels of Library staff and managers, and implementation of best
practices in Library management structures and processes.
For the Library's fiscal 2011 request, our principal requests for
program increases are for:
Broadening Research Capacity and Enhancing Data Management Technology
to Better Serve Congress on Complex Emerging Policy Issues
Broaden Research Capacity--$2.8 million
The Congressional Research Service (CRS) requests funding and FTEs
in fiscal 2011 to broaden its expertise and strengthen analytical
capacity in the areas of science and technology, healthcare, financial
economics and accounting, and social policy related to employment,
immigration, and the work force. This funding will enable CRS to
enhance its unique multidisciplinary analysis on the range of complex
policy issues before the Congress. The request is the first half of a
2-year initiative to provide the additional analytical skills needed to
fully support the expanding needs of the Congress in these areas. This
additional analytical capacity will also give CRS the long-term
flexibility to adapt to rapidly changing issues and debates that will
arise in these critical areas.
Enhance Technology--$2.1 million
CRS also requests funding to adapt and strengthen its information
technology research architecture in order to meet growing congressional
demands in almost every policy area for analysis requiring an
increasing quantity of complex data. This funding will enable CRS to
create and maintain a state-of-the-art information research
architecture, establish a robust research data management (RDM)
structure, and develop new mechanisms to deliver CRS products and
services to its congressional clients.
Assuring Access to the Collections Now and into the Future
The Library's fiscal 2011 budget request includes modest support
for key operational and technological improvements that directly affect
the delivery of core mission services. The request will support our
newly reorganized strategic planning efforts over the last several
years to prioritize our needs and allocation of resources.
Acquisitions and Bibliographic Access Directorate Space
Reconfiguration--$1.05 million
The request includes support for a reconfiguration of space in the
Acquisitions and Bibliographic Access Directorate (ABA) to realize
efficiencies in acquiring and processing collections materials. This is
a critical core function of the Library. Heretofore these processes
have been based on a century-old library model. Work processes have
been reengineered and streamlined, and now a space reconfiguration is
needed to fully implement our new workflow model by creating
appropriate processing areas, mail receiving areas, shelving, and
secure housing areas.
Collections Inventory Management--$1 million
The requested increase in funding will also help to make inventory
control an ongoing, core function. This funding will support the
continuation of the baseline inventory initiative begun in 2002, as
well as the inventory work related to the transfer of collections to
Fort Meade. The Library is working with leaders in the private sector
to identify and incorporate best practices in inventory control.
Integrated Workflow and System Replacement--$1.35 million
The Library also requests funding to take full advantage of
technology by completing the analysis of Library Services' systems and
workflows begun in fiscal 2009. This effort is developing a process
management system to integrate current systems and databases, thereby
streamlining Library-wide business functions. The Library's renewed
enterprise architecture program will guide the development of the
system. This request also includes support for the replacement of an
inadequate MS DOS-based order, distribution, and accounting software
system used by the Library's overseas offices.
Elimination of Foreign Legal Gazette Backlog and Class K
Conversion--$1.1 million
Finally, to ensure that the law collection is both comprehensive
and current, the Library requests funding for contractual services to
eliminate a preservation backlog of foreign legal gazettes, as well as
personnel resources to reclassify 610,000 volumes in the law
collections. This reclassification will allow new legal specialists to
search and retrieve all portions of the collections, as staff members
most familiar with the older classification system retire.
Investing in Human Capital
Supervisor Development--$1.05 million
In alignment with the Management Agenda's focus on human capital
management, the Library requests an investment in developing
supervisors and staff, as well as funding for a Library-wide student
loan program to support recruitment and retention of the next
generation of Library employees. The request for funding for
supervisory development flows in part from a Library-wide employee
survey, which revealed the need for enhanced supervisory and leadership
skills to develop new and existing supervisors with the skills to hire
and cultivate a diverse and effective workforce.
Staff Development--$1.6 million
The Library requests funding to invest in staff development to
address critical training gaps, and to develop and sustain a culture of
innovation. Funding for the Library-wide student loan program modeled
on the programs of the Congress and the Executive Branch will give the
Library the retention and recruitment tool that it needs.
Ensuring Effective and Efficient Maintenance and Operation of the
Library's Public Spaces and Facilities
Public Space Maintenance and Operations--$1.5 million
The Library's request includes funding to support Library-wide and
public space facility needs. The expanding workload associated with the
greatly increased number of visitors, aging historic buildings, complex
regulatory requirements, and broad new energy conservation initiatives
cannot be accomplished with currently available resources. In fiscal
2011, the Library requests support to address flooring issues in public
spaces, including carpeting that has long ago exceeded its normal
replacement cycle; to implement greening and energy conservation
initiatives; to eliminate an Office of Compliance-reported workstation
safety hazard; to modernize food service areas; and to expand the use
of contract professional design and engineering services as recommended
by the Office of the Inspector General.
Furniture Inventory Management--$391,000
In addition, the request includes funding to implement an ongoing
contract for an automated furniture inventory and recycling system for
furniture reuse. This funding will support the Library's highly
successful furniture inventory and reuse pilot project, which since
2006 has effectively reused 13,196 pieces of furniture to achieve a 3-
year savings/cost avoidance roughly ten times the annual cost of a
furniture inventory management contract. This requested funding will
also support a small stock of high demand, frequently needed items for
rapid provision to offices that are experiencing losses of productivity
because of the long lead time required for procurement processing.
Acquiring In-House IT Capability in the Electronic Copyright Office
(eCO) and Licensing/Royalty Distribution Systems
Copyright Technology Office IT Support--$475,000
In response to an increase in responsibilities related to system
infrastructure and development support for the electronic Copyright
Office (eCO) system on which the great majority of Copyright Office
activities are processed, the Copyright Office requests funding to
acquire in-house IT expertise for the system. This funding will provide
highly skilled and experienced IT professionals to support the eCO
system so that the Copyright Office will rely less on contract support
for day-to-day maintenance and operations. This funding will also
result in more detailed and efficient system implementation and
testing.
Licensing Reengineering Project--$790,000
The Copyright Office also requests funding for contractor support
to complete the implementation of the Licensing Division reengineering
effort to automate the royalty calculations process. Reengineering
Licensing's processes and automating the calculations process will
improve productivity and strengthen responsiveness to both copyright
claimants and users of the public licenses. In addition, the Copyright
Office requests funding for IT staffing to support the reengineered
licensing/royalty distribution system.
The committee last year appropriately expressed concern about the
number of copyright registration applications waiting processing.
Through internal efforts in the Copyright Office and a recent program
which I initiated to temporarily assign 50 other Library personnel to
the Office, we have made a significant reduction--close to 70,000
claims--in that backlog. Both the Register and I will continue to give
this effort a high priority.
In summary, senior management's extensive recent efforts to renew
and improve governance processes and accountability across the Library
account for our fiscal 2011 funding request to support these critical
operational requirements and immediate congressional needs.
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you again for
your support and your consideration of our fiscal 2011 budget.
______
Prepared Statement of Daniel P. Mulhollan
Mr. Chairman, Senator Murkowski, and other Members of the
Subcommittee: Thank you for the opportunity to present the fiscal year
2011 budget request for the Congressional Research Service (CRS). I
would also like to describe how we align our work with that of the
Congress to serve you most effectively and steps we are taking to
ensure continued success in that mission.
alignment of crs work with the congress
CRS works closely with the Congress on a daily basis and has
maintained this working relationship since its inception. Members know
they can count on CRS to be nonpartisan, objective, authoritative, and
confidential. Experts at the Service align their work with the
congressional agenda from the moment a new issue arises and continue to
meet the needs of lawmakers throughout all stages of the legislative
process and across the full range of active public policy issues. CRS
analysts examine the nature and extent of problems facing the Congress,
identify and assess policy options, assist with hearings on policy
proposals and on implementation of existing policies.
We closely support the Senate in the confirmation process involving
executive officers and judges and are currently gearing up for another
nomination to fill a Supreme Court vacancy. A team of CRS attorneys and
procedural experts is also assisting the Senate in preparing for an
impeachment trial of a Federal district court judge. With high profile
treaties on the agenda, CRS will continue its analytical support of the
treaty ratification process. CRS brings a high level of expertise and
institutional memory to assist with these essential constitutional
responsibilities of the Senate.
Highlights of the past fiscal year illustrate the breadth and depth
of services that meet continuing congressional needs for legislative
assistance.
As the financial crisis peaked and the U.S. economy continued to
stall, CRS experts focused on options for economic stimulus under
consideration by Congress: understanding the effectiveness of Federal
spending increases, income tax cuts, and the application of monetary
policy. During formulation, deliberation, and implementation phases of
the stimulus bill, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009,
analysts assessed how the provisions could provide stimulus, in what
ways they could be utilized, and by whom. They addressed debt and
deficit issues and measures of economic recovery. As Congress debated
measures to address weaknesses of the financial system, CRS supported
congressional efforts to reform key elements of consumer finance,
including credit card markets, mortgage finance, and predatory lending.
Experts studied and reported on systemic risk, resolution of problems
of banks deemed too big to fail, mark-to-market accounting, and credit
rating agencies. When the effects of the financial downturn began to be
felt in other parts of the world, CRS analyzed the impact of the crisis
on the European Union, China, Canada, Latin America, and Russia.
The healthcare debate also saw CRS heavily involved in analyzing
the various proposals and consulting with Member, committee, and
leadership offices. CRS formed a health team with participants from
several CRS divisions marshaled to provide a multidisciplinary
perspective on this highly complex issue. Our congressional procedures
experts also responded to many complicated procedural questions that
arose during consideration of legislative proposals. This issue remains
a continuing focus of CRS work.
The President also submitted his first nomination to the Supreme
Court last year. CRS analysts and information professionals, as in
years past, worked closely with Senate Judiciary Committee staff in
supporting the advice and consent process. CRS prepared analyses of
court of appeals decisions of Judge Sotomayor and developed resources
available on our website to assist with the hearings and Senate
deliberation of the nomination.
Other congressional concerns required impartial CRS policy
analysis, such as the influence of Iran's policies on the security of
the Middle East region, Afghanistan stabilization, and the handover of
major security missions to Iraqi forces; unemployment compensation, job
creation, and training needs resulting from the severity of the
recession; food and drug safety; and responses to the potential public
health threat of an H1N1 influenza pandemic. Additional examples of
support include analysis of environmental and climate change concerns,
U.S. energy security and independence; the crisis in the automobile
industry and subsequent bankruptcies of large automobile companies and
suppliers, the U.S. missile defense program and its technical
capabilities, national security issues and military law regarding
wartime detainees, and the increase of drug trafficking violence at the
U.S.-Mexican border.
CRS management consults with congressional leadership regularly to
ensure that the Service's research agenda is aligned with lawmakers'
needs. To confirm that CRS remains aligned with the Congress and
supportive of its legislative needs, we appreciate your support for
engaging outside expert assistance to inform and reinforce our efforts
to align our work with the congressional agenda. We recently entered
into a contract with LMI, a not-for-profit strategic consulting firm,
to evaluate independently CRS's current staffing models and procedures
to determine how effectively we are meeting our statutory mandate. LMI
has gathered both qualitative and quantitative information from
committees, subcommittees, Members and staff and CRS staff. We were
proactive in contacting over 3,700 staff members by e-mail before the
distribution of a staff survey by LMI to encourage a strong response
rate. That effort produced a response rate with a margin of error of
less than 3 percent for the data. LMI conducted interviews with Members
or senior staff from 15 congressional offices and focus groups with
staff from the House and the Senate--all groups selected using a
stratified random sample. LMI will also report on best practices for
research organizations geared to ensuring responsiveness to client
needs, and assess communication channels, including a Member Advisory
Committee, that would ensure that CRS remains aligned with the work of
the Congress and the needs of its clients. In addition, LMI conducted
meetings with CRS staff. We expect their final report in August.
On January 15, 2010, CRS implemented telework for its non-
bargaining unit staff, following guidance in the conference report that
CRS have in place by January a telework policy modeled on that of the
Library. Following negotiations with CREA, the certified bargaining
representative, and with the help of a mediator from the Federal
Mediation and Conciliation Service, we reached a formal agreement on
March 26, 2010. We will modify the telework agreement for non-
bargaining unit staff so that it conforms to the agreement reached with
CREA, and will implement telework for all CRS staff on May 3, 2010. CRS
has invested significant resources to set up a robust infrastructure to
support those who seek the telework option. I believe that the telework
policy implemented for CRS staff provides the benefits to employees of
an additional alternative work arrangement. At the same time the policy
preserves the ability of CRS to be there when Congress needs us and to
remain fully aligned with the legislative agenda and your work
patterns.
crs as shared staff
We understand the difficult budget outlook, and CRS is prepared to
play its part in arriving at a responsible budget for the next fiscal
year that achieves critical agency objectives within a constrained
funding environment. Congress faces enormous challenges in fashioning
policy on high-profile issues such as health, immigration, the aging
population, the conduct of two wars, burgeoning technological
advancement, and financial restructuring. In CRS, Congress has at its
disposal adjunct staff available to every Member and committee. This
means that Member and committee offices need not hire the specialized
expertise that CRS is able to retain and make available to all
congressional offices and committees as shared staff. In difficult
budget times, CRS offers a model that achieves economies and savings
and at the same time affords the Congress the expertise and resources
it needs to legislate wisely and in an informed manner with respect to
the complex issues that confront it and the country.
In that regard, before explaining our budget request, I want to
discuss briefly a matter that relates to this model that Congress
intended for CRS and the constitutional status of CRS and the Library
of Congress. As the Library has already informed you, in February, the
Federal district court in Live365, Inc. v. Copyright Royalty Board,
preliminarily rejected a challenge to the Librarian's authority to
appoint Copyright Royalty Judges ruling that it was likely that the
Library would prevail on its argument that the Librarian of Congress is
the head of a department who may appoint such officers under Article II
of the Constitution. The court relied in part on an earlier 1978 case--
Eltra Corp. v. Ringer--which upheld the Librarian's power to appoint
the Register of Copyrights. The judge noted the Eltra court's findings
that the Library was a hybrid agency with both executive functions
(e.g, the Copyright Office's registration function) and legislative
functions (e.g., CRS).
I feel that the hybrid formulation captures the original intent of
Congress in placing CRS within the Library. Congress extensively
debated the relationship between CRS and the Library prior to the
creation of the modern CRS in the Legislative Reorganization Act of
1970. At the time, it was thought ``the Library serves as a useful
mantle for protecting the Service from partisan pressures. Furthermore,
the effectiveness of the CRS will be enhanced by its continued instant
access to the Library's collections and administrative support
services.'' I believe that that rationale is still valid today and that
the model that the Congress devised back in 1970 works. While CRS
remains open to any change the Congress deems advisable, the overall
relationship whereby Congress' policy research and analysis support arm
is housed within the Library of Congress is a valuable one worth
preserving.
fiscal year 2011 budget request
The CRS budget request for fiscal year 2011 is $119,919,000, with
almost 90 percent devoted to pay and benefits for our staff. This
request includes funding for mandatory pay increases and price-level
increases due to inflation, added staff with specialized technical
skills and policy expertise, and an upgraded information architecture
supporting ready access to the many and varied data sets required for
research. CRS continues to operate at its lowest staff level in more
than three decades, and the small percentage of non-pay expenditures is
limited to basic operational needs. Therefore it is necessary to
request additional funding when investments are needed to expand or
upgrade the capabilities of the Service to meet the growing policy
demands placed upon Congress.
