    [Senate Hearing 111-]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

             LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010

                                  ----------

                             THURSDAY, JUNE 4, 2009

                                           U.S. Senate,
               Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The subcommittee met at 2:34 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
            DR. DEANNA MARCUM, ASSOCIATE LIBRARIAN FOR LIBRARY SERVICES
            KURT CYLKE, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL LIBRARY SERVICE FOR THE BLIND
                AND PHYSICALLY HANDICAPPED

                    OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR BEN NELSON

        Senator Nelson. Good afternoon, everybody, and welcome. We
    meet this afternoon for our fourth and final legislative branch
    budget hearing for fiscal year 2010. Today, we will hear from
    the Library of Congress and the Open World Leadership Center.
        It is my pleasure to welcome my ranking member--my
    recovering ranking member here--and good friend, Senator
    Murkowski. It has been a real pleasure working with her
    throughout this process this year, as well as with the other
    members of the subcommittee, Senator Pryor and Senator Tester.
    And we hope that perhaps they will be able to join us today as
    well.
        And I want to welcome our witnesses today--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 both of you gentlemen here this
    afternoon, and we are looking forward to hearing from you.
        We would hope that perhaps you would keep your opening
    statements as brief as possible, perhaps around 5 minutes, and
    submit the rest of your testimony for the record.
        One thing that we have established at our first three
    hearings, and I hope it bears repeating, is that we are not
    eager to increase the overall legislative branch budget this
    year. And so, we are looking for your guidance in helping us to
    address your agency's needs in fiscal year 2010, but this is
    not the year for the ``nice to haves.''
        Senator Murkowski and I look forward to working with you in
    this regard, and we have been working with the other members of
    the legislative branch in that regard as well.
        First of all, Dr. Billington, I want to welcome you and
    your Chief Operating Officer, Jo Ann Jenkins. It is an honor to
    have you here today. On behalf of the subcommittee, I want to
    wish you heartfelt congratulations on your 80th birthday.
        And thank you for your service as Librarian of Congress for
    these last 22 years, very important years in the development
    not only of the Library for Members of Congress, but for your
    efforts to reach out to world leaders and to bring them into
    the kind of librarian finesse that you have been able to
    continue to provide for all of us, and we appreciate that.
        I know personally, having been with you in Moscow and your
    close association with Mr. Putin and Mrs. Putin, and what you
    have been able to do to help them with their library efforts is
    commendable and makes us all very, very proud. Your service in
    this capacity is both highly commendable and greatly
    appreciated, and we can't express enough our appreciation for
    those efforts.
        The Library's fiscal year 2010 request totals $658 million,
    an increase of $51 million, or 8.5 percent over fiscal year
    2009. And I note that a large portion of your increase, about
    $20 million, has to do with upgrades to the Library's
    information technology systems. I look forward to hearing from
    you and discussing this with you just a little later on.
        I also want to welcome Ambassador O'Keefe of the Open World
    Leadership Center. Your budget total is $14.456 million, an
    increase of $556,000, or 4 percent above the current year.
        I want you to know that I strongly support the work of Open
    World. We are very proud of what you are doing in reaching out
    and bringing others into the kind of relationship with our
    country that we all want and we know that the others respect
    and want to continue.
        Your leadership in that area, your role has been
    tremendous. We are both proud and very supportive of your
    efforts, and we want those efforts to be able to continue. And
    we want to work with you in order to make sure that that, in
    fact, does happen.
        And now I would like to turn it over to my friend and
    ranking member, Senator Murkowski, for her opening remarks.

                      STATEMENT OF SENATOR LISA MURKOWSKI

        Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I appreciate how this series of hearings has gone. This is
    our fourth and our last, as you have noted. But as a new member
    to the Appropriations Committee and certainly a new member here
    with this Legislative Branch Subcommittee, there has been a
    great deal of focus and attention to the real workings of what
    goes on within the legislative branch, and I appreciate that.
        Sometimes this is one of those appropriations subcommittees
    where things just kind of move forward on status quo, and I
    think the level of inquiry that we have had in subcommittee
    with your leadership, it has been appreciated on all ends. And
    I just wanted to make that comment.
        I want to welcome the witnesses before us today. I had an
    opportunity to do a little sit-down with Dr. Billington and
    Ambassador O'Keefe. I appreciate that a great deal.
        Ms. Jenkins, it is a pleasure to welcome you back, and I
    know you have got a full team behind you as well. We certainly
    welcome you to the subcommittee.
        There is also an Alaskan today that I want to acknowledge.
    The Library brings to Washington every year a teacher to work
    with its Educational Outreach Division. And for the 2008-2009
    school year, the Library selected David Miller, who is the
    library media specialist from Ketchikan High School.
        I didn't go to Ketchikan High. I was born there. My parents
    both went there. So it is nice to have a hometown person
    associated with our Library. He has worked on several different
    projects, including an online professional development project,
    facilitating educator workshops, and developing teacher
    materials for the Library's Learning Page, which is great.
        The Library has had some important events in the last year,
    including the opening of its new visitor's experience in the
    Jefferson Building, the launching of the World Digital Library
    in Paris with partners from 21 countries, and the first full
    year of operating the state-of-the-art National Audio-Visual
    Conservation Center in Culpeper, Virginia.
        And Dr. Billington, Senator Nelson mentioned your work with
    Russia, and we know your involvement, very instrumental
    involvement with the opening of the Yeltsin Presidential
    Library in St. Petersburg, Russia. These are truly important
    accomplishments.
        Mr. Chairman, you have noted that for fiscal year 2010, the
    Library of Congress is requesting a budget of $699 million,
    offset by collections of $41 million, and this is primarily
    from copyright fees, which is an increase of 8 percent over
    fiscal year 2009.
        There are some large new initiatives included in the
    budget, such as multiyear information technology enhancements,
    which total about $15 million annually. This is an area that
    hasn't received budgetary increases in some time. So I look
    forward to hearing why an increase of this magnitude is
    justified, how it ties to an agencywide digital strategy.
        As far as the Open World program, Mr. Chairman, you have
    clearly noted your support for that program. They are
    suggesting an increase by 4 percent. I will ask in my questions
    to you, Ambassador O'Keefe, how and why a foreign exchange
    program belongs in the legislative branch bill.
        I am not questioning whether or not it should continue, but
    whether this is the right spot for it. I think you have
    probably had that question before. So I will look forward to
    your response with that.
        With that, Mr. Chairman, I am anxious to hear the comments
    from those who are here today to present.
        Senator Nelson. Well, at the risk of further embarrassing
    Dr. Billington, I certainly would like to say, Dr. Billington,
    that so many of us consider you a national treasure in your
    role in the Library and what you have done to reach out to
    others in the world.
        And certainly, Ambassador O'Keefe, you embody the same
    spirit. So, with that, Dr. Billington, we would love to receive
    your testimony.

                    SUMMARY STATEMENT OF JAMES H. BILLINGTON

        Dr. Billington. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Senator
    Murkowski, members of the subcommittee.
        It is really an honor to be here to represent the Library
    of Congress fiscal 2010 budget request.
        The Library has been honored to bring our outstanding
    recent exhibit, Mr. Chairman, commemorating the 200th
    anniversary of Abraham Lincoln's birth to Omaha as its last
    stop. Actually, it began in Omaha because Union Pacific funded
    it and made it possible. So it is only fitting that it had its
    last stop in that city.
        Senator Murkowski, we really appreciated your staff touring
    the exhibit with Library curators while it was still in the
    Jefferson Building, and we look forward to your coming to the
    Library this summer to look at our holdings on Alaska.
        It happens that right now a member of our staff, in
    addition to Mr. Miller, who is with us this year with our
    Teaching with Primary Sources Program that the Congress has
    supported so well, is running a teacher training workshop in
    Anchorage, and she just reported to us that every school
    district in the State is represented, except for Juneau, where
    the schools are still in session.
        So, anyhow, we look forward to working with you both and
    with all the members of this subcommittee, and we appreciate
    your cordial words.
        In fiscal 2010, we are requesting a net increase of 8.1
    percent, of which 4.6 percent represents funding for mandatory
    pay and price level increases; 0.4 percent is to sustain
    continuing projects, and the remaining 3.1 percent--the only
    major increase this year--is to support a critical investment
    in updating and enhancing the Library's technical
    infrastructure.

                     TECHNOLOGY INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIREMENT

        We are, in effect, superimposing a digital world on top of
    the traditional print world, moving from traditional business
    systems of personnel, finance, cataloguing, and management of
    information systems, to taking in and managing the very fast-
    changing digital formats that include eJournals, eBooks,
    digital TV, Web sites, digital images, digital audio and
    visual, and so forth.
        Each of our major program areas, the Congressional Research
    Service, Library Services, the Law Library, the Office of
    Strategic Initiatives, and the Copyright Office, must now deal
    with all aspects of digital works--acquiring them, preserving
    them, and providing access to them.
        Over the past 15 years, we have built separate systems,
    successfully meeting individual program needs as they have been
    identified to deliver the new services that Congress and the
    American people have asked of us. Some of these systems are
    new, like the Copyright Office's online registration system.
    Others rely on what has now become very dated technology.
        The Library has not sought any increase in base funding for
    the technological infrastructure for all of this for a decade.
    We now have a pressing need to modernize this infrastructure so
    that we support our diverse and vastly increased digital
    activity more efficiently. We must do so with more unified
    Library-wide systems that can be adjusted and scaled up
    economically to sustain services and meet new user demands as
    the technology changes.

                       SUPPORT FOR DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION

        We are now providing far more services and with 1,000 fewer
    full-time equivalents (FTEs) than we had in 1992, when we had
    barely begun the Library's digital transformation. Our entire
    technology request builds upon successful services that we have
    built incrementally, and unique experiences and feedback that
    we have gained through a variety of these initiatives.
        We are now poised to develop core infrastructure that can
    be used by all parts of the Library. We recently launched with
    UNESCO our World Digital Library, which has received
    extraordinary international acclaim with something online from
    all 192 members of UNESCO. It attracted 20 million page views
    in its first 4 days and is proving to be an effective catalyst
    for building the new technological platform with reusable,
    scalable, and multimedia components.

                                   FORT MEADE

        In conclusion, let me just highlight our Fort Meade
    request. Having the space to store so much of America's
    creativity and the world's knowledge in environmentally
    controlled facilities is critical to sustaining the historic
    mission of the Library. Publication continues to grow
    worldwide; has increased by approximately 40 percent since
    2000, even as online digital information is expanding. The Fort
    Meade program has achieved 100 percent retrievability, and is
    essential for preserving and making accessible our uniquely
    comprehensive collections for Congress.
        Amazon has recently stated that no meaningful solutions for
    effective long-term collection management can be implemented
    until more space is created, after inspecting the collections
    in a recent pro bono visit to the Library. The Library is a
    unique treasure trove of information, knowledge, and
    creativity, much of which is not available anywhere else.