An internal review of our capabilities to analyze the evolving and
increasingly complex challenges facing the Congress identified gaps in
the specialized skills needed for comprehensive multidisciplinary
analyses and assessments. This budget request includes $2.8 million for
17 of the 34 FTEs needed to rectify these concerns. Thirteen of these
34 positions would enhance scientific and technical capabilities in
areas such as energy, climate change, information technology, military
weapons, and security and provide additional expertise in disciplines
such as physics, engineering, and biology. Eight positions would
provide new skills in analyzing the healthcare industry, health
informatics, and veterans' health. Another eight positions would focus
on financial regulatory and oversight issues with expertise in
financial accounting and auditing, consumer financial protection,
credit markets, and financial derivatives. The remaining five positions
would be skilled in labor economics, demography, tax policy, and
statistics to support the analyses of issues pertaining to employment,
immigration, workforce, and economic well-being. This 2-year targeted
increase in staff would require that CRS return to a FTE total that is
only four over the level authorized in fiscal year 2007. These experts
would have a direct impact on providing all relevant information and
analysis needed for informed decisions.
The budget request also includes $2.1 million to address our need
to manage in a more sophisticated way the rapidly growing data
necessary for authoritative analysis. We must invest in tools and
services to establish an architecture that accommodates changes in
technology. With this funding, CRS would create service-wide frameworks
for data sets that would allow for efficient access to reliable data
and full utilization of its contents. This investment would also allow
us to employ modern content delivery capabilities, including
interactive maps, data set mining, personalization features such as
content tagging, and enhanced access to CRS products from mobile
devices. Delays in this investment would cause a decline in efficiency
and effectiveness as problems would increase due to technological
obsolescence.
conclusion
This budget request identifies the resources needed for the
talented and dedicated staff of CRS to provide the full scope of
information and analysis that is relevant to the work of Congress. CRS
scrutinized the plans for this spending to ensure the returns justified
the investment in this period of difficult economic conditions. My
colleagues and I have and will continue to examine every activity and
program for efficiencies and reduce or eliminate costs where possible
while fulfilling our mission. We are proud of our unique role in
providing comprehensive, non-partisan, confidential, authoritative, and
objective analysis to the Congress, and we thank you for your support.
Thank you.
______
Prepared Statement of Marybeth Peters, Register of Copyrights,
Copyright Office
Mr. Chairman, Senator Murkowski, and other Members of the
Subcommittee: Thank you for the opportunity to present the Copyright
Office's fiscal 2011 budget request. Today I will discuss my fiscal
2011 budget request for additional funds and FTEs to support the
electronic Copyright Office system and for offsetting authority and
FTEs to complete and maintain the Licensing Division Reengineering
effort. I will also highlight some of the Office's accomplishments and
challenges of fiscal 2009 and 2010.
support of the united states copyright system
The Copyright Office administers the U.S. copyright law, under
which owners of creative works register claims to protect their
copyrights, cable and satellite companies and other users of statutory
licenses pay royalties related to their statutory licenses, and
publishers and other distributors of works published in the United
States deposit copies of copyrightable works for possible addition to
the Library's collections. Congress enacted the first copyright law in
May 1790; in 1870, it centralized the administration of the Federal
copyright law in the Library of Congress. The Copyright Office
typically handles more than 500,000 copyright claims each year,
representing well over one million works, and transfers copies of
selected copyrighted works to the Library's collections. In fiscal year
2009, the Office received 532,370 claims to copyright and registered
382,086 claims. It transferred to the Library over 739,000 copies,
valued at over $32.2 million. The Office as a whole answered almost
360,000 non-fee information and reference inquiries and served a
substantial number of visitors to the Public Information Office and the
Copyright Public Records Reading Room.
The Licensing Division of the Copyright Office receives royalty fee
payments related to licenses that deal with secondary transmissions of
radio and television programs by cable television systems; secondary
transmissions of superstations and network stations by satellite
carriers; and the importation, manufacture, and distribution of digital
audio recording devices and media. In fiscal 2009, the Licensing
Division collected more than $262 million in royalties from cable and
satellite companies subject to statutory licenses, accrued more than
$10.5 million in interest on royalties for the copyright owners, and
distributed close to $273 million to copyright owners. The Office moved
forward with reengineering the Licensing Division and building an
electronic filing system.
highlights of copyright office accomplishments and challenges
Addressing the Copyright Office Backlog
As discussed in its December 31, 2009 report to you, the Copyright
Office has been focusing on reducing the outstanding backlog of
applications for copyright registrations. As highlighted in the report,
the Copyright Office's backlog reduction efforts are in three key
areas: additional staff; improved technology; and increased eService
usage. We added over 30 Registration Specialists: 17 in spring 2009 and
16 in January 2010. Those hired in 2009 are now fully productive; the
class of 2010 is in training and currently productive in several
categories of works. We improved the technology, supporting the
processing of serial publications in the fall of 2009, through a
combination of new hardware installation and new software. Finally,
eService, the online copyright claims submission system, is now the
predominant new claims filing method, accounting for over 70 percent of
our weekly filings.
In addition, between January and March 2010, the Librarian of
Congress provided short term resources to assist in reducing our claims
backlog. Fifty-one Library technicians were assigned to this effort,
focusing on clearing over 43,000 serials (approximately 10 percent of
our processable claims backlog); many television programs and audio
books and more than 10,000 pre-screened performing arts/sound recording
claims. Through the combined efforts of the Copyright Office and
Library staff, and despite weather related closings, we achieved our
goal of reducing the backlog by 100,000 claims. The Copyright Office is
grateful to the Librarian and the Library as a whole in supporting our
efforts to resolve the backlog issues.
Operations Activities
The Copyright Office implemented its business process reengineering
project at the end of fiscal 2007 and released eService, the electronic
Copyright Office (eCO) online registration system, in July 2008.
eService filings quickly displaced the use of paper applications,
constituting 54 percent of all claims received for fiscal 2009 and 72
percent for the first quarter of fiscal 2010.
In addition to the backlog reduction work previously discussion,
the Copyright Office focused on: long-term strategic improvements to
the eCO system; modified its fee schedule; completed preparations for
the Copyright Records Digitization Project; and as part of our
succession planning effort, established a new leadership training
program.
In the Summer of 2009, the Office awarded a contract for major eCO
software upgrade that will improve eService user processing, improve
Copyright Office throughput time, and in a later version, provide
automated statistics to support internal management.
Processes
Through a continuous improvement initiative, the Copyright Office
further refined its reengineered processes. For instance, Registration
Specialists proposed two changes adopted by the Copyright Office: one
resulted in decreasing the time required for the copyright deposit
dispatch process; the other led to improved inter-divisional
communications, resulting in faster problem resolution. We also
examined our mail operation and throughput times in our Receipt,
Analysis and Control Division which resulted in improvements in data
entry and processing of correspondence. We expect to continue our
improvement efforts by identifying additional areas where efficiencies
can be achieved.
In August 2009, the Copyright Office adjusted its fee schedule to
reflect post-reengineering operational changes. Fees associated with
filing copyright claims were adjusted to reflect processing costs, with
eService filings remaining at $35, and paper claims increasing to $65:
a reflection of the increase in the cost of processing paper claims.
eService claims are less costly: they do not require data entry and
they require fewer quality controls. Other fee services, such as
research or certified copies of deposits, were also adjusted to more
closely reflect the actual costs of the service.
Organization
As previously mentioned, during fiscal 2009, the Office hired 17
registration specialists. The new hires were immersed in an accelerated
training program combining classroom instruction with actual claims
processing in the production environment. As of this month, 16
registration specialists achieved independence in claims processing. A
second class of 16 registration specialists was hired in January 2010
and is currently engaged in an accelerated training program. The
addition of 32 new registration specialists will significantly increase
our production capacity. Recruitment for both groups was extensive,
with a special effort made to attract underrepresented populations into
our workforce. The interest level was overwhelming, allowing us to
select a high caliber of new Registration Specialists.
In mid-2008, the Copyright Office realized the need for a good
succession planning program and a corresponding need to implement a
leadership training program. In the spring 2009, we launched the
Aspiring Leaders Program with an inaugural class of 12 participants.
This is a competitive program in which candidates from the across the
Copyright Office were selected to participate in a series of education
programs focusing on leadership, communications, decisionmaking, and
strategic thinking. Participants also had detail opportunities to other
Federal agencies including the National Archives, Smithsonian
Institution, and offices thought the Library of Congress. Our goal is
to offer this program to other Copyright Office staff on an annual or
bi-annual basis.
Information Technology
In fiscal 2009, the Copyright Office continued to make significant
improvements to the eCO system through periodic software development
releases and hardware installations. The cumulative effects of these
actions are better system performance, stability and enhanced
functionality for both Office staff and online filers. This included
expanding the eService capacity to accommodate up to 500 concurrent
users and ensuring its stability through an automatic backup system
that will operate if the primary system fails. Also, in November 2009
the Library of Congress Information Technology Service installed a new
computer hardware suite that resolved recurring system throughput
issues, improving the accessibility of eCO information by the Copyright
Office staff.
System improvements are continuing through fiscal 2010 as the
Office is engaged in a major eCO upgrade designed to improve eService
customer experience, improve Copyright Office throughput time, and in
future versions, the automated capability to provide automated
statistical software. The project includes an upgrade to the newest
version of the software application that drives eCO and the
installation of new network hardware. The initial implementation,
scheduled for June 2010, will be followed by subsequent releases
introducing new system functionality based on feedback elicited from
internal and external users. Expected improvements in eCO system
performance and functionality will ultimately result in increased
production and decreased registration processing times.
For fiscal 2011, the Office seeks approval to hire three new highly
skilled IT specialists to provide expertise in the areas of project
management, business analysis, requirements definition, and system
testing. Providing for more in-house IT support will result in direct
and indirect cost savings by reducing reliance on contractors for
ongoing maintenance and operations, enhancing our ability to undertake
critical projects, improving project and resource management, and
improving testing methods.
Copyright Records Digitization Project
We made significant progress on our Copyright Records Digitization
Process during fiscal 2009 and early 2010. Based on an extensive
analysis of our existing records, we determined that, since 1870, the
year the registration function was moved to the Library thereby
consolidating the copyright functions in the Library of Congress, 34
distinct processes have been employed to capture and preserve copyright
data. Each process, from the large books signed by the A.R. Spofford,
the Librarian of Congress in 1870, through the handwritten and typed
card catalogue, and even a citizenship certification signed on a
playing card, required testing to ensure the best possible image could
be captured and stored for preservation and public use.
Based on the analysis, the Copyright Office will undertake the
following steps to complete the digitization task and allow full public
access to the country's copyright records:
--Complete imaging the Catalog of Copyright Entries (660 volumes).
This is a 6 month process and should be completed by the fall
2010;
--Complete imaging of 2.5 million assignment cards. This should also
be completed by fall 2010;
--Begin imaging the 49 million card catalogue by catalog series,
beginning with the most recent (1977) data and working
backward;
--Begin metadata creation for imaged records to ensure public
searchability. This is a manual process and must be done for
each image; and
--Begin the cross referencing between and integration of imaged
records.
I look forward to sharing our progress on this project at future
hearings.
Licensing Division Reengineering
In fiscal 2009, the Licensing Division resumed its reengineering
efforts, reviewing its current administrative practices and underlying
technology, performing a needs analysis for future operations, and
beginning to design its re-engineered systems. This included developing
an operational baseline, consulting with external stakeholders and
preparing the organization for the change process inherent in
reengineering. The goals of this reengineering effort are to: decrease
processing times for statements of account by 30 percent or more;
implement an online filing process; and to improve public access to
Office records. In fiscal 2010 the Congress authorized the Licensing
Division to use $1.1 million from the royalty pools to cover the
reengineering costs and associated supporting software. Earlier this
month the Office released a Request for Proposal to support this
effort. As part of our fiscal 2011 budget request, we requested an
additional one time authorization of $500,000 to cover any unforeseen
reengineering expenses. As always, any funds not expended will be
returned to the royalty pools. We are also asking for authorization of
2 FTEs and $285,000 to cover ongoing system costs and maintenance for
the new information technology system.
Legal and Policy Activities (Domestic and International)
The Office worked closely with the staff of the Senate Committee on
the Judiciary on the reauthorization of Section 119 of the Copyright
Act, a statutory license available to satellite services for the
carriage of certain-over-the-air television signals, which was to
expire on December 31, 2009. In 2008 the Office submitted its report to
Congress on updating this license as well as two other statutory
licenses; this report served as the beginning point of this past year's
legislative activities. During the year much discussion ensued and the
Senate introduce S. 1670. However, work on this legislation was not
completed by the end of last year and since then Congress has enacted
several temporary extensions of the section 119 statutory license.
The Office spent significant time during the year evaluating the
legal and business implications of the ongoing Google Book Settlement
litigation. The Office assisted the Justice Department in preparing its
Statement of Interest filed September 18, 2009 for the October fairness
hearing. That hearing was postponed when the parties announced that
they were amending the settlement agreement to address concerns that
had been raised by a wide range of parties. An amended settlement
agreement was filed with the court in early November and the fairness
hearing was rescheduled for February 18, 2010. The Office once again
assisted the Department of Justice with its second Statement of
Interest, filed February 4, 2010. Both statements expressed concerns
about the effect of the settlement on copyright law and policy and on
competition. Additionally, the Office assisted the Justice Department
in a number of court cases, including the preparation of amicus briefs
filed with the Supreme Court concerning the interpretation of various
provisions of the Copyright Act and filings in other cases involving
constitutional challenges to the copyright law.
The Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009 mandated that the Copyright
Office prepare a report for Congress on the copyright treatment of pre-
1972 sound recordings; this report is due in March 2011. Specifically,
the Office has been directed to study the desirability of, and means
for, bringing sound recordings fixed before February 15, 1972 under
Federal jurisdiction. Sound recordings fixed before February 15, 1972
are governed by state law which in many cases is not well defined. The
Federal copyright law allows states to protect these pre-1972 sound
recordings until February 15, 2067. Work on this complicated issue is
underway, and we expect to meet our deadline.
On the policy front, office attorneys spent considerable time in
2009 examining the ways in which the United States provides copyrighted
works in accessible formats to the blind, visually impaired and print-
disabled. The Office led an extensive consultation process regarding
the operation of the U.S. exception, 17 U.S.C. Sec. 121, generally
referred to as the ``Chafee Amendment.'' The Copyright Office website
contains the record of this public process. The Office also conducted a
day-long public meeting to explore the topics raised in the comments it
received. These included: the operation of the Chafee Amendment for the
general reading public as well as for students at the K-12 and college
levels; the cross-border movement of accessible works for the blind and
visually impaired; the role of technology; the role of trusted
intermediaries; and existing systems for providing accessible versions
of copyrighted works to the blind. The Office has worked diligently
with other U.S. Government agencies in preparing for and attending
meetings of the World Intellectual Property Organization's (WIPO)
Standing Committee on Copyright, which has this issue on its agenda.
The Office is currently working with the Library's National Library
Service for the Blind, as well as with advocates for the blind and
other stakeholders to explore ways to improve standards, resources and
responsible cross border movement of works in accessible formats.