                              PREPARED STATEMENTS

        Today, when technology is transforming the way we deliver
    our services to Congress and the Nation, the Library is
    renewing and expanding its role in our knowledge-based
    democracy. We look forward to working with this subcommittee to
    craft a budget for fiscal 2010, and we thank you and the
    Congress as a whole for continuing to be the greatest patron of
    a library in the history of the world.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Nelson. Thank you, Dr. Billington.
        [The statements follow:]
                   Prepared Statement of James H. Billington
        Mr. Chairman, Senator Murkowski, and other Members of the
    Subcommittee, I am pleased to present the Library of Congress fiscal
    2010 budget request.
        Mr. Chairman, I am deeply grateful to you and the subcommittee for
    your full support of our fiscal 2009 request. It has heartened and
    strengthened us at what we know is a time of extraordinary fiscal
    pressures on the Federal Government. In such a time, I feel a special
    obligation to stress the importance of what the Library of Congress is
    doing for America's future.
        The Congress of the United States has been, quite simply, the
    greatest patron of a library in the history of the world. Its creation,
    the Library of Congress, is the largest and most diverse collection in
    human history of the world's knowledge in all languages and of the
    intellectual and artistic creativity of the American people in all its
    major recorded formats.
        The Library's historic mission has been to serve the Congress and
    the American people by acquiring, preserving and making accessible its
    unique material and human resources. Its major challenge--and
    opportunity--in recent years has been to sustain and extend that
    mission amidst one of the greatest revolutions in history in how
    knowledge is generated and communicated.
        Our task has been, in effect, to superimpose new digital processes
    and services onto those of traditional artifactual library processes--
    while preserving and exemplifying the human values of the older book
    culture that helped create the free, open and knowledge-based democracy
    that we serve. In the course of meeting this challenge, we have
    undertaken a far greater range and volume of innovative processes and
    services than ever before with one thousand less FTEs than in our peak
    pre-digital year of 1992.
        Congressional vision and support has made it possible to continue
    to add important new acquisitions and to sustain unique preservation
    activities. Thanks to the Congress' building a direct passageway from
    the Capitol Visitor Center into the Thomas Jefferson Building, we have
    greatly increased numbers of visitors to see an entire new series of
    interactive exhibits culminating in the centerpiece of the Lincoln
    bicentennial that displays for the first time in 50 years the key
    original documents of Lincoln's presidency in his own hand. We were
    glad to welcome the creation of a Library of Congress Caucus in the
    course of 2008. And we are pleased to note the steady increase of the
    use of the Members Room and other Library facilities now that the
    tunnel directly connects the Library to the Capitol Visitor Center and
    to the Capitol itself.
        Thanks to Congressional support and the unprecedented generosity of
    David Packard and the Packard Humanities Institute, the magnificent new
    Packard Campus for Audio Visual Conservation in Culpeper, Virginia is
    now up and running under its outstanding new director, Patrick
    Loughney. The Packard Campus is, in essence, a high-capacity digital
    preservation facility for our massive and largely perishable audio and
    film collections. We are now able to save many collections that would
    otherwise have deteriorated and been lost forever.
        We are now in the process of hiring 39 new staff, and the Packard
    Campus is well-launched. The film preservation lab is operational and
    digital preservation of sound recordings, television, and radio
    broadcasts preservation work has started.
        I am pleased to report that our National Library Service for the
    Blind and Physically Handicapped is on schedule with the Digital
    Talking Book program. We have received the first 5,000 machines and are
    sending them to eight regional libraries for user testing. We will also
    send the first book cartridges to these regional libraries next week.
        On April 21, 2009, the Library, in cooperation with UNESCO,
    launched our new World Digital Library. Within hours of going online,
    this multilingual and multi-medial site had attracted 600,000 visits
    and more than 7 million page views. Our National Digital Library/
    American Memory site also began with a relatively small number of high
    quality, one-of-a-kind cultural treasures but has now steadily grown to
    more than 15 million online primary source files with educational
    enhancements.
                           fiscal 2010 budget request
        We are requesting a total fiscal 2010 budget of $699.4 million,
    representing a $52.6 million or 8.1 percent increase over fiscal 2009
    funding levels. The majority of this increase represents funding for
    mandatory pay and price level increases totaling $29.8 million or 4.6
    percent. Funding adjustments to support ongoing projects, totaling
    $16.6 million, and non-recurring funding for projects that are ending
    (-$13.7 million), represent a total of $2.9 million or 0.4 percent. The
    remaining 3.1 percent or $20 million represents the focus of our fiscal
    2010 budget request, seeking support for investment in the Library's
    technical infrastructure.
          modernizing the aging technology infrastructure--$20 million
    Infrastructure--$15.4 million
        The mandatory pay and price level increases are critical for
    keeping the Library whole, but our highest programmatic funding
    priority in fiscal 2010 is an increase in base funding to update and
    enhance the Library's technology infrastructure, upon which the
    progress of all service units of the Library depends. The Library
    requests $15.4 million to modernize our technology. This investment
    will fund: core technology, content management, and content delivery--
    three areas that are inextricably linked. We need an updated technology
    infrastructure before we can construct a foundation for bringing
    digital content into the Library, managing it so that it can be used by
    the Congress and the American people, and preserving it for future
    generations.
        Up until now, the Library has benefited from a centralized catalog
    of print holdings, but the digital projects have been designed and
    maintained separately. This is entirely understandable in a time of
    experimentation and transition, but at this stage of our digital
    maturation, we are now poised to develop core infrastructure that is
    used by all parts of the Library, and to implement flexible, scalable
    systems that meet the broad needs of the institution. The launch of the
    World Digital Library has proven to be a useful catalyst for the
    development of a new technology platform with reusable and scalable
    components. This modern form of technical infrastructure will allow us
    to streamline and make more efficient our workflows and processes
    throughout the Library.
        The 21st century Library is increasingly multi-medial. Our budget
    request will allow the Library to build sustainable systems to manage
    digital content of many varieties: video, audio, text, and images. Such
    technical systems will allow us to manage all of these formats in more
    cost-efficient, integrated ways. The funding we are requesting will
    also allow us to make these multi-media materials available to the
    Congress and other users in the ways they now expect: fast, convenient,
    and easy-to-use.
    Legislative Information System--$1.6 million
        One of the Library's key means of providing information to the
    Congress is through the Legislative Information System (LIS), which was
    first made available in the 105th Congress. This system provides
    Members and their staff with online access to the most current and
    comprehensive legislative information. The LIS has been developed under
    the direction of the House Committee on House Administration and the
    Senate Committee on Rules and Administration. It has been a
    collaborative project of several legislative branch offices and
    agencies. CRS has responsibility for overall coordination of the
    retrieval system. The Library is responsible for its technical
    development and operation.
        We are requesting a one-time investment of $1.6 million to update
    the current LIS so that it can meet growing demands. The new concept of
    operations will be based on a thorough assessment of the current system
    and develop an architecture that provides enhancements for users to
    better perform discovery, navigation, and retrieval across the entire
    spectrum of legislative content. The new system will take a modular
    approach to functions such as search and storage, so that they can be
    independently improved in the future. The Library will reconfigure LIS
    in consultation with House, Senate, Government Printing Office and CRS
    data providers.
    Targeted User Interactivity--$3 million
        Finally, we request an investment of $3 million to support the
    broad expansion of public access to the Library's collections and
    services on-site and online through the testing, evaluation, and
    adoption of emerging new technologies for the K-12 and teacher
    communities. Successful implementation of the Library of Congress
    Experience in the Thomas Jefferson Building has dramatically increased
    public awareness and unleashed the educational potential of the Library
    and its collections through the creative application of new interactive
    programs. Visitorship is up nearly 30 percent since its initial launch
    in April of 2008.
                  improving access, capabilities, and services
        Over the past 6 months, the Congressional Research Service has
    shown its exceptional capacity to serve the Congress under
    extraordinary and time-sensitive conditions. It provided comprehensive
    analysis and legislative support during the financial crisis, the auto
    industry crisis, the fiscal 2009 appropriations bill and the fiscal
    2010 budget resolution. It produced more than 100 reports for the
    American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 alone. This year it has
    identified more than 170 active issues for which it will support
    Congress in every step of the legislative process.
        We ask for $1.8 million to enhance access to Congressional Research
    Service (CRS) expertise by modernizing the technical environment that
    supports it. These systems govern how CRS manages and supports its
    research operations, personnel systems, and the systems used to run,
    maintain, and update the CRS web site for Congress. An additional
    $500,000 is requested to purchase network storage and switch hardware
    to improve the IT and emergency backup capability of CRS.
        The renewed LIS will also benefit the public THOMAS system. To
    continue to meet the public's need for legislative information, we
    request $138,000 to hire a web site manager who will develop a user
    interface and an improved navigation system for THOMAS users. The
    THOMAS site has seen a steady increase of inquiries from your
    constituents, and it is important that we make this web site more user
    friendly.
        We request a one-time $1.1 million increase in offsetting
    collections authority for the Copyright Licensing Division so that we
    can secure consulting services to help us convert from a manual to an
    electronic filing process. Electronic filing is needed to maintain
    reasonable operating costs in future years and to minimize increases
    that would be unacceptable to the Congress, copyright owners, and cable
    system operators.
        The Library is requesting $2.7 million to expand the availability
    and usefulness of legal materials collected and stored in the Global
    Legal Information Network (GLIN), a database of more than 160,000 laws
    and related legal materials from 51 jurisdictions in Africa, Asia,
    Europe, and the Americas. In fiscal 2005, the Law Library launched a
    major upgrade of the GLIN system that vastly improved functionality and
    usability, including providing access in 13 different languages. GLIN
    has since attracted a global audience that has increased tenfold,
    exceeding its performance target by 800 percent. As the system has
    improved, new jurisdictions have become members, the size of the
    database has increased, and the level of use continues to expand. This
    funding is specifically requested over a 5-year period, to upgrade and
    refresh the hardware and software to sustain GLIN operations as the
    program continues to expand in content, usage, and membership. This
    funding will also further the Law Library's mission to support the
    foreign law research needs of the Congress, promote the rule of law
    between and among nations, and support the legal information needs of
    emerging democracies. The Law Library has created a private GLIN
    Foundation and will work to attract private financing over the long
    term. This request will cover the hosting and maintenance of GLIN to
    ensure the continuity of operations as new members join.
                reengineering work processes in library services
        The Library staff increasingly relies on more current technologies
    to perform the new tasks that are required of them. We are assessing
    all of the workflows and processes to make the most effective use of
    present and emerging technologies. For Library Services (LS), where our
    core library functions are carried out, we are requesting $1 million in
    contractual support for a 3-year project to document and evaluate
    operational procedures and information technologies (IT) currently used
    in the 52 divisions of LS. We anticipate many opportunities to
    consolidate technology services within LS to create a more robust and
    integrated architecture and workflows. We will determine which data
    systems and services should be provided within LS and which should be
    provided centrally by the Library's Information Technology Services
    (ITS).
                       managing and securing collections
        We request $1 million to continue the inventory management program
    that was initiated in fiscal 2002 as a cornerstone of the Library's
    Strategic Collections Security Plan, when Congress directed the Library
    to conduct an item-level inventory of its general collections. We have
    made reasonably good progress with that inventory; however, when we
    began moving general collections to Fort Meade, we quickly recognized
    that our most important inventory goal had to be the effective
    retrieval of materials moved there. Happily, we have achieved a 100
    percent success rate in retrieving requested items from that location.
    Now, as we return to the original objective of conducting an item-level
    inventory of our general collections, we are working with the
    commercial sector to explore new technology options for this process.
    Some of these practices are already in place at Fort Meade. The scope
    of this effort is unprecedented. We are grateful for Congressional
    attention and support for this large and complex endeavor.
        To ensure that the Library's heritage assets are preserved for use
    by current and future generations, we are asking for $3.6 million in
    start up and new operational costs for Fort Meade Storage Modules 3 and
    4, which will house our special collections. This kind of housing for
    the Library's special collections is crucial to the Library's long-term
    strategy to provide for their security and preservation, as well as to
    provide sound space management and inventory management. This
    relocation will dramatically increase the life expectancy of these
    vulnerable collections.
        The operation of Modules 3 and 4 will be more intensive and
    expensive than the implementation of Modules 1 and 2, involving the
    expense of new hardware and software, collections protection and
    preservation, moving, on-site support staff, and facility management,
    largely because we are moving special format materials to Modules 3 and
    4, while Modules 1 and 2 house general collections. This year the
    Library is absorbing some costs associated with the opening of Modules
    3 and 4. Base funding is needed in fiscal 2010 for start-up and
    operational costs that will allow the Library to meet requirements in
    the areas of security, preservation, space management, and inventory
    management. With your support, we also will be able to conduct
    construction planning for Module 5 and prepare facility designs for
    Modules 6 and 7. The Architect of the Capitol has included $16 million
    in fiscal 2010 request for construction of Storage Module 5, which will
    help alleviate overcrowding on Capitol Hill and address serious
    concerns about safety, retrieval, and preservation.
        The construction of storage modules at Fort Meade has been one of
    the more significant preservation advances for the Library in decades.
    In short, this program has ensured that the Library of Congress remains
    the mint record of America's creativity by allowing continued
    acquisition of America's creative output and providing optimal storage
    conditions for our existing works.
                            additional requirements
        We are also asking for $238,000 for collections security on Capitol
    Hill, for extended reading room security guard services. Other
    requested funding includes $2 million for the final increment of
    mandated funding for Capital Security Cost Sharing, $2 million for
    modernized, environmentally friendly custodial services, $300,000 for
    facility design services for more complex renovations, and $334,000 for
    escape hoods for the visiting public.
                                   conclusion
        Mr. Chairman, I recognize that difficult choices are necessary in
    this economic climate. The Library has already recognized the need to
    sustain our core functions with level or reduced resources. We believe
    that the key to continued success is to make more effective use of
    technology. The $52.6 million we are requesting is an investment to
    ensure that the Library stays current with the new technology in
    today's Internet-based world while we continue to maintain traditional
    services. With your support, the Library will continue to perform its
    historic mission to make its resources available and useful to the
    Congress and the American people and to sustain and preserve the
    world's most extensive collection of knowledge and creativity for
    future generations. I believe that, with the careful investments I have
    outlined, the Library will continue, renew, and expand its role in our
    knowledge-based democracy--today and in the days to come. Thank you.
                                     ______