Finally, during the week of March 8, the Office and the WIPO sponsored
an international training program at the Library of Congress. The
program focused on exceptions for the blind in the United States and
other countries and consideration of a series of timely questions about
resources, technical standards and market solutions designed to improve
accessibility in the digital world, an area in which the United States
has long been a leader. Attending were representatives of developing
countries and countries in transition as well as experts from various
parts of the world. Speakers included government and private sector
experts from the United States and other countries. Staff from the
Judiciary Committees of the Senate and House spoke on ``Copyright
Policy on Capitol Hill.''
Additionally, the Copyright Office assisted Federal government
agencies with many multilateral, regional and bilateral negotiations
and served on many U.S. delegations, including negotiations regarding a
proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement and negotiations and
meetings relating to the implementation of intellectual property
provisions of existing Free Trade Agreements and Trade Promotion
Agreements. The Copyright Office also participated as part of the U.S.
delegation at various meetings of the WIPO.
conclusion
Mr. Chairman, I ask you to support the Office's fiscal 2011 budget
request for two FTEs and additional offsetting authority to complete
and maintain the Licensing Division Reengineering efforts and
additional FTEs to provide long-term support for eCO, our information
technology system.
I also want to thank you for your past support of the Copyright
Office reengineering efforts and its budget requests.
Senator Nelson. Ambassador O'Keefe.
Thank you, Dr. Billington.
STATEMENT OF AMBASSADOR JOHN O'KEEFE, EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR, OPEN WORLD LEADERSHIP CENTER
Ambassador O'Keefe. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator
Murkowski, Senator Pryor. I appreciate the opportunity to
testify on the Open World Leadership Center's fiscal year 2011
budget request.
As a unique congressional center and resource, Open World
is the dynamic catalyst for hundreds of international projects
and partnerships that constituents have developed with emerging
leaders from the countries of Eurasia. More than 6,000
volunteer American families in all 50 States have hosted 15,500
young professionals. More than 75 percent of Open World's
fiscal year 2009 appropriation was expended on U.S.-based goods
and services.
Our U.S. hosts immersed these professionals in American
life and values, contributing $1.9 million in cost shares.
American volunteer hosts have enthusiastically stepped forward,
keeping the demand for 2010 visitors at nearly triple our
supply.
In the past year, we have intensified our continuing
efforts toward working with Senators, Representatives, and
their staffs in coordinating programs with civic organizations
in towns across America. We have doubled the number of Members
of Congress who have met with our delegates. The Open World
Board of Trustees has also directed the Center to draft a new
strategic plan with goals that will engage Members of Congress
and their constituents even more.
We brought delegates from all 83 regions of Russia, all
parts of Ukraine, from the Caucasus and central Asia. They now
constitute 10 percent of the Russian Duma, one-third of the
Council of Judges, and are the engines for change in fields
from education to medicine.
In the security sphere, for example, a Georgian Open World
participant has been promoted to be his country's first
``cybersecurity czar.'' As he crafts Georgia's strategy to
thwart the emerging threat of cyber attacks, he has reconnected
with Department of Homeland Security experts that he met on our
program.
In a very recent example, a Kyrgyz parliamentarian, whom
the Montana Senate majority leader both hosted in Helena and
then visited in Bishkek, is one of the leaders writing the new
constitution in Kyrgyzstan right now following the April
revolution.
Open World offers an extraordinary ``bang for the buck'' in
terms of efficiency, cost effectiveness, and value. The Center
boasts an overhead rate of 7 percent, and every grant contains
cost-shared elements. Unfortunately, to keep costs down, I had
to let go one of our nine staff here in Washington.
Funding at the $14 million level requested by the Board of
Trustees will enable the Center to resume its important
nonproliferation program, bringing nuclear experts to enhance
working relationships not covered by other programs. We will
expand to Armenia, Uzbekistan, and Belarus and will fund a
full-time development expert.
With your support, Americans throughout the United States
will engage a promising new generation of political and civic
leaders--parliamentarians, mayors, environmentalists, anti-
human trafficking activists, and others--in a dialogue that
has, for example, doubled the number of Rotary Clubs throughout
the regions we operate in and created 20 sister courts.
PREPARED STATEMENT
This unprecedented congressional program has proven to be
an exciting vehicle for linking grassroots professionals and
emerging leaders. It helps create more transparent and
accountable governments and expands cooperative arrangements
between America and Eurasia.
Thank you very much for your attention.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Ambassador John O'Keefe
Mr. Chairman, Senator Murkowski, and other Members of the
Subcommittee, I appreciate the opportunity to present testimony on the
Open World Leadership Center's budget request for fiscal year 2011. The
Open World Leadership Center, of which I am the Executive Director, is
a unique congressional center that is a resource for Members of
Congress and their staff and constituents. It seeks to assist Congress
in its foreign policy oversight responsibilities and aid Congress in
interparliamentary and similar legislative activities. In this
capacity, the Center conducts one of the largest U.S. exchange programs
for Eurasia, through which some 6,100 volunteer American families in
all 50 states have hosted thousands of emerging leaders from former
Soviet countries. As a result of these exchanges, hundreds of projects
and partnerships beneficial to all have been initiated and enhanced.
All of us at the Center are very grateful for Congress' continued
support, and to the Members of Congress who participate in the Center's
Open World program and who serve on our governing board. We look
forward to working with you, other Members of Congress, congressional
interest groups, and volunteer hosts throughout the United States to
set the future path of Open World.
The Board of Trustees suggested that the Center seek greater
congressional involvement in the Open World program and develop a
strategic plan that makes our agency an even more valuable resource for
the legislative branch. I am pleased to share with you that nearly one
out of two program participants in 2009--48 percent--met with Members
of Congress or their staff. When our board convened on February 4,
2010, we discussed important legislative components of a new strategic
plan for 2012-2016, and I look forward to sharing these components with
you as we develop them.
Allow me to update you on the Center's operations and some recent
program accomplishments. More than 15,000 emerging leaders from Russia,
Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova,
Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Lithuania, and Uzbekistan have participated
in Open World. Significantly, more than 48 million Muslims reside in
countries where Open World is active, and these countries have
approximately 2,000 miles of shared borders with Iran and Afghanistan.
Since its inception, the Center has awarded grants for overseeing
our U.S. exchanges to 60 organizations headquartered in 25 different
states and the District of Columbia. These grantee organizations host
delegations themselves or award subgrants to local host organizations
to do so. By 2010, well over 600 local host organizations--including
universities and community colleges, Rotary clubs and other service
organizations, sister-city associations, and international visitor
councils and other nonprofits in all 50 states and the District of
Columbia--had conducted Open World exchanges for the Center.
More than 75 percent of Open World's fiscal year 2009 appropriated
funds were expended on U.S. goods and services through contracts and
grants--much of it at the local community level. American volunteers in
48 states and the District of Columbia home hosted Open World
participants in calendar year 2009, contributing a large portion of the
estimated $1.9 million given to the program in the form of cost shares.
In fiscal year 2010, Open World had a 14 percent reduction in
appropriated funds. As a consequence, Open World terminated one of its
most important but costliest programs, the nonproliferation exchange
program for Russian nuclear experts and decision makers. Nevertheless,
through cost shares, contract renegotiations, donations, and an
interagency transfer, the Center was able to maintain the quality of
the Open World program as well as to double the number of participants
from the Republic of Georgia.
The Center's budget request of $14 million for fiscal year 2011 was
reviewed by our Board of Trustees. We will seek to fulfill our Board-
approved strategic plan to expand to Armenia, Uzbekistan, and Belarus,
as well as to bolster our development efforts. At this level, we will
bring 1,400 participants in calendar year 2011. We estimate that,
again, more than 75 percent of the appropriated funds will be spent on
U.S. goods and services, including nearly $4.5 million in direct grants
to American host organizations. The funds will allow thousands of
Americans throughout the United States and their counterparts abroad to
generate hundreds of new projects and partnerships and other concrete
results.
open world program results
There are many examples of solid, productive results from the Open
World program:
A Moscow principal who is pioneering inclusive education at her
school instituted new curriculum activities for her students with
disabilities--and became an advocate for Individualized Education
Programs for special-needs students--after her 2008 Open World
education exchange to Worcester, Massachusetts. Russian President
Dmitry Medvedev met with this alumna and toured her institution on
September 1, 2009, the first day of the Russian school year. The
Russian president was impressed by the curriculum additions and by the
alumna's point that inclusive schools like hers do not receive any
government funding to defray the cost of the extra services provided to
special-needs children. President Medvedev said he would have the
Ministry of Education look into this funding issue and praised the
alumna's school for being in the vanguard of inclusive education. The
school visit was covered by three national TV channels.
In agribusiness, a Moldovan alumnus, Dr. Gheorghe Arpentin,
commenced a series of Skype online lectures recently at the request of
North Carolina grape growers, many of whom have recently converted
their fields into grape vineyards. The first lecture, on using organic
viticulture, was well received; Dr Arpentin's recommendations were
referred by members of the North Carolina Wine and Grape Council to
North Carolina State University, where they are now being field tested
on North Carolina soils for prospective application. Dr. Arpentin was
recently named a deputy minister of agriculture. His second lecture is
scheduled for late April 2010.
This is what one of the American participants in Dr. Arpentin's
first Skype class had to say:
``The SKYPE Lecture on Grape Growing by Dr. Arpentin from Moldova
was exactly what we needed. We Americans tend to reach for `chemicals'
to increase our crop productions. Dr. Arpentin directed us to `go
natural with use of select rotated wild grasses' which will increase
our yield, decrease bitterness of the grape, maximize plumpness and
yes, save us money. With Moldova's 3,000 year history of successful
grape growing and wine making and with Moldova's awards in the field, I
listened closely and learned.''
In an example touching on U.S. security interests, Open World
Georgian delegates involved in drafting their country's personal data
protection act met in November 2009 with House Energy and Commerce
Committee staff members working on H.R. 2221, the Data Accountability
and Trust Act, to discuss and compare their legislative provisions.
Upon returning home, one of the delegates became the director of the
Georgian Ministry of Justice's Data Exchange Agency, which is
responsible for the nation's cybersecurity and e-government program. He
continues to communicate with those he met on Open World, including
representatives from the Department of Homeland Security's Computer
Emergency Readiness Team and congressional staffers.
At the Civil Society Summit held in Moscow last July in conjunction
with the U.S.-Russian Presidential Summit, 12 of the 75 American and
Russian attendees were Open World partners. All 12 now serve on working
groups for the U.S.-Russian Bilateral Presidential Commission, which
was created as a result of the presidential summit to explore new
opportunities for U.S.-Russian partnership. In January 2010, a Russian
alumnus was invited back to Washington, DC, where he had spent much of
his 2008 Open World visit, to participate in the inaugural meeting of
the Commission's civil society working group. The alumnus, who heads a
nongovernmental organization (NGO) that aids homeless, exploited, and
at-risk children and teens in Astrakhan Region, is an authority on
child welfare issues, a major focus of the working group's first
meeting. He is also active in advocating for Russia to create a
counterpart agency to the Virginia-based National Center for Missing
and Exploited Children, which he first learned about--and visited--
during his Open World exchange. This same alumnus was just appointed to
and made chairman of the Astrakhan city election commission.
Open World alumni are continuing to climb up the ladder into
leadership positions while bringing about changes from the periphery in
and the bottom up. The Open World Leadership Center tracks these and
other such results using eight categories, or ``bins,'' such as
partnerships with Americans, alumni projects inspired by the Open World
experience, and benefits to Americans. Since launching a results
database in August 2007, Open World has identified more than 3,000
results (see attached Results Chart).
open world and congress
As a U.S. Legislative Branch entity, the Open World Leadership
Center links Congress to experienced and enthusiastic citizens
throughout the United States who are engaged in projects and programs
in Open World countries, and actively supports the foreign relations
initiatives of Congress. The Open World program routinely involves
Members in its hosting activities and is responsive to congressional
priorities. Seven of the 18 congressional members of the Commission on
Security and Cooperation in Europe (Helsinki Commission) met with Open
World delegates last year. The Center also regularly consults with the
Congressional Georgia Caucus, the Congressional Ukrainian Caucus, the
Russia Caucus, the Congressional Azerbaijan Caucus, the Congressional
Caucus on Central Asia, the Friends of Kazakhstan Caucus, other
congressional entities, and individual Members with specific interests
in Open World countries or thematic areas.
Some examples of Member and congressional staff interaction with
Open World in 2009 and early 2010 are:
--In February 2009, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Ranking Member
Richard Lugar of Indiana met with four Turkmen parliamentary
deputies taking part in Open World, including International and
Interparliamentary Affairs Committee Chairman Batyr Berdyyev.
They were able to compare notes on legislative jurisdiction,
schedules, campaigning, and staffing with Senator Lugar. The
group also discussed how the United States and Turkmenistan are
dealing with the global economic crisis, and briefly reviewed
Turkmenistan's proposal in the U.N. General Assembly to create
an international security system for transnational energy
pipelines.
--In October 2009, five Tajik journalists visiting Connecticut joined
Senator Christopher Dodd at the award ceremony for the Thomas
J. Dodd Prize in International Justice and Human Rights. The
award was presented to the Committee to Protect Journalists and
the delegates had the opportunity to talk about issues related
to the freedom of press with the senator and other journalists
at the event.
--In January 2010, Congressman David Price of North Carolina hosted a
group of Moldovan parliamentarians in Raleigh and then in
Washington, DC. The group's visit coincided with that of
Moldovan Prime Minister Vlad Filat to both of these cities in
order to further cement sister-state relations between North
Carolina and Moldova. The Moldovan delegates proposed and
discussed the idea of forming a North Carolina Caucus in their
parliament.
--In September 2009, Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison met with an
Open World delegation of Kazakhstani women leaders, including
Bakhyt Syzdykova, Kazakhstan's youngest member of parliament.
Representative Robert Aderholt of Alabama, a cochair of the
Friends of Kazakhstan Caucus, also met with Syzdykova and
discussed the idea of establishing a relationship between the
Alabama Youth Legislature and the Kazakh Youth Parliament.
Since then, we have begun making plans to bring regional
coordinators for the Kazakh Youth Parliament to Alabama on an
Open World exchange.
--Pennsylvania Representative Allyson Schwartz, cochair of the
Congressional Georgia Caucus, met in November with Georgian
parliamentarians to discuss opportunities for future
collaboration with the Caucus, and Georgia's geopolitical
situation.
--Open World partnered with the International Conservation Caucus
Foundation in co-hosting the visit of Russian environmental
leaders. Senators Tom Udall of New Mexico and Sheldon
Whitehouse of Rhode Island met with the delegation, which
included representatives of the Russian Duma, to discuss issues
related to preserving endangered species and protecting the
environment.
--Open World arranged meetings with alumni leaders for the members of
a Senate staff delegation during their late August-early
September visit to Moldova, Georgia, and Russia. In Moldova,
the congressional staff delegation met with mayors who had been
hosted in North Carolina in 2007 on Open World. During this
meeting, the staff delegation presented the mayors with letters
of greeting from North Carolina State Representative Larry
Brown and Winston-Salem Mayor Allen Joines, who had both taken
part in the Moldovan mayors' Open World visit.
--At the invitation of Chairman Eni Faleomavaega of the House
Subcommittee on Asia, the Pacific and the Global Environment,
Open World Executive Director John O'Keefe participated in
December in a roundtable discussion with high-ranking
Kazakhstani government officials about their country's human
rights record and chairmanship of the Organization for Security
and Cooperation in Europe.