      Prepared Statement of Daniel P. Mulhollan, Director, Congressional
                                Research Service
        Mr. Chairman, Senator Murkowski, and other Members of the
    Subcommittee: Thank you for the opportunity to present the fiscal year
    2010 budget request for the Congressional Research Service (CRS). I
    would also like to highlight some of the actions and new initiatives
    undertaken recently that we consider essential elements in fulfilling
    the mission that Congress established for this agency. But before I
    discuss our request for next year, I would like to spend a few minutes
    on the importance of the mission of CRS and to relate that mission to
    the current challenges facing the Congress.
        You, as Members of Congress, are required to resolve issues that
    are growing more complex and technical and that are becoming
    increasingly interrelated in both expected and unforeseen ways. This
    complexity necessitates increased reliance on technical competence,
    which in turn demands predictability and coherence in issue areas from
    disciplines that traditionally have been more reliant on projections
    and probability. But whether determining the impact of changes in
    financial market regulations, ascertaining a method for equitable State
    allocations for Federal Medicaid payments, or examining a proposal to
    balance interests in a contentious region of the world, the well-being
    of millions of Americans is at stake if data and analysis do not
    accurately predict actual outcomes.
        The elected representatives of the people are able to rely on the
    expertise of CRS to assess options and anticipate consequences as they
    undertake critical deliberations. Our work must be authoritative,
    objective and confidential, and we must offer just what our charter
    statute instructs us to do, namely, to anticipate the consequences of
    alternative proposals and in doing so, foresee unintended consequences.
        Anticipating the consequences of proposals is becoming ever more
    difficult. The increased complexity of the problems facing Congress is
    obvious. Just look at the array of financial instruments that Members
    must understand and grasp with sufficient confidence to create a
    regulatory regime that maximizes the benefits of innovation and market
    competition while curtailing fraud and abuse. Members must rely on
    specialists in the financial markets, just as they must rely on foreign
    relations specialists with regional expertise to recognize the
    political and cultural forces at work in the world today, and health
    finance experts and health care specialists to understand the factors
    contributing to growing health care costs.
        Congress's reliance on the expertise of others presents a potential
    risk to representative democracy. Citizens elect Members of the House
    and Senate to represent their interests and the interests of the Nation
    as a whole. In effect, your constituents ask you to make decisions on
    the merits of one form of weaponry over another; on the fairest and
    most economically sound way to allocate broadband width; on the balance
    of economic, human rights, labor and environmental interests in a
    bilateral trade agreement; and on the best investment in alternative
    energy technologies. No matter how brilliant and wide-ranging the
    experience of each Member of Congress, he or she must perforce rely on
    the expertise of others on a whole range of issues to ascertain the
    best policy course given his or her values and priorities.
        Democratic theorists have raised the specter of the polity being
    run by technocrats and elite bureaucracies that supplant the people's
    voice and choice in determining the best course in an increasingly
    complex world. I would submit that an important protection against that
    vision is the expertise resident within CRS. The Congress has placed a
    significant investment in the competency and integrity of CRS staff.
    Members of Congress have all sorts of experts approaching them daily,
    and they have, of course, hired personal and committee staff with
    selected expertise or experience. Nonetheless, Members know and rely on
    Service expertise, not only to assess independently the outside expert
    opinions advocated before them, but also to complement their own
    experience and knowledge, and that of their staff, to ensure that the
    judgments they make are as well informed as possible.
        When Members turn to CRS, they can be assured that analysis they
    receive is authoritative, objective, and confidential. We do not
    advocate. We make methodologies and sources clear, and we hold
    legislative needs paramount, including the role of each individual
    Member in the deliberative processes of the Congress. The Congress's
    continued investment in CRS is tacit recognition of the need for
    expertise skilled in multiple disciplines in order that they understand
    the interactions and consequences of complex issues. The Congress also
    recognizes its need to have access to expertise that is solely devoted
    to creating sound underpinnings to inform judgments within the
    legislative branch.
                        fiscal year 2010 budget request
        The CRS budget request for fiscal year 2010 is $115,136,000, with
    almost 90 percent devoted to pay and benefits for our staff.
    Significant cost-cutting measures were required in the last fiscal year
    because the enacted budget was over $6 million less than requested.
    This necessitated a reduction in our workforce from the previous FTE
    level of 705 to the current level of 675. This is the lowest staff
    level in three decades, and CRS will continue to operate with a reduced
    level of internal support staff and services to sustain our analytic
    capacity. The lower budget also required reductions in the access to
    research materials and in the investment in information technology. The
    current budget constrains funding to support basic operational needs.
    Therefore it is necessary to request additional funding for enhanced
    means of accessing CRS analysis and information.
        The budget request for fiscal year 2010 includes the mandatory pay
    increases ($5.2 million) and price-level increases due to inflation
    ($.3 million) that will maintain the existing level of service. It also
    requests two program increases totaling $2.3 million that will enhance
    the analysis available to Congress and the capabilities of the
    supporting information technology. Included in the $2.3 million request
    is $1.8 million for a modernization effort to achieve three objectives:
    (1) improve the quality and usability of the CRS website; (2)
    reconstruct and standardize Service-wide systems and information
    resources to form an integrated, interrelated, and interoperable
    research environment; and (3) revise the way CRS procures, stores,
    updates, retrieves, and shares the large, multiple, and complex data
    sets and information systems used in the creation of its analysis. The
    remaining $500,000 will support three other objectives: (1) provide
    real-time computer network fault tolerance, data redundancy, and
    automated fail-over capability in the event the computer network in the
    James Madison Building is inoperative; (2) increase network speeds to
    the Alternative Computer Facility and improve performance of critical
    applications and file transfers, which will reduce the time required to
    save files and run applications; and (3) increase computer storage
    capacity to help meet the growing demand to store CRS work products and
    research information, encompassing the full range of multimedia formats
    such as video, audio, and podcasts.
                          alignment with the congress
        CRS takes full advantage of its close relationship with the
    Congress to align its work with evolving congressional needs across the
    full spectrum of policy concerns that are on the legislative agenda, or
    are likely to arise.
        CRS works in a consultative relationship with Congress so that
    specific congressional needs are recognized as they relate to evolving
    circumstances, including changes in world events, advances in
    government operations, and developments in legislative processes.
    Members and committees of Congress and their staffs maintain
    continuing, on-demand access to CRS experts through phone calls, e-
    mails, personal briefings, confidential CRS memoranda, and by
    consulting actively maintained CRS research products on our website.
        Based on its daily work with the Congress, CRS identifies and
    analyzes the policy areas in which Congress is actively engaged or is
    very likely to become engaged. CRS typically identifies between 150 and
    175 such issue areas. CRS ensures that it has identified all major
    issues that might receive legislative attention through discussions
    with leadership on both sides of the aisle in both chambers. CRS
    support for these policy areas entails formation of teams of experts
    who develop common understandings of major policy questions and
    concerns to ensure that our service for the Congress is fully informed
    by the most appropriate CRS expertise across disciplines and subject
    areas. The CRS website provides ready access to key research products
    and services in each of these policy areas.
                            support for the congress
        Over the past year, the Congress has consistently turned to CRS
    when in need of expert, objective assistance as it has addressed
    extraordinarily challenging and enduring problems.
        The financial and economic crisis that still dominates domestic and
    global settings has been the focus of intensive, continuing CRS support
    for Congress. In this area, congressional concerns that have driven the
    work of CRS experts include: limiting damage from the disorder in
    housing markets; restoring functionality to mortgage markets and credit
    markets generally; ensuring viability of financial institutions and
    their return to standard business operations; assessing impacts on
    other credit-sensitive sectors such as autos, home furnishings, and the
    pursuit of higher education; recognizing structural shifts in the
    economy accelerated by the downturn; as well as assisting victims of
    the recession, and mitigating the downturn through oversight and
    regulatory provisions that will limit the recurrence of destabilizing
    financial excesses. CRS economists, legislative attorneys, and
    specialists in American national government, among others, have
    analyzed a range of proposals from the previous and current
    administrations, examined actions in other countries, and assisted in
    assessing evolving economic developments and in identifying and
    evaluating legislative options. Questions CRS has addressed relate to
    concerns such as feasibility, effectiveness, constitutionality,
    unintended consequences, separation of powers, and federalism issues--
    all in a context of largely unprecedented circumstances.
        Other major policy areas facing Congress have also commanded multi-
    disciplinary support from CRS experts, often on a confidential basis,
    and with the need for objectivity and independence from executive
    branch and outside interests. Notable examples of continuing, expert
    support relate to congressional efforts to ensure appropriate and
    effective U.S. engagement in Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, and the broader
    Middle East; provide for emergency responses to Midwest flooding and
    Gulf-coast and Mid-Atlantic hurricanes and mitigate needs for future
    disaster responses; meet energy needs of the Nation with due
    consideration for both environmental imperatives and ongoing functions
    of the economy; improve the safety of food, drugs, and other products
    for American consumers; and limit undue influence of special interests
    in making and executing policy.
                             management initiatives
        The past year saw several successful initiatives aimed at making
    CRS a more efficient and effective organization and enhancing its value
    to the Congress.
    Section Research Managers
        During the past year, CRS revamped its first-line management
    structure, hiring section research managers and integrating them into
    the management of the organization. They are working to ensure that the
    Service stays aligned to the legislative challenges facing the Congress
    through collaboration, multi-disciplinary research and analysis, and by
    fostering an energetic work environment. They have already succeeded in
    breaking down barriers that had at times impeded our ability to
    collaborate and effectively marshal our expertise. Their new thinking
    on ways to address issues on the legislative agenda and convey CRS's
    expertise to the Congress brings both immediate and long-term benefits.
    This corps of section research managers will also serve as a resource
    for management succession in CRS.
    Professional Development Enhancement
        CRS developed enhanced performance standards for each position in
    the Service, as well as performance plans and individual development
    plans. This large undertaking involved a Service-wide coordinated
    effort and is part of a commitment to developing a continuous learning
    culture and to engage fully every individual in his or her own
    professional development. At the end of 2008, 76 percent of the staff
    had created and received supervisor approval of their individual
    development plans for the year.
    Authoring and Publishing Reports
        CRS has implemented a new process for production and formatting of
    CRS research products, streamlining preparation, display, and
    maintenance of these products. CRS undertook this complex effort to
    create research products for the Congress that more efficiently support
    PDF and HTML distribution through the CRS website, standardize the
    presentation format using a uniform and consistent new product design,
    and facilitate more sophisticated use of graphics.
    Tracking Inquiries from Congress
        CRS is in the final stages of configuring a new system to track and
    manage congressional requests from entry to completion. This entails
    customizing an off-the-shelf customer relations management tool. This
    system, known as Mercury, will replace the outdated Inquiry Status and
    Information System (ISIS) and includes additional features to increase
    responsiveness to congressional needs; support research management;
    foster collaboration among researchers; and identify Service-wide
    activity by issue area.
    Redesign of the CRS Website
        CRS has developed a multiyear, phased plan to make CRS.gov more
    user-friendly and ensure that Congress has ready access to the full
    breadth and depth of our analytical and other services. Many
    congressional and CRS staff provided their views on the strengths and
    weaknesses of the current site and ideas for enhancements. These views
    helped to shape our final design. The initial effort this year will
    begin to provide better organization of material and a more intuitive
    navigation of the website.
                                   conclusion
        In making our fiscal year 2010 budget request of $115,136,000, we
    are mindful of the formidable challenge you face in weighing budget
    requests in this period of difficult economic conditions. My managers
    and I have and will continue to examine every activity and program for
    efficiencies and eliminate costs where the return on investment is in
    question. This budget request will provide the resources needed for the
    talented and dedicated staff of CRS to continue to build on the unique
    tradition of providing comprehensive, non-partisan, confidential,
    authoritative, and objective analysis to the Congress. We are proud of
    our role, and we thank you for your support.
                                     ______

        Prepared Statement of Marybeth Peters, Register of Copyrights,
                                Copyright Office
        Mr. Chairman, Ms. Murkowski, and other Members of the Subcommittee:
    Thank you for the opportunity to present the Copyright Office's fiscal
    2010 budget request. Today I would like speak with you about some of
    the work and challenges the Copyright Office faced in fiscal 2008. In
    addition, I would like to talk about the Office's Historic Records
    Project that was funded as part of the fiscal 2009 Budget and our
    request for additional offsetting authority to complete our Licensing
    Reengineering effort, which is part of the Copyright Office's portion
    of the Library's fiscal 2010 budget request.
                      highlights of copyright office work
    Policy and Legal Activities
        On June 30, 2008, the Office presented its Report to Congress on
    the statutory licenses (Sections 111, 119, and 122 of the Copyright
    Act) that allow cable operators and satellite carriers to retransmit
    programming carried on over-the-broadcast television signals. The
    Report, which Congress requested as part of the Satellite Home Viewer
    Extension and Reauthorization Act of 2004, analyzed the differences in
    the terms and conditions of these statutory licenses and considered
    their continued necessity in light of changes in the marketplace over
    the last 30 years. The Report has served as the starting point for
    continuing discussions on legislation to extend the Section 119
    statutory license, which is set to expire on December 31, 2009, unless
    reauthorized by Congress. The Office is working with Senate Judiciary
    staff and stakeholders on proposed amendments to these licenses.
        The Office has worked closely with the Senate Judiciary Committee
    on other pressing copyright matters. One significant issue has been
    orphan works, i.e., the situation where a potential user cannot
    identify or locate the owner of copyrighted works (including literary
    works, photographs, motion pictures, sound recordings and other
    creative works). In April 2008, the Senate introduced the Shawn Bentley
    Orphan Works Act of 2008 (S. 2913) was introduced in the Senate, passed
    by unanimous consent on September 26, 2008. Due to several unresolved
    issues in the House, the Office expects to assist the House Judiciary
    staff on this subject in 2009.
        The Office has also worked with Judiciary Committee staff to
    develop legislation relating to the public performance right for sound
    recordings in Section 106 of the Copyright Act. The Performance Rights
    Act (S. 379), introduced in the 111th Congress, would amend the
    copyright law to expand the public performance right of sound recording
    copyright owners to include analog audio transmissions. This change
    would, for the first time, require over-the-air radio stations to make
    royalty payments to record companies and recording artists.
        Another issue that the Office will address in 2009 concerns the
    copyright treatment of pre-1972 sound recordings. The issue is
    complicated because these works were not eligible for Federal copyright
    protection before February 15, 1972; rather, they were governed by
    State law which, in many cases, is not well-defined. Pursuant to the
    Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009, the Office has been directed by
    Congress to conduct a study on the desirability of, and means for,
    bringing sound recordings fixed before February 15, 1972, under Federal
    jurisdiction. The Office's report is due in March 2011.
        In 2008, the Copyright Office assisted Federal Government agencies
    with a number of multilateral, regional and bilateral negotiations and
    served on many U.S. delegations. Notable among these were meetings of
    the World Intellectual Property Organization's (WIPO's) General
    Assemblies and its Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights,
    negotiations regarding a proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement,
    and negotiations and meetings relating to intellectual property
    provisions of existing and proposed Free Trade Agreements. The Office
    also was a key advisor to the United States Trade Representative in a
    successful World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute settlement proceeding
    against China relating to intellectual property protection and
    enforcement in China. The Office expects to continue to play a leading
    role in the United States delegations to WIPO and in other multilateral
    and bilateral meetings and to advise other Federal agencies on
    international and domestic copyright law and policy matters.
        Last year, the Office assisted the Justice Department in a number
    of important court cases, including some involving constitutional
    challenges to various provisions of the Copyright Act.
        In addition to the Office's work on legal and policy issues, fiscal
    2008 was an exciting and challenging year for Copyright Office
    operations.
    Reengineering Program
        At the end of fiscal 2007, the Copyright Office implemented its
    reengineering project: redesigned processes, initiation of hands-on
    training in new operations for the entire staff, established new
    organizations, launched a new integrated IT system to process
    registrations, and renovated facilities. In addition, on July 1, 2008,
    the online registration system Copyright Office (eCO) was released to
    the public through the Copyright Office website.
        The May 19, 2009 Washington Post article containing substantial
    errors, did highlight the paper application registration backlog issue
    we are facing. The article did not choose to discuss our continuing
    efforts to improve operations through staff retraining and realignment,
    technology system enhancements and reallocation of tasks.
        In February 2009 we completed the retraining for all Copyright
    Registration Specialists, and when compared to May 2008, their
    productivity per specialist has doubled. In April 2009, we completed
    the hiring of our first class of new Registration Specialists in over 2
    years. The new Specialists are in training and are already productive.
    Looking ahead we will maintain a continuous improvement initiative
    focused on identifying and implementing workflow and IT system
    improvements.
                Organization
        At the beginning of fiscal 2008, all staff had been reassigned or
    selected for new positions. Honoring the Register's commitment to
    ensure all Copyright staff had positions after reengineering, the
    Office continued its major program to retrain former examiners and
    catalogers to work in a combined position, Copyright Registration
    Specialist. The registration specialists use eCO and the redesigned
    registration process to: examine claims including any related
    correspondence, complete a registration record, and in many cases, make
    selections for the Library's collections. Training was conducted in
    house by Senior Registration Specialists. To date all Registration
    Specialists with us in August 2007 have received at least 1 full year
    of appropriate training and a full year of related experience in eCO.
    Training began in fiscal 2007, extended through 2008, and concluded in
    February 2009. Targeted training to meet individual employee needs is
    still provided. As more Registration Specialists completed training and
    achieved independence, the senior Registration Specialists who served
    as trainers were able to return to full time registration duties.
        During the initial implementation of reengineering, Copyright
    Office management announced a 1-year suspension of performance
    requirements, permitting staff sufficient time to gain the requisite
    training, familiarity, and experience with the new processes and IT
    system. In August, 2008, Office management and AFSCME Local 2910 (the
    Guild) representing the affected employees signed an agreement
    regarding implementation and impact of the new performance requirements
    As agreed, written performance requirements for individual employees
    went into effect October 1, 2008. Phased in following a 90-day grace
    period after each registration specialist reached his/her 1-year
    anniversary working in the new system, the performance requirements
    included a productivity rate of 2.5 claims opened per hour and
    qualitative benchmarks.
        With the implementation of new performance requirements,
    productivity rose in the second quarter of fiscal 2009. For
    Registration Specialists who are still within the 90-day grace period
    before the performance requirements take effect, the overall group
    average is 2.6 per hour. For Registration Specialists who have
    completed training and for whom the performance requirement is in
    force, the overall group average is approximately 3.0 per hour. This is
    double our hourly productivity from where we were in May 2008.
                Processes
        Through its continuous improvement initiative, the Office further
    refined the reengineered processes by examining workflows and support
    systems. On occasion, we adjusted and improved work processes or
    systems to enhance efficiencies. Throughout the year, we identified
    issues, developed alternative processes, and tested and implemented the
    best options. For example, realizing that missing or incorrect fees
    were slowing workflow in the Registration division, we shifted the fee
    resolution process to RAC, a much earlier step in the workflow. This
    improved the registration process time and resulted in a better balance
    of the staff's workload.
        We also examined how to improve eCO's responsiveness. By analyzing
    how eCO processed data, we were able to implement basic system
    redesigns, reducing user wait times.
                Information Technology
        The electronic Copyright Office system has two components: eCO
    Service, which supports online registration (e-Service) and enables
    processing of both electronic and hardcopy claim submissions; and eCO
    Search, which permits searching of more than 20 million registration
    records dating to 1978.
        The Office applies the continuous improvement concept to the
    ongoing refinement of eCO. Earlier this year the Copyright Technology
    Office restructured the Copyright Office's systems internal oversight
    board. The new board is comprised of Office processing divisions'
    supervisors and staff. The board is responsible for reviewing,
    evaluating, prioritizing and recommending proposed eCO system
    improvements. The board gives the employees directly involved with eCO
    a voice to suggest system improvements to enhance operations. To date,
    the Office has implemented a large number of incremental enhancements
    to improve system performance and functionality. As we continue to move
    into 2009, we expect the process will continue to be effective.
        In fiscal 2008, the Office initiated an eCO system Performance
    Improvement Project (eCO PIP) designed to optimize eCO performance and
    to develop short-and long-term recommendations for additional system
    improvements. Following the first round of optimization efforts, system
    performance improved by 50 percent.