Open World plans to build on these congressional partnerships and
to be even more active in serving Congress.
nonappropriated open world funding
The Center, which is authorized to receive contributions from
private sources, has redoubled its efforts to seek a wide range of
supporters to increase and further diversify funding and strengthen the
Open World program through cost-share partnerships. The major sources
of nonappropriated funding are direct contributions from foundations
and individuals, interagency transfers of funds, cost shares from Open
World grantees and American hosts, and other forms of in-kind
contributions, especially for Open World's alumni program, which
receives no appropriated funds.
In an effort to track the very generous in-kind support Open World
receives from grantees and American citizens, the Center in 2007
initiated a cost-share reporting requirement for all grantees
participating in the program. We received $1.7 million in donated goods
and services from hosts and grantees in 2008--equal to 19 percent of
the Center's fiscal year 2008 appropriation. While the exact figure for
2009 will not be available until later this spring, early estimates
indicate it will be near $1.9 million.
As an example of cost shares from grantees, Supporters of Civil
Society in Russia (SCSR), the American partner of the prestigious
Moscow School of Political Studies (MSPS), contributed $95,000 worth of
lodging, meals, interpretation services, and other goods and services--
53 percent of the total U.S. programming cost--to bring one group of 20
emerging Russian leaders nominated by MSPS to St. Louis, Missouri, in
April 2009 and another group of 28 to Chicago, Illinois, in October
2009 for intensive accountable governance programming. Open World
awarded a 2010 grant to SCSR to host again in both these locations with
a similar cost share.
Concurrently, Open World actively seeks donations from private
sources. In 2009, Open World Trustee Walter Scott made a 3-year pledge
of $525,000 from his family foundation to support Open World programs.
Under the expert guidance of our development consultant, the Center is
also approaching other individuals and organizations interested in the
region.
Reciprocal visits by Americans to Open World alumni help fulfill
Open World's mission of strengthening peer-to-peer ties and
partnerships. These visits by American professionals, hosts, or
grantees involved in Open World are self-funded. For example, in May
2009, eight representatives of the League of Woman Voters, an Open
World grantee organization, traveled to Moscow, Kaluga, and St.
Petersburg, Russia, and discussed electoral processes and women's
political leadership with more than 25 alumni who had been hosted by
various chapters of the League. Numerous U.S. judges and legal experts
involved with Open World exchanges also make independently financed
reciprocal trips to meet with program alumni. In 2009, American jurists
involved with Open World's rule of law program made 59 reciprocal
professional visits to Open World countries to meet with program alumni
and senior judicial leaders to discuss judicial reform.
Direct contributions from individuals, foundations, and other
private sources during the same time period totaled more than $400,000.
A fiscal 2009 interagency agreement with the National Endowment for the
Arts (NEA) supported all the hosting costs (up to $500,000) of the
Russian Cultural Leaders Program.
Finally, the Center has temporarily engaged the services of a
development consultant. In tandem with helping define and update our
strategic goals and agency mission statement, this specialist will help
the Center establish an in-house capacity for fundraising.
open world 2010 activities, 2011 plans, and 2012-2016 strategic
planning
Interest in the Open World program remains vibrant within the
American hosting community. The ``demand'' for Open World visitors from
Russia in 2010 is more than double the ``supply''--potential American
grantees applied to host up to 1,816 Russian participants, while the
Center will only have funding to bring 750 to the United States. For
the 2010 Ukraine program, demand was triple the supply of available
hosting slots, and for Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan,
Moldova, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan, potential grantees proffered a
total of 1,158 hosting slots, while Open World can afford to host only
314 visitors from these seven countries.
Open World continues this year to host in thematic areas that
advance U.S. national interests in general, and congressional interests
in particular, and that generate concrete results while strengthening
the ties between American communities and their partners abroad. This
programming emphasizes and builds on Open World's incremental successes
in such areas as governance (focusing on the legislative branch's role
in helping to bring about good governance and affecting public policy),
the rule of law, human-trafficking prevention and prosecution, and
environmental issues. This year Open World will also increase its non-
Russian programming to approximately 46 percent of its total
programming, which is double Open World's 2007 level of non-Russian
programming.
One example that demonstrates Open World's commitment to supporting
existing partnerships and initiatives is our involvement with the 15-
year-old relationship between Maryland and Russia's Leningrad Region.
Open World has sponsored 14 Leningrad-Region delegation visits to
Maryland since 2002, helping this sister-state partnership work on such
substantive areas as accountable governance, education, social
services, and the rule of law.
In turn, the State of Maryland has funded reciprocal visits to
Russia. In August 2009, a delegation of Maryland educators led by the
director of international affairs of the Maryland Secretary of State's
Office visited Leningrad Region. Then in December, an official Maryland
Sister States delegation met in Russia with over 40 Open World alumni
associated with this partnership and worked with government officials
to nominate an Open World delegation of Leningrad regional legislators.
These regional legislators were hosted for Open World in January
2010 by the Maryland Secretary of State's Office. The delegation spent
much of its time in the Maryland legislature, focusing on how a state-
level legislature functions and on the legislative process. Other
programming covered such topics as legislative advocacy, lobbying,
ethics, state taxation and fiscal structure, and economic development.
The Center will also continue women as leaders programs, like the
one planned in April 2010 for a delegation of women parliamentarians
from Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan. Their programs will focus on women's
issues, with the Kyrgyzstani leaders participating in Congresswoman
Eddie Bernice Johnson's Women's Peace Initiative in Dallas, Texas, and
the Kazakhstani leaders being hosted in Illinois by Congresswoman
Debbie Halvorson.
In 2010 and 2011, the Center will actively seek to host more
regional legislators--especially legislators from Central Asia and the
Caucasus, based on congressional interest. We will have a large pool of
newly elected regional legislators to draw from. Rule of law
programming for Open World countries whose judiciaries demonstrate
continued movement towards independence will also have a focus.
Finally, with Board approval and in consultation with the
Appropriations Committees, the Center is prepared in 2011 to expand the
Open World program into other countries.
By the end of this fiscal year, the Center will have finalized a
new strategic plan spanning 2012-2016 with a focus on making the Center
an even more valuable resource for Congress and its constituents. There
will be in-depth program changes to increase congressional involvement
in Open World and focused efforts to provide support to the constituent
hosts who have established programs and partnerships in Open World
countries. The Board, in its preliminary discussion of the new
Strategic Plan, suggested considering the following:
--Ensuring that a substantial portion of future program participants
are legislators, either at the national, regional or local
level.
--Engaging more Members of Congress to host Open World
parliamentarians.
--Increasing the percentage of Open World delegations that meet with
Members of Congress, congressional entities, and/or
congressional staff to discuss issues of relevance to both
sides.
--Ensuring that every delegation gains a working understanding of the
role of the U.S. Congress and state and local legislatures in
government operations.
--Adding subthemes to Open World programming to highlight how
citizens and interest groups work to affect the legislative
process at the Federal, state, and local levels.
fiscal year 2011 budget request
Funding at the requested level of $14 million will enable the
Center to fully respond to congressional interests in the region and
beyond while continuing its proven mission of hosting young political
and civic leaders who return home to launch projects and programs in
cooperation with their American counterparts and hosts. The Board of
Trustees believes that maintaining a robust grassroots-based Open World
presence in the region is necessary and important for future U.S.
relations in these politically significant countries.
The budget request, in conjunction with projected donations and
cost shares, will also allow the Center to increase hosting to a level
of approximately 1,400 total participants. Actual allocations of
participant slots to individual countries will be based on Board of
Trustees recommendations and consultations with the Subcommittee and
the U.S. Embassies in these countries. The requested funding will also
help offset an expected decrease in prior year recovered funds and
Trust revenue income.
Major categories of requested funding are:
--Personnel Compensation and Benefits and other operating expenses
($1.73 million);
--Contracts ($7.8 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 temporary health insurance for participants; and
--Grants ($4.47 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,
--Community activities,
--Local transportation,
--Professional interpretation,
--Administrative support.
conclusion
In an increasingly connected world, where citizen ambassadors on
Main Street are conducting important work in the sphere of public
diplomacy, Open World gives community leaders a unique institutional
base in the legislative branch for partnering with Congress while
providing them with the resources to succeed. As Dr. James Billington,
chairman of the Open World Board of Trustees, stated at the annual
Board meeting on February 4, 2010:
``Citizen diplomacy is becoming much more important. In an
increasingly connected world, it is not just State Department officials
but North Carolina farmers who now have access to a deputy minister in
Moldova. And the Federal judge who hosts counterparts in Kentucky is
now in direct contact with a supreme court justice in Ukraine. The
secretary of state from Maine regularly exchanges emails with the mayor
of Arkhangelsk, Russia. Open World helps create these and thousands
more lines of communication.''
Open World offers an extraordinary ``bang for the buck'' in terms
of efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and value. The Center boasts an
overhead rate of about 7 percent, every grant contains cost-shared
elements, and more than 75 percent of our appropriation is plowed back
into the American economy every year. At the local level, where the
funds and the jobs are most needed, our delegates, as part of their
``after hours'' Open World experience, participate in American life at
local restaurants, cultural sites, sporting events, shopping centers,
and other places in the community. During the professional portion of
their local program, they not only benefit from working with their
American counterparts, but also share their own expertise in turn. In
this way, the Center is both a mini-stimulus plan as well as a true
international exchange program.
Funding the 2011 Open World program at the requested level of $14
million will allow Americans in hundreds of Congressional Districts
throughout the United States to engage up-and-coming Eurasian political
and civic leaders--such as parliamentarians, environmentalists, and
anti-human trafficking activists--in projects and ongoing partnerships.
Americans will, once again, open their doors and give generously to
help sustain this successful congressional program that focuses on a
region of profound interest to U.S. foreign policy. To that end, the
Subcommittee's interest and support have been essential ingredients in
Open World's success.
Senator Nelson. Thank you.
Why don't we go to a 6-minute round of questions?
ACQUISITION STRATEGY AND STORAGE COSTS
Two years ago, at our request, the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) looked at the Library's management
of its collections. One of their recommendations was that the
Library develop a Library-wide strategy for making its
collection available in electronic form, both as a means of
providing greater access to its collections, as well as a
substitute for physical storage.
Now I heard what you said, Dr. Billington, about making
certain that the original copies are available because of the
potential of altering anything that is digitized. Is there any
way that we can find to be able to overcome the costs of the
actual storage of such materials? For example, is it possible
to have, in some cases at least, fees for the ability to do
that?
I know in the case of copyright, the Copyright Office is
self-sustaining in terms of the copyright fees. But that
doesn't include the storage, ultimate storage, which is what is
creating the challenge for us, one of the challenges that we
have right now.
So it is a broad question, but is there a way to overcome
this situation because it is driving up our storage costs?
Dr. Billington. Well, Mr. Chairman, in terms of exploring
cost recovery as a factor, I know you have mentioned that to
us, and I have already asked the staff to prepare a careful
study of that. So we will get back to you in detail on that.
On the question of storage, our authorizing committee asked
us to look into this, and we found the company in the private
sector that may be most analogous to the Library in terms of
the volume of storage that they contend with and the issue of
storage overall. Their engineers are specialists in this. This
is Amazon we are talking about.
Their people concluded that no meaningful solution for
long-term effective collection management can be implemented
until more space is created; that there is no realistic
alternative. I could go into the reasons for this in detail.
The modules at Fort Meade are enormously efficient for this
purpose because of their size and ultimate scale. They contain
enormous amounts of material already. But we add 2, 2.5 million
analog items every year, even in the face of the digital
explosion. There we have a shared program, national program
with the many other institutions that I mentioned.
ADDITIONAL SPACE FOR COLLECTIONS ESSENTIAL
But there really is no alternative to having more space,
and that was confirmed, as I say, by experts, objective experts
in the private sector. There is danger in our current
circumstance of having 200,000 books that are on the floor of
the stacks now because we are at full capacity on Capitol Hill,
despite the fact that we have shelving that reaches almost from
here to Chicago, somewhere between Detroit and Chicago, if you
put the shelves end to end. We are the only comprehensive
collection of its kind in the world.
Maintaining, not merely acquiring these things, but having
them inventoried and accessible, becomes very, very difficult
when you get this much new material in and there is no place to
put it. You have a situation where you are going to be tempted
to severely cut back on acquisitions. We are studying
acquisitions, as you suggest. We did a very exhaustive study a
couple of years ago, and we are now taking a comprehensive,
fresh look at it.
But there is a danger, if there is a gap in acquisitions,
that the most recent things later will be more and more
difficult to acquire and to afford and to make accessible. And
that reduces the value of your collection by more than just one
year's missing or reduced capacity, because the gaps pile up,
and pretty soon, you lose what is an enormous advantage to the
United States--not just to the Library of Congress and to the
Congress and the Government itself--of having a collection that
is comprehensive.
Because we include in our collections items that nobody
else acquires, and all other libraries and other research
libraries in this country are under even more severe
restrictions than we are these days, whether it is from the
university, municipal, or State budgets. And so, maintaining
the Library of Congress as the ``library of last resort,'' as
the library that is able to answer questions that cannot be
fully answered elsewhere, even by the vast amount of digital
material that is available, is very important.
RECOUPING COPYRIGHT STORAGE COSTS
Senator Nelson. Well, what about going to the area of
copyright where you could not only get the copyright processing
covered, but the ultimate storage as well?
Dr. Billington. Yes. Well, copyright storage is included in
the fee costs. Costs and fees are reevaluated every third year.
So it is actually a part of the fee computation to include at
least a percentage of the storage cost.
There is some relief in sight in copyright despite problems
we have had. We undertook a massive effort to bring the
processing backlog under control; 50 people worked to help
overcome these backlogs. But now 75 percent of registrations
are processed electronically, and so that should help a great
deal.
But all collections, of course, do not come through
copyright. Copyright is only one source. We have gifts. We have
exchanges. We receive collections material in a variety of
different ways and, of course, through very extensive
purchasing. We have the overseas offices as a source not just
for us, but for any other research library in America that
wants to seriously keep up their foreign language collections.
But the margin between what the Library of Congress
provides and what any other institution provides is growing
rather than declining. Therefore, the need to sustain this
national resource is, I think, growing even faster than the
necessary costs of sustaining it.
Senator Nelson. Thank you.
Senator Murkowski.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
TWITTER ARCHIVE
Dr. Billington, I would like to ask you about the new
media. You mentioned that the number of volumes, I guess, out
there is just growing exponentially, and we recognize that
there is another world out there that is growing insofar as the
level of communication. And I understand that earlier this
month, the Library of Congress entered into a gift arrangement
with Twitter to donate its digital archive of the public Tweets
to the Library.
A couple of questions for you. First of all, I am just
coming into the world of Twitter and using it to keep in touch
with my constituents. But the question that I would have to you
first is a pretty basic one. How will the Library use this
information? What will the purpose be?
And then, second, how do you retain this archive of Tweets,
recognizing just how much is out there? Will you archive the
Tweets to the Library on an annual, quarterly basis? How do you
update this digital information, recognizing the rate with
which it will be coming to you?
And then, finally, I am curious to know how we deal with
the cost side of it. I assume that because the archive of
public Tweets was donated that there is no initial cost to the
Library, but I would have to imagine that there would be some
cost associated with receiving or organizing.
So if you could just speak to this, I am very curious. It
seems like you are embarking into a bold new world where no man
hath gone before. So more power to you, but it is kind of
interesting to understand how we would integrate this within
the Library of Congress.
Dr. Billington. Well, the short answer is there are some
short-run surprises, happy surprises in the answer to your
question, and there are some long-run questions that we will be
in the process of intensively examining over the next few
months.
A short-run surprise is that, first of all, this is a gift,
and the preparation and delivery of it will be done by the
Twitter company themselves. Twitter will bear the cost of
preparing and transferring it to the Library's servers. I am
surprised but also reassured that the cost to technically
support the collection will be very minimal because we can
absorb it in our existing infrastructure--the basic technical
infrastructure.
ACCESS TO TWITTER COLLECTION
Our cost of taking and storing the archive then will be
minimal, but we will need to look into how to catalogue it, how
to make it retrievable, while addressing privacy needs and how
we make it accessible--this is a classic acquisitions problem.
How we make it available would be defined by our basic
acquisitions policy. These are all challenges that we will be
addressing intensively in the next months. So far, for the
initial period, this is really pretty much a gift that we can
accommodate.
How we make it available, how we deal with it, that is
important not simply as it relates to this one collection. It
is important because this is not going to be the last of the
technological innovations. In order to continue our historic
mission of acquiring, preserving, and making accessible the
world's knowledge and the Nation's creativity, we must
incorporate these new media.
And something else, this process of studying new
technologies and ways to make them available is part of our
relating much more intensively the new digital world to the
basic world of acquisitions and the core mission, the historic
mission. There has been no change to the mission of the
Library. The media through which knowledge and information and
creativity in America are conveyed are going to change and keep
on changing.
We feel that the process of integrating the Twitter
collection and finding out exactly how we use it, how we access
it, and so forth will be a useful learning process for the next
few changes and innovations. Otherwise we fall behind and
become less comprehensive than this institution has
historically aspired to be ever since it acquired Jefferson's
then virtually universal library in 16 languages.
So this is a new language, if you like. I can't tell you
the answer, but I can assure you that we are going to be
looking into these problems very intensively and will be
informing this subcommittee and others here in the Congress of
our discoveries and conclusions.
Senator Murkowski. Well, as you point out, this is just
kind of the beginning of the acquisition of the social
networking media. And it will be a challenge.
FORT MEADE AND COMPETING PRIORITIES
I want to go back, just very quickly if I can, to the
storage issue that the chairman has raised, and particularly
collection storage Module 5 at Fort Meade. In order to fund
this at $16.9 million and recognizing that we are trying to
balance the priorities out here, we have got to balance the
Library's request with the AOC's request and each of the other
agencies within the legislative branch, are there any other
increases within your budget that you could perhaps delay so
that you could move forward?
Because I understand that this is the number one priority
is the storage collection Module 5. And first of all, I guess I
want to make sure that I am correct in that, that this is that
high priority. And if so, is there anything else that, again,
could be delayed in terms of taking it up this year so that we
could help address this aspect of the storage?
Dr. Billington. Well, there is not much question of the
Library's priority. It is clear that in terms of the things
that the Architect of the Capitol (AOC) is requesting with
regard to the Library that this is by far the top priority
because this affects core mission and continuity. We are 8
years behind in the schedule that was agreed to way back in the
1990s. And so, this is our priority in the Architect of the
Capitol request.
Now within our own budget, I have been talking with the
Executive Committee in view of the concern about levels of
funding. I would say that we have to have as our first priority
sustaining core services--the mandatory pay raises and price
level increases. I can give you a detailed scenario, if you
want it, in writing.
Senator Murkowski. Well, if you would help us out with
that, Dr. Billington, and I know it is difficult to rank, if
you will. But I think it is going to be important to us. I
think we appreciate that from the perspective of being able to
meet your core mission, you have got to have the storage
capacity. You have indicated that the backlog, the 8-year delay
in this, and we appreciate that.
But if you could perhaps help us out, put it in writing, I
think that that would be helpful for the subcommittee.
Dr. Billington. Okay. Well, we will be happy to do that.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you.
Dr. Billington. In general, I can say that if we have to,
if we have to balance that against our budget submission, or if
we have to absorb the cost of living allowances (COLAs), the
mandatory COLAs and so forth, we would have to cut, in some
cases perhaps even eliminate, some of the other things that we
have done in recent years. We have already looked very
intensively at the possibilities, and we would have to probably
reenter any such programmatic cuts for funding in the 2012
Federal budget.
We have not considered training for cuts; with minimal
funding we have produced some training programs to get the most
out of our people. It would be largely people and the people-
centered things that we would have to preserve. The demands,
when you have so many fewer people than we have had, really are
very great, and the need for continuous training, because of
the sophisticated nature of our work, is very great.
Our Chief Operating Officer has played an important role in
developing some of these programs. I can itemize them for you,
but we will get you a detailed study if you want----
Senator Murkowski. I would appreciate it.
Dr. Billington [continuing]. Of how we would proceed.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you.
Dr. Billington. As I say, it is in process. So we should be
able to give that to you fairly rapidly.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Nelson. Yes, thank you, Senator Murkowski.
MANDATORY PAY INCREASES
At the risk of being indelicate, would you explain the
mandatory COLAs? If we don't have a union contract, what would
be mandatory about COLAs or salary increases? Not suggesting
that people shouldn't expect salary increases, but help me
understand the structure that you are talking about.
Dr. Billington. Well, yes, 90 percent of this is absolutely
mandatory by law, and the rest is more or less required. It is
very difficult to avoid it. We have very little discretion,
except in the senior level.
I don't have the authority to withhold or change pay
adjustments for the 90 percent and really can't do it for most
of the rest, except for maybe senior-level pay, which we
wouldn't cut. It won't save you very much.
Anyhow, I can provide more detailed legal information if
you would like. We have looked into this quite extensively.
Senator Nelson. Yes, it would be helpful to understand that
because that was a new concept to me. I didn't realize--I
didn't believe there was a union agreement. But if there is
statutory responsibility, we obviously have to follow it. I
would just like to know what it is. It would be helpful.
Oh, yes?
Ms. Jenkins. I just want to add that it isn't necessarily
union agreements, but under title V, employees who are in GS or
wage grade positions are automatically entitled to certain
increases. That represents 90 percent of our staff. So the
other 10 percent would be senior management, which is not
mandatory. But for 90 percent, under title V, it is covered,
according to our counsel.
COLLECTION POLICIES AND COST
Senator Nelson. I understand. Okay. Thank you.
I am intrigued by the access of the Tweets through a gift.
I would imagine that the costs, while not necessarily involving
the storage, would come from trying to figure out how to have
access, protect the right to privacy, and that. Do you have any
idea or do you have anyone looking at what that might involve
in terms not simply of activity, but what the costs of putting
that kind of a program in place is because we would be talking
about something fairly sophisticated, I would assume?
Dr. Billington. Yes, the material won't be delivered for a
while. We will have time to examine and analyze all options.
One of the things in addition to the management agenda that I
established in July, is a governance board whose challenge is
to integrate the whole digital universe directly, more directly
into the established policies of acquisition, preservation, and
access.
And so, they are going to have to examine these questions
thoroughly. I set it up in January and they have been meeting
since February. How to provide access to electronic information
like the Twitter collection is one of the big challenges that
will have to be covered.
I am not sure I heard exactly a specific question.
Senator Nelson. Well, I realize it is probably not a fiscal
year 2011 matter, but I suspect that it could be coming at us
in the fiscal year 2012 budget or some future budget and am not
suggesting that this not be accomplished. What I am suggesting
is that we have a cost-benefit analysis that needs to be made
on this. It is one thing to receive it. It is another thing to
create the opportunity for access.
Dr. Billington. Yes. It is currently estimated that a small
team over the next 6 months will devote about 144 hours or
under $10,000 to the details of handling the archive. I think
that it is probably going to end up costing a little more than
that, but we will give you clear progress reports on this.
WEB GOVERNANCE BOARD
But I have set up, as I say, in January a Web governance
board to determine and execute a Library-wide strategy, Web
strategy for the future. That Board has been meeting, getting
the content people and the specialists in Web matters together,
hammering out policy options. And that is an ongoing activity.
Unlike a lot of the management agenda, which is nearly
completed--the eight task forces, which will shortly get their
final reports in--this will be an ongoing enterprise, in
addition to the team that I have just mentioned, which will not
be very expensive.
Incorporating the latest technologies is a challenge, but
if we did not take this on, we would risk losing early exposure
to what is clearly going to be an increasing communications
phenomenon of our culture.
Senator Nelson. Well, there is no question that it is and
it ought to be preserved. I will have to try to figure out the
probative value or societal utility of having access from the
general public to the Tweets. Retaining it and preserving it is
one thing. Creating what might be access could be not only
costly but, I don't know, of questionable value to the average
person. Curiosity is at a certain level, there is no doubt, but
I don't know what the societal value would be of that for
access. So I hope you would look at that aspect of it.
Dr. Billington. No, our use for it--it was also conveyed to
Google. We won't have the main responsibility to be the
processor of every request. But how it is to be handled and if
we have it for different purposes than they do are questions at
this point. Google may be able to do some things that we can't
do. They probably will.
Our job is to do exactly what you say. It is easier to
compute the cost than it is to define the benefits. But the
overall benefit is one of keeping this unique repository of the
world's knowledge and of America's creative expression, that
deals with the phenomenon of change in our society.
Senator Nelson. I understand, but it is not quite like a
book you can check out.
Dr. Billington. No.
Thank you, sir.
ADDITIONAL SPECIALISTS FOR CRS
Senator Nelson. On CRS, you are requesting 17 new FTEs for
the Congressional Research Service to broaden the research
expertise. How did you arrive at the number, and if funded,
will you be requesting more FTEs for CRS in fiscal year 2012?
In other words, is this something that is an ongoing
requirement? Or is it a backlog of Member requests, or perhaps
you could give some explanation as to why there would be a
request of this size?
Dr. Billington. I will just say one word and then give it
to Director Mulhollan of the Congressional Research Service.
But basically, it is a phenomenon of the reduction in staff at
a time when the complexity and volume of requests has
increased. So it is their analytic response to your requests.
By ``you,'' I mean the Congress. There is a strong interest in
scientific and technical matters that have become far more
complex, with far more requests coming in far more frequently.
So it is 2 years, as I understand it. It is a 2-year
phenomenon to regain some of the very considerable amount of
lost staffing that has occurred over recent years. But the
Director can answer it more fully.
Senator Nelson. Sure.
Mr. Mulhollan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I appreciate the question. How we arrived at it is we took
a top-down view throughout the service with regard to what the
demands are now and what we anticipate the demands will be in
the future, as well as our current capacity. And what that
capacity is in a number of areas.
What we are asking for is a total of 34 positions, 17 for
fiscal years 2011 and 2012, which would get us back to slightly
more than the 705 FTE level we had in fiscal year 2007. Why do
we need to get back to that earlier level? One example is that
13 of those positions are in science and technology. I am sure
you both have heard about the need for increasing capacities
and the demands on the Congress in these areas.
Just recently, the Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs Committee of the Senate reported out S. 1649, which
authorized $2 million for 3 years to increase CRS's science and
technology capacity, as an example. This is something that the
Congress is going to be facing. And what you have in CRS, I
would argue, is a cost-effective tool and a shared expertise.
You have a physicist that can work for Commerce, Science,
and Transportation in the morning, for Armed Services in the
afternoon, and Environment and Public Works in the evening. It
is shared expertise. It is cost effective.
Second, we are asking for eight researchers with expertise
in financial regulation and the financial services industry,
and eight on the health side. Our experience is that my
colleagues in both those areas did not have a 2-day weekend for
over a year. And I foresee that demand in the future.
Because of the demands in the future, we feel that these
are reasonable requests. I haven't asked for additional FTEs
for CRS since fiscal year 2003, and so I hope you view us as
being prudent with the taxpayers' hard-earned money. But we are
looking at what Congress needs and the incredible challenges
being faced. The shared expertise you have here is a good
investment.
Senator Nelson. I understand.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
OPEN WORLD LEADERSHIP CENTER
I will go to Ambassador O'Keefe. I don't want you to feel
left out here this afternoon.
Back when we had the fiscal year 2010 legislative branch
conference report, we included some language in that that
encouraged the Open World Leadership Center to expand its
effort to raise private funding in order to reduce requirements
for appropriations, and then in this hearing last year, I had
asked a question about outside funding sources. This was as it
related to the United States-Russia Foundation and whether or
not there could be a possibility of some funding to the Center.
Can you speak, Ambassador, to the issue of any efforts to
raise private funding to help offset some of the funding
requirements and kind of where we are in some of these efforts?
Ambassador O'Keefe. Yes, ma'am. I can speak to that.
FUNDRAISING EFFORTS
Last year, we raised $413,000 in outside funding. For this
year, we are projecting $619,000. So we have got a bit of a
boost.
With regard to foundations, we are seeking grants not only
from the United States-Russia Foundation, but from other
foundations. We have not yet been successful in getting those
grants.
In terms of more structural approach, as I mentioned, we
reduced staff by one. I have hired an expert on a 6 month
contract to help us find our way with a really good, solid
funding strategy, to help us develop the kinds of basic
materials that will have the funds manager at a foundation
actually look at what we have.
So I can't say that we are rolling in dough or that we will
be rolling in outside funding next year, but I can tell you
that we have this effort moving forward. I don't want to take
up too much time. But I would also mention that we will seek
funds from individual donors as well.
EXPANSION OF THE OPEN WORLD PROGRAM
Senator Murkowski. Then let me ask about the Center's plans
for expanding the exchange program into other countries. I
think you mentioned Belarus and Armenia. I think you mentioned
three, did you not?
Ambassador O'Keefe. Uzbekistan was the third, Senator. Yes.
Senator Murkowski. Uzbekistan, okay. What does it cost to
start up a program in other areas? As far as expansion costs,
what does this mean to the Center, and give me a little
background there.
Ambassador O'Keefe. Start-up costs are, depending on how we
approach it, about a minimum of $50,000 or so to get the
logistics contractor to function in the country. What we look
for is whether they have existing offices. But then we have to
pay for whatever additional staff they need.
We have taken a slightly different approach in the latest
expansion in Turkmenistan. We skipped the logistics contractor
and just had the Embassy do the logistics for us. It was 30
percent cheaper. We could do it there because the Embassy staff
wasn't as pressed as in some of the other countries where we
have a more robust relationship.
I would say that entry cost is not prohibitive. We can
manage it. The reason for the three countries is that it is not
simply part of the strategic plan, but these three distinct
areas--central Asia, Caucasus, and that slowly changing
European border, which seems to move back and forth--are areas
important to United States interests.
And in particular, I would stress that in Uzbekistan and
Belarus, there has been limited exchange because of strained
relationships. Because we are a legislative branch agency and
because we are associated with the Library, we have a much
easier time of operating and attracting people in the program
in those countries.
Senator Murkowski. If you were held to the fiscal year 2010
funding level of $12 million, how would it impact the
operations, the staff level? Would you be able to move forward
with these proposed expansions? Just give me some assessment as
to what it might look like.
Ambassador O'Keefe. Yes, ma'am.
FREEZE LEVEL SCENARIO
I would say that if we are at the same amount, we are going
to have to cover increased costs in our information technology
(IT) contract and in our logistics contract. So to cover those
costs, we would probably reduce numbers. Expansion would be
held off for the time being.
One of the things we might seek, as I mentioned, is cost
shares. If we could find an organization to do a 50-50 cost
share in any of these three places, we would consider it.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you.