        Electronic Submissions.--On July 1, 2008 the Office opened to the
    public eCO e-Service for basic claims, enabling users to submit via the
    Internet, copyright applications and certain classes of copyright
    deposits. Prior to July 2008, e-Service was opened under a limited-
    access beta test. During the last quarter of fiscal 2008, the Office
    created 46,118 e-Service user accounts and processed 59,850 e-Service
    claims. Approximately 43,000 users charged copyright application fees
    to credit cards or bank accounts and the rest charged fees to existing
    deposit accounts. Users submitted approximately 35,000 electronic
    deposit copies; the remaining claims were submitted with hard copy
    deposits sent in by regular mail. By the end of fiscal 2008,
    approximately 72,500 individuals and organizations were registered e-
    Service users. Electronic claims through e-Service now account for well
    over 50 percent of weekly copyright applications received.
        Form CO with 2-D Barcode.--On July 1, 2008, the Office released the
    new Form CO that incorporates two dimensional (2-D) barcode technology.
    The first Form CO submissions were received and processed in September.
    The forms, which are completed online, are intended for applicants who
    prefer not to transact business over the Internet. When printed out,
    each form has scannable 2-D barcodes which encode all the data entered
    in the form. When the Office scans the 2-D barcodes, all fields of the
    eCO record are populated automatically without the need for manual data
    entry.
    Registration of Copyright Claims, Recordation of Documents, and Deposit
            of Copies of Copyrighted Works
        During fiscal 2008, the Copyright Office received 561,428 copyright
    claims covering more than 1 million works. Of the claims received,
    232,907 were registered and 526,508 copies of registered and
    unregistered works valued at $24 million were transferred to the
    Library of Congress for its collections and exchange programs. The
    Office recorded 11,341 documents which included more than 330,000
    titles of works.
        There were 231,000 claims in process in eCO 1 year ago; today there
    are approximately 500,000. The number of copyright claims received in
    fiscal 2008 is comparable to previous years, but the Office registered
    fewer than half the number of claims compared to previous years and
    transferred fewer than half the typical annual number of deposit copies
    to the Library. These reductions are reflective of the significant
    challenges the Office faced in the wake of reengineering
    implementation. There were a number of contributing factors.
      --As mentioned earlier, Registration Specialists required extensive
            training in new processes and the use of eCO. This training
            impacted productivity in multiple ways: first senior
            registration specialist needed to learn the system then the
            senior specialists needed to train junior staff. In effect, the
            first few months of fiscal 2008, production was significantly
            limited.
      --The Office implemented eCO in August 2007, with electronic claims
            processing officially opening almost a year later. Processing
            paper claims electronically proved to be more difficult than
            originally anticipated, with Optical Character Recognition
            (OCR) technology being less successful than expected. The paper
            claims became labor intensive requiring manual data entry into
            the eCO system before the claim could be examined. Combined
            with staff retraining, slow processing of paper claims was a
            contributing factor to the build-up of claims on hand in fiscal
            2008. Public acceptance of e-Service filing, 2-D barcode
            technology and a fully-trained staff have helped us overcome
            these issues.
      --Some large submitters have been slow to adopt electronic filing;
            however, there is a strong indication that in the very near
            future more will move to e-Service.
      --As with any large-scale IT implementation, eCO underwent
            adjustments for usability, efficiency, and stability. The
            Office has largely resolved the issues.
      --Although the Office lost registration specialists through normal
            attrition, to focus training efforts on existing staff,
            management made the decision to hold new hiring until 2009.
            While the decision was necessary, it lead to a temporary
            staffing shortage, adversely affected production. As April
            2009, all Registration Specialists positions are filled.
        The Office has taken a number of steps to improve processing time
    and reduce the number of claims on hand. Subsequently, the production
    trends are very positive in a number of areas.
      --Large bottlenecks of unprocessed works received in the mail have
            been reduced, by more than 65 percent.
      --Paper applications awaiting data entry into eCO have been reduced
            by more than 85 percent: from a high of 34,000 to under 5,000.
      --Unprocessed check batches were reduced from a 6-week lag to real-
            time processing.
      --During fiscal 2008, we closed approximately 40 percent of submitted
            claims. To date through fiscal 2009, we are at 60 percent
            closed claims.
      --As mentioned earlier, training has concluded for all Registration
            Specialists who were on board as of August 2007. As a result,
            registration specialist productivity increased across the board
            to double that of 1 year ago.
      --As more Registration Specialists become fully independent, the
            number of staff requiring quality assurance reviews of their
            work declines, allowing Senior Registration Specialists,
            currently responsible for quality assurance reviews, to focus
            more time on processing claims.
      --The Office recently appointed two new registration specialists in
            the Visual Arts and Recordation Division and seven new
            registration specialists in the Performing Arts Division. On
            April 27, eight new registration specialists started in the
            Literary Division. These actions address the short staffing
            situation that contributed to low production and growth in the
            volume of claims in process.
      --The eCO e-Service online registration system was released to the
            public on July 1, 2008. By the end of fiscal 2008, e-filings
            reached almost 50 percent of all claims entered. The percentage
            for fiscal 2009 thus far has been 53 percent. As the volume of
            e-Service claims increases the volume of paper claims
            decreases, which has a favorable effect on productivity.
      --Registration Specialists have been freed from activities that
            detracted from reducing the number of claims in process:
        --The Office established a quality assurance program targeting data
                entry errors during the process of manually keying data
                from scanned paper applications into electronic records.
                This action reduced the time spent by Registration
                Specialists correcting data entry errors.
        --The Office began identifying and routing claims with fee problems
                to the Accounts Section earlier in the production process.
                This action dramatically reduced the volume of
                correspondence that Registration Specialists were required
                to generate in response to short fees and other fee-related
                problems.
        The volume of paper claims on hand will continue to affect
    processing times until actions already taken or planned by the Office--
    eliminating the short staffing in the Registration Divisions, achieving
    a fully trained staff, implementing strategies to attract more filers
    to eCO, and upgrading to the newest version of the software application
    that powers eCO--have taken full effect.
        Thus far in fiscal 2009 the Office is experiencing a downturn in
    the number of claims received, which we believe is related to the
    current economic environment. At this time, projections indicate a
    possible fiscal 2009 decline in copyright claims of somewhat over 5
    percent compared with fiscal 2008. The Office is taking a cautious
    approach to managing the fiscal 2009 budget to ensure that we remain
    within the forecasted revenue base.
    Copyright Records Digitization Project
        In July 2008, the Copyright Office initiated a study to determine
    how to approach the digitization of its 70 million pre-1978 copyright
    records, many of which are sole copy records. The Office is now ready
    to move beyond the initial planning stages of the project. The
    objectives of the project are to:
      --Provide online access to records of copyright ownership for the
            years from 1923 to 1977 inclusive.
      --Provide online indexes as a finding aid to these records.
      --Create preservation copies of the paper records of copyright
            ownership dating back to 1870.
      --Move from microfilm to online digital records.
        Earlier this year the Office issued a Request for Information (RFI)
    targeting vendors with expertise in records digitization. The Office
    received and reviewed 21 responses to the RFI. In fiscal 2009, we
    intend to initiate a pilot test of several options for digitization
    across a representative sample of the copyright record types and
    formats. Based on the pilot test, we will determine the best
    alternative and begin full production digitization in fiscal 2010. The
    project's duration may extend over several years as necessary based on
    funding availability. However, the plan also calls for flexibility
    allowing us to seek out partnering opportunities that may both reduce
    the digitization cost and shorten the project's duration.
    Licensing 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. The goals of this
    reengineering effort are to decrease statement of account processing
    times by 30 percent or more and to improve public access to Office
    records. The estimated $1.1 million cost of re-engineering will be
    assessed against royalty funds as soon as the Office is granted the
    authority to do so. Fiscal 2010 will be challenging for the Licensing
    Division. The IT system design and implementation must go forward even
    as changes to the copyright law, particularly 111 and 119, are being
    considered. Licensing Division staff may also be forced to work through
    statements of account using the old processing system as the new system
    is piloted.
    Conclusion
        Mr. Chairman, I ask you to support the fiscal 2010 budget request
    including the request for additional offsetting authority to complete
    the Licensing Reengineering efforts. Fiscal 2008 was a transitional
    year for the Office; we are hopeful that the measures we implement in
    fiscal 2009 will help us to overcome many of the reengineering
    challenges.
        I also want to thank the Congress for its past support of the
    Copyright Office reengineering efforts and our budget requests.