COPYRIGHT APPLICATIONS BACKLOG
And then, Dr. Billington, I just have one last question for
you, and this is as it relates to the Copyright Office. Can you
give me any detail on the extent of the backlog right now
within copyright and how you are addressing the backlog issue?
Dr. Billington. Well, very briefly, the current backlog is
326,000 claims. We expect to return to a normal processing
level, 150,000 claims, by this time next year, roughly
speaking. We realize that we were not responding as quickly as
we had hoped and so the Library detailed at the beginning of
this year 50 Library employees outside of copyright to make a
kind of storming effort to reduce this, which they did very
successfully.
We are getting there, and the prospect of deliverance comes
both from the fact that they have hired a lot of new people,
and they had this big jolt from additional staff effort. But
also, the electronic registration system now covers 75 percent
of the claims now, up from 54 a year ago. And so, automation is
rapidly helping address the problem, as we hoped.
And with the few FTEs that are required to complete the
electronic registration process, this should be a one-time
concern that we can overcome by this time next year.
Senator Murkowski. Good. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
TECHNOLOGY INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING AND PROGRESS
Senator Nelson. Dr. Billington, in fiscal year 2010, the
Library received $15 million for technology infrastructure
upgrades. Can you give us an update on how these funds have
been used and what the Library has been able to accomplish with
fairly large investment?
Dr. Billington. Well, the general picture is that about $9
million of that is going to deal with the hard technology and
the supporting software, networking software, which will
fortify the three major data centers of the Library, which are
the Capitol Hill complex, Culpeper, and Manassas, where the
backups are. $3.5 million will deal with content, the content
problem, and $2.5 million with content presentation.
We are in the process of getting this much more precisely
defined. But by and large, this is--that is the rough
definition of the work. But we are in the process, as I say, of
getting this much more exactly defined, and we will get you a
more detailed account shortly.
INVENTORY MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES
Senator Nelson. Sure. And in the new request for fiscal
year 2011, you have included $1 million for inventory
management. How will this money be expended, and what will that
accomplish?
Dr. Billington. I am sorry, I couldn't----
Senator Nelson. The $1 million for inventory management?
Dr. Billington. Yes. Well, this is an ongoing process. We
have already done a fair amount of inventory management, but it
is a very demanding process. I can provide you with exactly
what this request covers for the record.
Senator Nelson. Sure. That would be fine. Does it include
FTEs? Do you hire an outside firm to do it? I guess if you can
give us that for the record, that would be helpful.
Dr. Billington. No, I think we are doing it internally.
Ms. Jenkins. I was just going to say that it is contract
support. It is $1 million for us to do an inventory across the
general collections in library services, but it is no new FTEs,
just $1 million----
Senator Nelson. So it is contract?
Ms. Jenkins. Yes.
Senator Nelson. That is what I wondered, yes. So no
ongoing, it is a one-time sort of expenditure?
Ms. Jenkins. It is ongoing funding of contract personnel.
Senator Nelson. I see. Sure.
Dr. Billington, in the Law Library account, there are two
items that are being requested, class K conversion and Gazette
preservation backlog. Is this an area where there is a
potential for user fees to help us with the budget?
Dr. Billington. I am sorry. I didn't quite hear that again.
USER FEES AND LAW LIBRARY SERVICES
Senator Nelson. There are two items in the Law Library in
the fiscal year 2011 budget request. One was called class K
conversion and Gazette preservation backlog. In connection with
your answering those questions, I have the other question of
whether this is an area where we might access some user fees,
the Law Library?
Dr. Billington. Well, that is a complicated question. You
have the whole question of the user fees. The Library of
Congress, by and large, does not do that. Many other libraries
do, but we don't do that. When I sign for an acquisition, for
anything for the Library, I don't sign for the Library of
Congress. I sign for the United States of America. And I am
basically committing our resources to preserving it and making
it accessible.
Now if you get into the user fee business, you end up
drifting your talent inevitably toward somebody's user fee. But
the users are the entire people of the United States. Of
course, in the first instance, the Congress itself. And so,
that is an area we are reluctant to get into. But what you have
with this request is something of rather great importance to
the Congress and the Government and to the judiciary, for that
matter, and the executive branch, which is to have the up-to-
date Gazettes, which are the basic laws of other countries.
Law collections have already been catalogued before
completion of the K classification, but they are not accessible
because the people who know both the old system and the new are
retiring. We must complete the K class conversion. The legal
community has been agitating about this, and you may want to
consider the arguments they have made.
The new head of our Law Library has great experience both
in the private sector and in the public sector. Do you want to
have a word here?
Ms. Shaffer. Yes, thank you, Senator. Good afternoon.
The issue here really is making this collection easily and
immediately attainable when you, the Members of Congress, need
the material. And in its current format, it is either fragile
because of its physical properties or it is inaccessible
because it isn't organized in a way that makes it quickly
available.
And so, the purpose of both of these projects is to
accomplish a stability for the Gazettes so that we will have
access to them whenever you need them, and particularly for
many jurisdictions where the Gazette is the only resource,
where there are no commercial resources that duplicate what is
there.
And in the case of the K class, it is kind of like thinking
of going to a grocery store and not having the different
categories of food organized by category. So it makes it very
inefficient and could lead to an inability to find things on a
timely basis for Congress, our key client and customer.
Thank you.
Senator Nelson. Thank you.
Dr. Billington. I have to say, the legal community has been
very concerned about the K class conversion, and this is an
area where, while one doesn't want to get into the business of
charging fees, if there were some donations on the part of a
committee of this kind, we have ample opportunity to receive
donations and use them directly for this purpose.
Senator Nelson. You aren't going to be waiting very long
for generous lawyers, are you?
I understand.
Well, thank you very much, all of you. I want to thank our
witnesses for joining us today. It has been a very informative
hearing.
LIBRARY BUDGET OFFICER EMPLOYEE OF THE WEEK
And before we recess, I would like to acknowledge one more
person from the Library of Congress staff, the Library's Budget
Officer, Ms. Mary Klutts, and to congratulate her for being
honored as one of Senator Kaufman's Federal employees of the
week. We thank you for your many years of hard work.
And we know that you will provide many more, and we also
appreciate the fact that Senator Kaufman recognized you for it.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
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 Library for response subsequent to the
hearing:]
Questions Submitted by Senator Ben Nelson
flat budget
Question. I am committed to a flat budget in fiscal year 2011. What
could the Library do to assist me in obtaining that goal? Have you
considered options within the Library for recovering any of your costs?
Answer. The Library has actively pursued opportunities to offset
costs through reimbursable services over more than 20 years,
significantly building its range of fee-supported programs and services
over those years by both statute and policy.
The Library administers its fee-based activities under the
authority of 2 U.S.C.182b-c and 2 U.S.C. 150, which enable the Library
to recover the costs associated with specific services provided to
customers and the general public:
--The operation of a gift shop and other sales of items associated
with collections, exhibits, performances, and special events of
the Library of Congress for public visitors and other
individuals or organizations;
--Document reproduction and microfilming services for researchers,
libraries, government agencies, and other entities in the
United States and throughout the world;
--The sale of Library of Congress cataloging data and related
publications to libraries and information service organizations
and individuals in the United States and throughout the world;
--The procurement of commercial information services, publications,
and library support services, as well as related education and
information services, for Federal libraries and information
centers (FEDLINK program);
--Customized research reports, translations, and analytical studies
for a fee for entities of the Federal Government and the
District of Columbia on a cost-recovery basis. The products
derived from these services make the Library's vast collections
available to analysts and policy makers throughout the Federal
and District of Columbia governments, maximizing the utility of
the collections through the language and area expertise of the
Federal Research Division staff.
--Preservation, duplication and delivery services for the Library's
audiovisual collections, including motion pictures, videotapes,
sound recordings, and radio and television broadcasts.
However, charging fees for public services that traditionally have
been ``free'' presents challenges. In 2007 the British Library proposed
new fees for basic services such as reading room use. The proposal met
with widespread public dissent which included public protests. The
British Library ultimately did not implement the proposed fees. The
British Library does charge for services that add value to their core
work for the public good, as does the Library of Congress. The services
for which the British Library charges are defined by law, the British
Library Act 1972, as is the case with the Library of Congress, and
include content reproduction, retail gift shop operations, and document
delivery. As with the Library, these services largely cover costs and
do not have sufficient market scale to generate substantial profit.
In fiscal 2009, Library Services reorganized the Office of Business
Enterprises. This program consolidates the business operations of three
cost-recovery services to create economies of scale and cost
efficiencies. Examples of efforts that will provide additional service
to Congress and the public while also reducing and recovering costs
include: network printing in the Library's reading rooms, print-on-
demand for Library publications, digital reproduction of collections,
and cooperative agreements with external entities.
Question. Is cost-sharing a possibility in any of the services you
provide? Could you consider additional charges for copyright services
to offset the costs associated with storage of the items; perhaps to
charge more for larger items requiring more storage?
Answer. The Library provides a number of services on a cost-sharing
basis, as indicated in the answer above. The Copyright Office, in
addition, engages in cost-sharing with respect to most of its services
to the public. Section 708 of the Copyright Act directs the Office to
set its fees for services at ``not more than that necessary to cover
the reasonable costs incurred by the Copyright Office for the
services.'' The fees ``shall be fair and equitable and give due
consideration to the objectives of the copyright system.'' Copyright
fees are periodically evaluated and adjusted following an activity-
based costing methodology. Because the Copyright registration system is
voluntary and because it is in the public interest to encourage
registration so that authors and copyright owners can be identified,
fees are set at levels that are intended to encourage registration
while recovering as much of the cost of the service as is possible. The
current registration fee covers most but not all of the cost of
performing that service, including the cost of physical storage of
deposits. The annual appropriation of the Copyright Office supports
service-related activities not recovered by fees and other costs not
related to fee services. Fees for services that are performed only for
the benefit of the person paying the fee are set at or near full cost
recovery. In August 2009, the Copyright Office adjusted fees to reflect
its new reengineered processes. Typically, fees are adjusted every 3
years.
collections management
Question. Two years ago, GAO looked at the Library's management of
its collections. One of GAO's recommendations was that the Library
develop a Library-wide strategy for making its collection available in
electronic form--both as a means of providing greater access to its
collections as well as to substitute for physical storage. In response,
the Library developed a preliminary digitization strategy. What is the
current status of the Library's digitization strategy?
Answer. The Library's digital strategy guides all efforts to add
digital content to the collections Library-wide. The Library now has
enormous digital content holdings, however digital information is not
viewed as a replacement for the physical record of knowledge and
creativity represented in the paper-based collections. Our digital
strategy recognizes a need to maintain hard copies of many materials in
view of the impermanence of digital material. While we expect an
increasing percentage of the materials we collect will come to us in
electronic form in future years, the current reality is that the
production of physical materials has not slowed, and there is little
overlap between our physical and digital collections. Expanding our
digital content holdings will not result in a reduced requirement for
physical storage space.
Question. The strategy indicated that the Library would design a
study to examine the feasibility of substituting digitized content for
physical storage. Has such a study been conducted? If so, what were the
results?
Answer. The Library's study of this issue has shown that digital
preservation technology serves immediate access needs, however
digitized content is vulnerable to silent and virtually undetectable
loss over time. While a digital collection can be stored in a
relatively small space, hacking, user error, technological failure, and
future migration to new formats and platforms could have the same
devastating effect of a fire on such a collection. Libraries and the
Library have largely eliminated the catastrophic effects of fires; they
have not been able to eliminate the technological risks posed to
digital collections. Almost universally, preservation experts have
questioned digitized content as a safe medium for passing the nation's
intellectual legacy onto the next generations. The Library is working
actively to address the technical challenges of digital preservation.
Question. Two possible options to reduce physical storage
requirements are (a) changing the requirements for copyright deposit to
allow for electronic formats as ``best available,'' and (b) maintaining
the second required deposit copy in electronic form. To what extent
have you looked into these two options?
Answer. The Library is actively pursuing deposit of electronic
works. We are looking at recommending changes in the Copyright law so
that the ``best edition'' requirement can be modified or replaced to
permit the submission of electronic copies even when the only copies
that are ``published'' are in non-electronic formats, or to permit the
submission of one electronic copy and one non-electronic copy in such
cases. Such a change would be subject to consultation and input from
copyright owners (i.e. publishers). The Library is also working on an
e-Deposit system to address several important needs. Chiefly, an
electronic submission service is essential to provide the technological
infrastructure needed to support electronic submissions. While we are
currently in the developmental stages of this effort, we expect to have
an operational system for the receipt of electronic serials within a
year. We will doubtless learn much from this experience, and we intend
to incorporate the lessons learned in the development of a similar
system for the deposit of monographic materials.
Question. According to the preliminary strategy, an increasing
volume of deposits are ``born digital.'' How has this been factored
into future demand for physical storage?
Answer. At present, the rise of digital publishing has not been
accompanied by a decrease in print publishing; hence there has been no
reduction in the need for physical storage. If the output of print
publications diminishes substantially in coming years, the Library's
need for additional space will correspondingly be reduced.
Question. The Library's strategy also lays out ambitious goals for
building and securing an IT infrastructure, which this subcommittee
funded last year. How will the Library use this technology to achieve
greater efficiencies through reduced need for physical storage?
Answer. Enhancements to the core IT infrastructure will not
directly lead to greater efficiencies through reduced need for physical
storage. Information technology tools and services are utilized in ever
more effective ways to provide discovery of and access to the Library's
digital content. This infrastructure can lead to greater efficiencies
for internal operations and enhanced access for remote users, but it
has little impact on the need for physical storage.
storage
Question. I feel that we cannot continue to take in the current
volume of items without recovering some of the costs for their storage
and I feel strongly that this is something we need to look very
carefully at. I know one of your top priorities for fiscal year 2011 is
funding the construction of book storage module 5. This is going to
difficult to accomplish in a flat budget year as I have committed to
this year. Are there any items you'd be willing to cut from your budget
to fund this project?
Answer. In the event of a flat budget, the Library already will
have to absorb $18 million in mandatory pay and price level increases--
costs that we are statutorily required to pay. The Library could absorb
the cost of mandatory pay and price level increases through a
significant reduction of base programs, specific options that we are
investigating. If the Library were to further identify a funding source
within its base for Fort Meade Module 5, this would very likely have an
impact on staffing.
Question. Are storage modules 1-4 currently at full capacity? When
do you expect to have them completely utilized?
Answer. Module 1 has been completely filled since late 2005. Module
2 will be completely filled within the next 2 months. Extensive
planning has been done over a period of years to ensure that every inch
of space in Modules 3 and 4 is fully and effectively utilized to store
non-book, special format collections. A detailed blueprint of every
shelf and what will be placed on each shelf was developed and will
serve as the guide to the placement of each of 237,000 trackable
containers of special collections items. The Library has embarked on a
3 year transfer program to complete the filling of Modules 3 and 4. By
the close of fiscal 2010, 25 percent of the trackable containers will
have been moved to Fort Meade, with the remainder to follow over a
period of 18-24 months.
Question. What efforts are being made to streamline your
acquisition process so that we are getting the best ``bang for our
buck'' in terms of the utilization of limited storage space?
Answer. The Library has taken steps to address and reaffirm is
collecting policies and to assure that they continue to be in the best
interests of the Library, Congress, and the American research and
general user communities, carefully revising its Collections Policy
Statements to assure that it was continuing to collect and retain only
appropriate materials for the collections. The revised statements take
into account the emergence of digital content and the acceptance of
digital content over print or other formats where appropriate. In
addition the Associate Librarian for Library Services has begun to work
with staff to consider the number of copies of individual works to
retain for the collections in the digital age.