        Senator Nelson. Ambassador O'Keefe.
    STATEMENT OF AMBASSADOR JOHN O'KEEFE, EXECUTIVE
                DIRECTOR, OPEN WORLD LEADERSHIP CENTER
        Ambassador O'Keefe. Thank you, sir.
        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Murkowski, thank you for the
    opportunity to testify on the Open World Leadership Center's
    fiscal year 2010 budget.
        As the Center's Open World program matures, we see its
    growing significance for both the American communities and
    organizations that make it successful and for the participating
    young leaders from countries of strategic interest to the
    United States.
        With me today is our chairman, Dr. Billington, who, 10
    years ago, proposed what Under Secretary of State for Political
    Affairs William Burns has said is the most effective exchange
    program of the many he was involved with. In 1999, with strong
    bipartisan support from Congress, Dr. Billington, Russian
    academician Dmitry Likhachev, and then-Ambassador to Russia
    James Collins brought forward a leadership exchange program
    that has benefited both the United States and new countries
    born from the breakup of the Soviet Union.
        Thanks to Open World, there are scores of Russian
    nonproliferation experts who now know their American
    counterparts and have a greater sense of joint purpose. There
    are anti-human trafficking advocates and officials in Ukraine
    who have a better understanding of how to track down
    perpetrators of this crime and assist their victims. And there
    are mayors and city councilors in Moldova and Azerbaijan who
    are making local governments more open and responsive to
    ordinary citizens.
        In reviewing this legislative branch agency's effectiveness
    over the years and our successful expansion beyond our original
    focus country of Russia to Ukraine, Moldova, the Caucasus, and
    central Asia, I must give credit to our dedicated staff, the
    partner host organizations, and volunteer experts and home
    hosts across the United States. I am honored to serve a program
    with such broad support in U.S. communities and in countries
    where we operate.