The Library also has issued a new regulation governing the
mandatory deposit of copyrighted electronic serials available online
that will allow the Library to determine if it can accept digital
serial content instead of print. The outcome of this phase of mandatory
deposit for digital content will set the stage for expanding to other
formats of digital content.
The Library has undertaken an ambitious plan to restructure the
massive exchange program (International Exchange Service--IES) that
provides access to documents produced by more than 120 other national
government agencies and international bodies. IES is being revamped to
allow the Library to have online access to this content of foreign
governments that is so invaluable to Congress and the legislative
process. As part of review of IES, new agreements have been forged that
have already reduced the number of print titles shipped to the Library
in favor of remote virtual access.
Library Services has been working to develop a plan to establish a
central unit devoted to collections development. This unit will have
responsibility for advising the Librarian and the Associate Librarian
on acquisitions policies, helping to ensure that defensible
acquisitions are being made. In June the Librarian will convene the
annual meeting of key acquisitions and recommending managers and staff
to discuss items acquired over the past year. At this meeting as in
past years, he and the Associate Librarian will reaffirm that staff are
adhering to sound acquisitions policies.
crs
Question. You are requesting 17 new FTE for the Congressional
Research Service to broaden research expertise. How did you reach this
number? If funded, will you be requesting more FTE for CRS in fiscal
year 2012? What prompted you to request a large increase in staffing
for CRS? Is there a backlog of member requests?
Answer. CRS research managers identified gaps in specialized skills
that cannot be resolved by reassigning positions or retraining staff.
Full analytical support for the complex emerging issues facing Congress
will require 34 new positions. Half of this increase is requested in
fiscal year 2011 with the remainder expected to be included in the
fiscal year 2012 budget request. This request is prompted by the need
to broaden expertise and strengthen analytical capacity in the critical
areas of science and technology, healthcare, financial economics and
accounting, and social policy related to employment, immigration, and
the workforce. There is no backlog of member requests. However, CRS not
only responds to congressional inquires but must anticipate
congressional needs to provide the research and analysis when Congress
requires it. This request would help alleviate workload issues but the
primary benefit is producing more comprehensive and sophisticated
analyses of increasingly complicated issues.
Question. You are also requesting $2.1 million for ``information
technology research architecture'' for CRS. This Committee provided $15
million for information technology upgrades library-wide in fiscal year
2010. Can you explain this new request?
Answer. The increased funding in fiscal year 2010 for library-wide
information technology upgrades did not include the information
technology research architecture that is unique to CRS. Improvements
are needed in research data management due to the increasing number of
large complex datasets needed to produce authoritative multi-
disciplinary analysis. The $2.1 million investment will provide the
expertise and systems (hardware and software) to efficiently access
reliable data and information from a CRS-wide data library that is
constructed to allow full utilization of its contents. It will provide
modern content delivery technologies including interactive maps, data
set mining, personalization features such as content tagging, and
enhanced access to CRS products from mobile devices.
Question. Dr. Billington, when prioritizing your request, how would
you rank your request for new CRS personnel?
Answer. The request for new CRS personnel ranks third in the
Library's priorities for fiscal 2011, after funding for mandatory pay
and price level increases and funding for Fort Meade, Module 5.
law library
Question. Please explain the two items you are requesting for the
Law Library. (Class K Conversion and Gazette Preservation backlog).
Answer. The Library has requested $353,000 and 3 FTEs over 10 years
to complete the classification of the legal collections for the
following reasons:
--The Class K standard expanded the shelving arrangement according to
jurisdiction, subject, form, author, and year to create a
unique classification number for each title.
--Since it is difficult to find contractors with the necessary
experience in legal cataloging, legal publishing, and the law,
the Law Library must rely on its established staff base.
--Limited staffing to support the conversion of titles acquired
before the implementation of the Class K system has resulted in
610,000 volumes remaining unclassified.
--Until classified, legal materials remain mostly invisible and
inaccessible, yet these materials have critical research
importance in a global environment.
--In order to cope with the Library managing two distinct collections
(K-classed and unclassified), two different systems for
shelving materials have been used. Staff members knowledgeable
about the two systems are retiring. As a result, materials are
more difficult to find.
The Library has requested $760,000 over 3 years for microfilming
official gazettes, to eliminate the Gazette preservation backlog:
--Most nations publish their newly effective laws, regulations, and
treaties in newspaper form known as official gazettes--a source
of legal documentation essential to a comprehensive,
authoritative law collection.
--Due to the volatility of newsprint, the Law Library uses microfilm
as a means of preservation. In the past, the Law Library had
partners sharing the cost of preserving the gazettes. However,
the loss of these partners has resulted in a 5.3 million-page
backlog.
--The inability to keep up with this preservation workload will
result in future permanent gaps in the Law collection, and will
adversely impact the usability and veracity of the Law Library
collection for research.
staff development
Question. What is included in the $1.6 million Staff Development
Program you are requesting?
Answer. This request supports substantially expanded loan repayment
and tuition reimbursement options for the Library to attract and retain
the top talent needed to operate in today's dynamic operating
environment. Such flexibilities are accepted practice in other
government agencies.
A formal training needs assessment conducted across the Library
revealed common agency training priorities that could be more
efficiently addressed by consolidating expenses through delivery of
centralized training. Currently the Library operates an award-winning
staff development program that trains 60 staff members per year. With
the requested funding, the Library plans to expand the developmental
opportunities available to the entire Library staff population. There
is a particular need for training to help the Library's multi-cultural,
multi-generational staff improve customer service and collaborative
skills to keep up with technological advances and the changing work
environment. This request also enables the Library to offer staff
career planning services, another critical and long-standing need
articulated by the Library's labor organizations.
Question. What is the Supervisor Development Program you are
requesting $1.048 million for?
Answer. The Library has requested $1.048 million and 3 FTEs as part
of a centralized training and development program. The Library's
current Supervisor Development Program requires centralized funding to
provide essential training to supervisors Library-wide. Individual
Service and Support Units have not been able to consistently fund all
the elements of required foundational training that apply to all
supervisors. The Library recently established quarterly Supervisor
Forums for all managers and supervisors to share information,
initiatives, clarify questions, and share best practices for
effectively supervising and managing staff at the Library. These
forums, along with other supervisor focus groups, feedback from
existing supervisory courses, and the Library-wide Employee Survey
results have all indicated a clear need for additional supervisory
training to motivate and support high levels of staff performance and a
high performance culture across the agency. Part of the requested
funding will be used for Workforce Performance Management advisory and
support services, to ensure that supervisors know how to set
appropriate performance expectations for employees, provide performance
feedback, and effectively evaluate performance. We are also requesting
funding for Senior Leadership Development, to develop and implement a
pilot program to prepare current middle management for positions at the
senior managerial level. Currently 50 percent of the Library's senior-
level staff is eligible for retirement.
Question. Is the Library's Office of Opportunity, Inclusiveness,
and Compliance adequately staffed? How is diversity at the Library?
Answer. In 2008 the Library began a process of reorganizing its
Office of Workforce Diversity to develop a more responsive and
efficient operation. The Office of Opportunity, Inclusiveness, and
Compliance (OIC) is now structured and funded in a manner consistent
with Federal best practices, based on the results of an Inspector
General review.
A talented and diverse workforce is at the heart of the Library's
vision for the future and a key component of the Librarian's management
agenda and strategic plan. The current workforce includes slightly more
than 3,600 employees. These employees represent every race and gender
and speak a collective total of more than 50 different languages. As of
December 31, 2009, the Library's workforce consisted of 56 percent
women and 44 percent minorities. This diversity is consistent with
strong and ongoing efforts to train and nurture the workforce,
including annually rating Library managers on their demonstrated
commitment to leverage diversity in their organizations. The OIC is
working on a comprehensive diversity report to be issued by the end of
fiscal 2010. The Library is working to ensure OIC's efforts and human
resource strategies are complementary in development of the 5-year
human capital plan. This human capital plan, when finalized, will
contain clearly defined strategies for continuing to improve diversity
at the Library and specific performance indicators to measure results
and further enhance accountability.
twitter
Question. I understand that Twitter recently agreed to donate its
digital archive of public tweets to the Library of Congress. What is
the relevance of this collection?
Answer. As the keeper of the mint record of American creativity,
the Library has over time collected works in whatever form that
activity is expressed, most recently digital. The Twitter archive is a
new form of communication with world-wide participation. Scholars today
and in the future will mine the data set, researching a vast number of
subjects and trends. A number of researchers have already expressed
interest in gaining access to the material. The Twitter collection
provides an important opportunity to learn more about preserving large
research data sets.
Question. Will this donation result in additional maintenance costs
to the Library?
Answer. We estimate that a small team will be able to work out the
details of handling the Twitter archive over the next 6 months. The
cost of tape storage and equipment to operate the tapes, based on 5
terabytes of data per year, is estimated to be $3,000 the first year
and an additional $1,000 for succeeding years and can be handled within
our existing technical infrastructure. Because accepting and preserving
collections are part of regular staff responsibilities, we do not
anticipate additional staff costs. Once the Library completes an
assessment of privacy and access issues related to this archive, it is
likely that additional costs will be identified to make the collection
accessible.
copyright
Question. Your fiscal year 2011 request includes an additional 5
FTE for the Copyright Office. What are these additional personnel
needed for?
Answer. Three FTE's are to support of eCO, the backbone technology
system for Copyright Office operations. The FTE will expand our
technical capabilities in database management, software development,
and project management. Two FTE's will oversee the Licensing Division's
newly reengineered technology operations. Work on reengineering
Licensing Operations begins in early Summer 2010, with system
implementation scheduled for a year later. With the envisioned web-
based licensing submissions and electronic processing, the Licensing
Division will need technical support. As the Licensing Division is
self-funded, this would not impact the Library of Congress Federal
appropriation.
Question. What is your current backlog of copyright applications
waiting to be processed?
Answer. As of May 16, 2010 the backlog of claims awaiting
processing is approximately 317,000.
Question. How effective is your new paperless registration system?
What percent of applications do you currently receive online vs. in the
mail?
Answer. eService, the Copyright Office online registration system,
is very effective. Currently we receive 75 percent of our weekly
submissions through electronic filing. As we improve our online
systems, we expect electronic submissions to increase.
information technology
Question. Dr. Billington, you received $15 million in fiscal year
2010 for technology infrastructure upgrades for the Library. Can you
update the subcommittee on your use of these funds? What has the
Library been able to accomplish with this large investment of
resources?
Answer. The long-term vision for this funding is, by 2016, to
acquire, preserve, and deliver important cultural, legislative and
copyright information online that is reliable and authentic; where
anyone can find what is meaningful to them through a set of updated
online navigation approaches and tools. In fiscal 2010, funding is
being invested in three broad areas to support this vision:
--$9 million in the core technology: the hardware, operating
software, and network devices needed to support the Library's
three data centers. This includes: $7 million in equipment and
software to improve the network, storage, back-up and restore,
and continuity of operations technologies and facilities to
provide the infrastructure for content management and content
delivery; $1.4 million for services to support the
implementation of the new equipment and software; $0.6 million
for maintenance for the new equipment and software;
--$3.5 million in new software for content management that
restructures the underlying data for better searching (metadata
and data ontologies), including legislative information data
dictionaries, establishment of data relationships and patterns
(including search & navigation patterns), data relationship
tools and metadata creation tools, and linking of computing
functionality to data sets; digital content ingest, including
content integrity preservation, and reusable, modular, flexible
and scalable ingest and management tools and services
--$2.5 million in web architecture development and open source
software for the presentation and delivery of content online,
on mobile devices, and through easy-to-use interfaces for the
user.
The Executive Committee approved the core technology investment
plan in December, 2009. To date, requisitions have been submitted for
all of the $9 million in core technology investment. An investment plan
and requisitions have been prepared for the $3.5 million for new
software for content management. The enterprise-wide IT Steering
Committee (the LOC IT capital investment management board) reviewed
this plan on May 25. The investment plan for web architecture
development and open source software for presentation and delivery of
content online has not been finalized. This $2.5 million plan will
undergo review by both the Web Governance Board and the IT Steering
Committee.
inventory management
Question. You have included $1 million in your request for
Inventory Management. What will this cover? Are all items in the
Library's collections currently ``inventoried?''
Answer. The funding will cover 23 contractual staff who will
continue the inventory of the Library's book and periodical
collections. The staff will also inventory the special format materials
that will be transferred to Modules 3 and 4. Since the start of the
inventory program in fiscal 2002, more than 4 million items have been
inventoried. In the general, area studies, and Law Library collections
of books and bound periodicals, there are approximately 17 million
items, leaving approximately 13 million that need to be inventoried.
For the special format collections, e.g., manuscripts, maps, sheet
music, and prints and photographs, inventory is also essential to
capture information on what we have and where the items are at any
given point in time, and to ensure effective access and retrieval.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Lisa Murkowski
fort meade storage module 5
Question. Is the $16.9 million requested for Storage Module 5 the
total cost for design, construction and complete outfitting of the
storage unit, so that it would be ready to accept collections for
storage? Will additional funding be needed for this storage module in
future fiscal years?
Answer. The $16.9 request for Storage Module 5 will cover
construction and outfitting costs. No additional funding will be
required by the Library of Congress to make Module 5 fully operational;
however, annual funding of $1 million for ongoing collections inventory
management is necessary--a fiscal 2011 funding request--to ensure items
transferred to Fort Meade have accurate online records and to continue
the inventory of the collections remaining on Capitol Hill. The
Architect of the Capitol will require a funding increase to maintain
the facility and for additional utility charges. Module 5 design is
complete but will need to be updated to incorporate lessons learned
from Modules 1-4, in conjunction with the solicitation of construction
contract proposals.
Question. If only partial funding is provided in fiscal year 2011,
will it be possible for the Library to begin work on this storage unit
and then complete it when the balance of funds are available; or does
the Library need the total amount in full before it can begin work on
this unit?
Answer. For this construction request, the full amount would be
necessary at the time of the construction contract award. (This
response has been coordinated with the Architect of the Capitol.)
requested ftes--human resources services
Question. Why is it necessary to have three additional FTE's for
the Human Resources Supervisor development program and two additional
FTE's for the Human Resources Staff development program? Are these
staff development programs new, or are they being expanded in some way
that requires additional personnel?
Answer. Of the total staff development request of $1.6 million, a
quarter of it ($408,000) is for two GS-12 career planning specialists
and contractual support, to provide career planning services for the
entire Library. This funding would enable Human Resource Services to
expand on staff development services they already provide in response
to a need articulated by the Library's labor organizations for
professional career planning services.
Question. Are there certain elements of the supervisor development
program and the staff development program that can be combined so as to
achieve efficiencies in the organization, operation, and cost of the
programs?
Answer. Of the three FTES requested for supervisory development,
one is for the coordination of supervisor development training
services; the other two are to staff the workforce performance
management program. Both of these functions currently are being
provided on a skeletal level because of the absence of dedicated
personnel. The Library's current performance management practices,
coordinated by a staff of one, were flagged as a critical weakness in
the recent Employee Survey. The five requested positions address
separate operational needs, all essential, in the Library's human
resources program.
Question. What are the goals of the supervisor and staff
development programs?
Answer. Goals of staff and supervisor development services are to
enable the Library to provide consistently outstanding services to an
expanding customer base, within a dynamic work environment involving
the use of wide-ranging new technologies, with fewer and fewer staff.
Question. What is the anticipated outcome from this investment?
Answer. Additional funding will enable the Library to address
critical training and development gaps, increasing efficiency and
effectiveness across the entire organization.
capitol police merger
Question. Last year we completed the merger of the Library of
Congress security officers with the U.S. Capitol Police. From the
Library's perspective, how were the police merger and the transition of
personnel, resources, and police mission handled? Was this a smooth
transition?
Answer. Overall, the police merger and transition of personnel,
resources, and police mission were successfully accomplished.
Question. Since the police merger, have the Capitol Police and the
Library of Congress worked through the remaining issues related to the
reimbursement of overtime for Library events?
Answer. The two agencies have worked out the key details for the
Library's reimbursing the USCP for supporting Library special events.
The USCP and LOC Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) will be amended to
reflect the reimbursement agreement. Further discussions are occurring
to improve coordination and to streamline procedures.
Question. Are there any remaining police coverage issues that the
Library has yet to resolve with the Capitol Police? If so, what are
those issues?
Answer. The unresolved issues include:
--Jurisdictional issues between the Library's Office of the Inspector
General (OIG) and the USCP.
--Formalization of information-sharing between the Library and the
USCP.
--Finalization of the Library's special events funding coordination
and procedural matters.
Question. Since the police merger, have there been any jurisdiction
issues related to the collections or building regulations? How have
those been resolved?
Answer. Unresolved are jurisdictional issues related to the
investigation of criminal activity occurring at the Library, such as
suspected theft and malicious damage to Library collections and
property. The Library's OIG has proposed that an MOU be formalized
between the OIG and the USCP.
crs services evaluation
Question. The Legislative Branch conference report for fiscal year
2010 concurred with the House report language regarding a CRS services
evaluation, which requested that the Director of CRS ``conduct a formal
evaluation of how well its current staffing models and procedures meet
user needs.'' Has CRS conducted this evaluation? Where is CRS in that
process?
Answer. The consulting firm LMI will assess communications
mechanisms, including a ``Member Advisory Committee'', and make
recommendations on the best options to promote optimal communication
between CRS and Members of Congress. LMI will use the client feedback
data they receive and best practices research in developing its
recommendations on communications mechanisms. No decision on new
mechanisms will be made until the LMI evaluation is completed.
crs member advisory committee
Question. The House report language that was included in the fiscal
year 2010 Conference Report also directed CRS to ``consider creation of
a new mechanism such as a Member Advisory Committee which would allow
routine discussions between CRS leadership and users.'' Has CRS created
a Member Advisory Committee? If so, please explain how the committee is
intended to work, or is working.
Answer. The consulting firm LMI will assess communications
mechanisms, including a ``Member Advisory Committee'' and make
recommendations on the best options to promote optimal communication
between CRS and Members of Congress. LMI will use the client feedback
data they receive and best practices research in developing its
recommendations on communications mechanisms. No decision on new
mechanisms will be made until the LMI evaluation is completed.
digital talking book program
Question. Please give us an update on the Digital Talking Book
program.
Answer. The Library is on schedule with both digital talking book
player and book production. To date approximately 204,000 machines have
been produced, with production ongoing at a level of 20,000 players per
month. More than 857,000 copies of nearly 2,169 digital titles have
been produced and distributed on flash cartridge. A download site now
offers nearly 19,000 digital book titles and grows daily. The one-
millionth book was downloaded in March 2010.
CONCLUSION OF HEARINGS
Senator Nelson. So thank you, and the subcommittee stands
in recess. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 4:40 p.m., Thursday, April 29, 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
Ayers, Stephen T., Acting Architect of the Capitol, Architect of
the Capitol.................................................... 133
Prepared Statement of........................................ 138
Summary Statement of......................................... 136
Billington, Hon. James H., Librarian of Congress, Library of
Congress....................................................... 225
Prepared Statement of........................................ 230
Summary Statement of......................................... 228
Chrisler, Tamara E., Esq., Executive Director, Office of
Compliance..................................................... 152
Prepared Statement of........................................ 153
Doby, Chris, Financial Clerk, Office of the Secretary, U.S.
Senate......................................................... 1
Dodaro, Gene L., Acting Comptroller General, Government
Accountability Office.......................................... 173
Prepared Statement of........................................ 177
Questions Submitted to....................................... 212
Summary Statement of......................................... 175
Dwyer, Sheila, Assistant Secretary, Office of the Secretary, U.S.
Senate......................................................... 1
Elmendorf, Douglas W., Ph.D., Director, Congressional Budget
Office......................................................... 189
Prepared Statement of........................................ 192
Questions Submitted to....................................... 219
Erickson, Hon. Nancy, Secretary of the Senate, Office of the
Secretary, U.S. Senate......................................... 1
Prepared Statement of........................................ 7
Summary Statement of......................................... 5
Gainer, Hon. Terrance W., Senate Sergeant at Arms, Sergeant at
Arms and Doorkeeper, U.S. Senate............................... 72
Prepared Statement of........................................ 75
Questions Submitted to....................................... 112
Jarmon, Gloria, Chief Administrative Officer, United States
Capitol Police................................................. 93
Jenkins, Jo Ann, Chief Operating Officer, Library of Congress.... 225
Morse, Hon. Phillip D., Sr., Chief, United States Capitol Police. 93
Prepared Statement of........................................ 94
Questions Submitted to....................................... 118
Mulhollan, Daniel P., Director, Congressional Research Service,
Library of Congress............................................ 225
Prepared Statement of........................................ 233
Murkowski, Senator Lisa, U.S. Senator From Alaska:
Questions Submitted by................................115, 128, 265
Statements of......................................3, 135, 174, 227
Nelson, Senator Ben, U.S. Senator From Nebraska:
Opening Statements of..............................1, 133, 173, 225
Questions Submitted by.................112, 118, 212, 215, 219, 259
Nichols, Dan, Assistant Chief, United States Capitol Police...... 93
O'Keefe, Ambassador John, Executive Director, Open World
Leadership Center, Library of Congress......................... 240
Prepared Statement of........................................ 241
Peters, Marybeth, Register of Copyrights, Copyright Office,
Library of Congress, Prepared Statement of..................... 236
Pryor, Senator Mark, U.S. Senator From Arkansas, Question
Submitted by................................................... 218
Shaffer, Roberta, Law Librarian, Library of Congress............. 225
Tapella, Robert C., Public Printer, Government Printing Office... 183
Prepared Statement of........................................ 184
Questions Submitted to....................................... 215
SUBJECT INDEX
----------
ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL
Page
Annual Operating Budget Request.................................. 146
Architect of the Capitol:
Accomplishments.............................................. 147
Proud Stewards............................................... 136
Blue Ribbon Panel--Fire Code Requirements........................ 160
Budget Increase Concerns......................................... 134
Capital Budget Request and Project Planning Process.............. 139
Capitol:
Police Radio Project......................................... 171
Power Plant FTE Increase..................................... 165
Visitor Center.............................................137, 164
FTE Increase............................................. 165
Operating Budget Request................................. 146
Congratulations on Nomination.................................... 133
Energy Conservation.............................................. 137
And Sustainability Programs.................................. 142
Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act Authority--Lease Authority.. 162
Budget Impact................................................ 162
Fiscal Year 2011:
Budget:
Impact................................................... 156
Request................................................134, 135
Projects..................................................... 136
Preliminary Findings............................................. 160
Prior Year Balances.............................................. 157
Project:
List--Safety Issues.......................................... 159
Priority Ranking............................................. 157
Projects Budget.................................................. 167
Review of Repairs................................................ 161
Senior Executive Service......................................... 163
Substantial Project Increase..................................... 158
Sustainability Program........................................... 166
U.S. Botanic Garden/Sustainable Sites Initiative................. 146
Utility:
Meters....................................................... 166
Tunnels...................................................... 161
What Drives the Budget Request................................... 159
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE
Additional Committee Questions................................... 211
Benefits of Work for Congress.................................... 221
Biggest Challenge Moving Forward................................. 221
Computers........................................................ 199
Diversity Status................................................. 223
Fiscal Year 2011 Flat Budget..................................... 219
Flat Budget...................................................... 204
Foreign National Hiring.......................................... 201
Growing Demand for CBO's Analyses................................ 193
Health........................................................... 189
Healthcare Staff................................................. 220
New FTEs for Fiscal Year 2011.................................... 221
Pay Increase..................................................... 210
Restrictions in Hiring Foreign Nationals......................... 222
Role in New Healthcare Legislation............................... 220
Shift Resources.................................................. 201
Internally................................................... 222
Some Details of CBO's Fiscal Year 2011 Budget Request............ 194
Supplemental..................................................... 189
Funding Spent................................................ 220
Workload......................................................... 200
GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE
Additional Committee Questions................................... 211
ARRA Funding..................................................... 214
Fiscal Year 2011 Request......................................... 212
GAO:
Continues to Be an Employer of Choice........................ 178
Hiring for Recovery Act Oversight............................ 202
Labor Relations and Pay...................................... 208
Union........................................................ 215
GAO's:
Diversity Plan............................................... 208
Fiscal Year 2011 Budget Request.............................. 179
Involvement With Administrative Issues Facing the Capitol
Police..................................................... 196
Overseas Presence............................................ 198
Requested FTE Increase....................................... 196
Work on Capitol Police Issues................................ 213
Recovery Act Oversight........................................... 197
States' Ability to Manage Recovery Act Funds..................... 203
The Nation's Challenges Shape GAO's Fiscal Year 2011 Expected
Workload....................................................... 177
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
Additional Committee Questions................................... 211
Budget........................................................... 215
COOP Plan........................................................ 218
Congressional Printing and Binding............................... 186
Environmental Sustainability..................................... 206
Facilities Repairs............................................... 195
Federal Digital System.........................................211, 216
Fiscal Year 2011 Appropriations Request.......................... 186
GPO Building Issues.............................................. 217
GPO's Performance System......................................... 209
Increasing Revenues.............................................. 195
New Versus Continuing Projects................................... 205
Passport Production.............................................. 216
Results of Fiscal Year 2009...................................... 184
Revolving Fund................................................... 187
Priorities................................................... 204
Salaries and Expenses of the Superintendent of Documents......... 187
Sustainability Achievements...................................... 207
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
Access to Twitter Collection..................................... 250
Acquisition Strategy and Storage Costs........................... 247
Additional:
Committee Questions.......................................... 259
Space for Collections Essential.............................. 248
Specialists for CRS.......................................... 253
Alignment of CRS Work with the Congress.......................... 233
CRS.............................................................. 262
As Shared Staff.............................................. 235
Member Advisory Committee.................................... 267
Services Evaluation.......................................... 267
Capitol Police Merger............................................ 266
Collection Policies and Cost..................................... 252
Collections Management........................................... 260
Copyright........................................................ 264
Applications Backlog......................................... 256
Digital Talking Book Program..................................... 267
Expansion of the Open World Program.............................. 255
Fiscal Year 2011 Budget Request................................235, 246
Flat Budget...................................................... 259
Fort Meade:
And Competing Priorities..................................... 250
Storage Module 5...........................................229, 265
Freeze Level Scenario............................................ 256
Fundraising Efforts.............................................. 255
Highlights of Copyright Office Accomplishments and Challenges.... 237
Information Technology........................................... 265
Inventory Management............................................. 265
Objectives................................................... 257
Law Library...................................................... 262
Library Budget Officer Employee of the Week...................... 259
Mandatory Pay Increases.......................................... 252
Nonappropriated Open World Funding............................... 244
Open World:
And Congress................................................. 243
Leadership Center............................................ 255
Program Results.............................................. 242
2010 Activities, 2011 Plans, and 2012-2016 Strategic Planning 245
Recouping Copyright Storage Costs................................ 248
Requested FTEs--Human Resources Services......................... 266
Staff Development................................................ 263
Storage.......................................................... 261
Support of the United States Copyright System.................... 236
Technology Infrastructure Funding and Progress................... 257
Twitter.......................................................... 264
Archive...................................................... 249
User Fees and Law Library Services............................... 257
Web Governance Board............................................. 253
OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE
Additional Resource Availability................................. 153
Communications--IT Systems....................................... 153
Compliance Education............................................. 168
Congressional Accountability Act 15 Year Anniversary............. 152
Fiscal Year 2011 Budget Request................................134, 152
Hazard Prioritization............................................ 170
Hazards Decrease................................................. 167
IT System........................................................ 168
OOC Infrastructure............................................... 155
Prioritization of Citations...................................... 161
Safety:
And Health Inspections....................................... 155
Awareness.................................................... 152
Strategic Planning............................................... 154
System Security.................................................. 169
UNITED STATES CAPITOL POLICE
Additional Committee Questions................................... 112
Addressing Threats to Senate Offices............................. 127
Civilian Contracting............................................. 109
Fiscal Year 2011 Request......................................... 119
Internal Control Weaknesses...................................... 127
Manpower Reductions.............................................. 120
New Initiatives.................................................. 111
In fiscal year 2011.......................................... 132
Overtime......................................................... 110
Radio Modernization Project....................................125, 131
Salaries......................................................... 128
Salary Miscalculation............................................ 118
USCP:
Overtime..................................................... 108
Radio Project................................................ 107
Salary Miscalculation........................................ 104
U.S. SENATE
Office of the Secretary
Additional Committee Questions................................... 112
Administrative Offices........................................... 32
Bill Clerk....................................................... 10
Captioning Services.............................................. 11
Chief Counsel for Employment..................................... 32
Conservation and Preservation.................................... 34
Curator.......................................................... 34
Daily Digest..................................................... 11
Disbursing Office................................................ 17
Education and Training........................................... 41
Enrolling Clerk.................................................. 14
Executive Clerk.................................................. 14
Financial Operations............................................. 17
Gift Shop........................................................ 42
Historical Office................................................ 44
Human Resources.................................................. 49
Implementing Mandated Systems.................................... 8
Interparliamentary Services...................................... 50
Journal Clerk.................................................... 15
Legislative:
Information System (LIS) Project............................. 50
Offices...................................................... 9
Library.......................................................... 52
Official Reporters of Debates.................................... 16
Page School...................................................... 60
Parliamentarian.................................................. 16
Presenting the Fiscal Year 2011 Budget Request................... 7
Printing and Document Services................................... 61
Public Records................................................... 63
Senate:
Employees Child Care Center.................................. 98
Information Services.........................................97, 99
Stationery Room.................................................. 64
Web Technology................................................... 65
Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper
Additional Committee Questions................................... 112
Combined Appropriation Account................................... 114
Expenses......................................................... 116
Fiscal Year 2011 Budget Request................................112, 113
Information Technology........................................... 79
Security..................................................... 102
Operations....................................................... 84
Payroll System Upgrade........................................... 117
Police Operations, Security, and Emergency Preparedness.......... 76
Printing Department Relocation................................... 113
Printing, Graphics and Direct Mail Relocation..................102, 118
Prior Year Balances.............................................. 106
Senate Emergency Notification System............................. 115
Salaries......................................................... 115
Senate Personnel System.......................................... 103
Telecom Modernization:
Plan......................................................... 117
Program...............................................103, 105, 107
Project...................................................... 114
Telephone/Voicemail Interruption................................. 114
Unobligated Balances...........................................113, 117
-