                    BROAD DISTRIBUTION OF HOSTING IN U.S.A.

        In 2008, we have sent delegates to 355 communities in 44
    States. Seven hundred fifty American families home hosted these
    first-time visitors to the United States. We will attain that
    same broad geographic distribution in our hosting program this
    year.
        My main disappointment lies in not accommodating all those
    in the United States who wish to be part of Open World. We have
    more than twice the number of organizations that want to engage
    with us than we have participant slots available.
        Our request this year reflects the revised strategic goals
    approved by our board recently. The original plan called for a
    20 percent expansion between fiscal years 2007 and 2011.
        Even with economies of scale, gifts, and our cost
    reductions, such a goal would require a substantial budget
    increase, which the board believed was not feasible at this
    time. Therefore, our request of $14.456 million is a modest 4
    percent increase. This amount will support expansion to Armenia
    in 2010, as well as other programs.
        We have been good stewards of the funds you have given us.
    Our overhead is 7.1 percent, and for 3 consecutive years, we
    have received clean audits. This year, the auditor had no
    comments, no findings, and no discussion points, which is
    amazing, for those of you who are familiar with audits.

                               PREPARED STATEMENT

        Open World's board and its hosting partners throughout the
    United States have created a powerful tool for Congress and our
    Nation to forge human links to the vast and strategically
    important heartland of Eurasia. I seek your support to continue
    our efforts in the next fiscal year.
        Thank you for your attention.
        Senator Nelson. Thank you very much.
        [The statement follows:]
                       Prepared Statement of John O'Keefe
        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Murkowski, Senator Pryor, and Senator
    Tester, I appreciate the opportunity to present testimony on the Open
    World Leadership Center's budget request for fiscal year 2010. The Open
    World Leadership Center, of which I am the Executive Director, 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. All of us
    at Open World are very grateful for Congress's continued support and
    for Congressional participation in the Program and on our governing
    board. We look forward to working with you on the future of Open World.
        Last year, American volunteers in 44 States and 202 Congressional
    Districts home hosted Open World participants, contributing a large
    portion of the approximately $1.8 million given to the Program in the
    form of cost shares--an amount equal to 20 percent of the Center's
    fiscal year 2008 appropriation. Even though Open World is an
    international exchange program, more than 75 percent of Open World's
    fiscal year 2008 appropriated funds were expended on U.S. goods and
    services through contracts and grants.
        More than 14,000 emerging leaders from Russia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan,
    Georgia, 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.
        In fiscal year 2008, Open World had a 35 percent reduction in
    appropriated funds, which would have translated into an estimated 37
    percent reduction in grants to U.S. organizations. However, through
    cost shares, staff cuts, contract terminations, an interagency
    transfer, and withdrawals from Open World trust fund reserves, the
    Center was able to maintain the quality of the Program and the number
    of participants at levels consistent with prior-year averages.
        The Center's budget request of $14.456 million for fiscal year 2010
    is a modest 4 percent increase over the fiscal year 2009 level of $13.9
    million, even though the cost of the logistical services contract will
    rise 6 percent. We will close this gap and maintain a participant
    hosting level of 1,400 through additional cost shares, with a portion
    coming from our partners abroad. We estimate that, as occurred with our
    fiscal year 2008 appropriation, more than 75 percent of the
    appropriated funds will be spent on U.S. goods and services, including
    $4.16 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 cost-share efforts
        The Center actively seeks a wide range of partners to diversify
    funding and strengthen the Open World Program. In 2008, the Center
    received interagency funding and direct contributions totaling over
    $900,000. Cost shares, mainly from American grantees and hosts, added
    an estimated $1.8 million. We received pledges of $950,000 as gifts
    (for a 3-year period) directed to programs not supported by
    appropriated funds. These pledges include a $500,000 commitment (to be
    spent over 3 years) for our alumni program from Open World Trustee
    George Argyros, and $450,000 (to be spent over 3 years to host health
    and education leaders from the Republic of Buryatia) from Senator
    Vitaliy Malkin of the Russian Parliament. To date, we have received
    $482,000 of the $950,000 pledged.
        An interagency transfer of $530,000 from the National Endowment for
    the Arts (NEA) to support all the hosting costs of the Russian Cultural
    Leaders Program represented a 6 percent increase over NEA transfers in
    previous years.
        In 2007, the Center initiated a cost-share reporting requirement
    for all grantees in an effort to track the generous in-kind support
    that they and local hosts provide to the Open World Program. The
    Program received an estimated $1.75 million in donated goods and
    services from hosts and grantees in 2007--equal to 13 percent of the
    Center's fiscal year 2007 appropriation. We expect to see a higher
    share for 2008 when the cumulative figures become available later this
    spring.
        The Open World alumni program is paid for exclusively with
    nonappropriated funds. Open World has actively sought in-kind
    opportunities and cost shares in this area as well.
        Numerous U.S. judges and legal professionals involved with Open
    World exchanges make independently financed reciprocal trips to meet
    with program alumni. In 2008, 61 American jurists involved with Open
    World's rule of law program made such reciprocal working visits to Open
    World program countries. Reciprocal visits with alumni help fulfill
    Open World's mission of strengthening peer-to-peer ties and
    partnerships.
                            open world and congress
        As a U.S. Legislative Branch entity, the Open World Leadership
    Center seeks to link Congress's foreign policy interests with citizen
    diplomacy. The Program proactively involves Members of Congress in its
    programming and strives to make this programming responsive to
    Congressional priorities. In 2008, nearly one out of four (353) Open
    World participants met with Members of Congress and Congressional
    staff, either in Washington, D.C., or in the Members' constituencies.
        A majority of the trustees on the Center's governing board are
    current or former Members of Congress. The Center also regularly
    consults with the House Democracy Assistance Commission (HDAC), the
    Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, the Congressional
    Georgia Caucus, the Congressional Ukrainian Caucus, other Congressional
    entities, and individual Members with specific interests in Open World
    countries or thematic areas. Moreover, in 2008, for the first time, the
    Center partnered with HDAC to provide Open World programming to three
    Ukrainian and six Georgian parliamentary staffers. The Center hopes to
    build on this partnership and to continue its success in the coming
    years.
                              measures of success
        The Open World Leadership Center tracks the results of the Open
    World Program 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 2,000 results (see attached
    Results Chart). Some representative results are:
      --A Russian alumna was one of seven recipients of the Secretary of
            State's 2009 International Women of Courage Awards. Accompanied
            by First Lady Michelle Obama, Secretary Clinton praised the
            alumna for her ``stalwart leadership in seeking justice for the
            families of bereaved [military] service members.''
      --Ukrainian alumna Anzhela Lytvenenko and her organization Successful
            Woman won a $15,000 Democracy Grant for a project to improve
            government/NGO cooperation on human-trafficking prevention in
            Ukraine's Kherson Region.
      --An Azerbaijani alumnus designed a brochure for recruiting citizen
            election monitors based on a form for enlisting campaign
            volunteers that he obtained from Representative John Sarbanes
            (MD) during an April 2008 Open World visit to the Baltimore
            area.
      --Open World host and Atlanta-Tbilisi (Georgia) Sister City Committee
            Chairman John Hall partnered with alumni in Tbilisi to organize
            an economic summit in Atlanta in December 2008.
                   open world 2010 plans and 2009 activities
        In 2010, Open World will carry out the goals of the recently
    revised Strategic Plan (2007-2011) as approved by the Board of
    Trustees, focusing on quality control of nominations and U.S. programs.
    We plan to expand to at least one additional country (Armenia), and we
    will continue our effort to diversify our funding. We will add more
    delegates from Central Asia and the Caucasus while proportionally
    reducing the number of Russian delegates.
        We will host additional members of the national legislatures of
    Open World countries located in Central Asia and the Caucasus, based on
    reports of the effectiveness of Open World parliamentary hosting
    received from the U.S. Embassies. The Center will also continue the
    rule of law programs for participating countries where we are finding
    substantial cooperation and movement toward an independent judiciary.
    We will foster sister states/sister cities programs in many locations
    in the United States, and broaden efforts in the cultural field, where,
    through our Russian Cultural Leaders Program, we have, for example,
    benefited museums in the Midwest thanks to our partnerships with the
    Likhachev Foundation and the American-Russian Cultural Cooperation
    Foundation.
        In cooperation with the Department of State, we plan to intensify
    our work with women leaders. With funding in 2010 at the requested
    level, Open World will continue to share America's democratic processes
    and institutions, send about 1,400 participants to homes throughout the
    United States, and spread a wealth of American experiences to borders
    beyond our own.
        For 2009, Open World continues to host in thematic areas that
    advance U.S. national interests, generate concrete results, and support
    U.S. organizations and communities engaged in these thematic areas.
    This programming emphasizes and builds on Open World's incremental
    successes in the fields of governance (emphasizing 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, environmental issues, and ecotourism. This year Open World
    will also increase its non-Russian programming to approximately 45
    percent of its total programming (up from 36 percent in 2008 and 23
    percent in 2007).
        Demonstrating Open World's commitment to supporting existing
    partnerships and initiatives, an estimated 70 Open World hosting
    programs (31 percent of all 2009 programming) will be conducted by
    Americans with established partnerships in Open World countries. For
    example:
      --Freedom House, a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization that serves as
            a voice for democracy and freedom, will host accountable
            governance delegates from Kharkiv, Ukraine, in their U.S.
            sister city of Cincinnati.
      --Building on a 15-year-old relationship between Maryland and
            Russia's Leningrad Region, the Office of the Secretary of State
            of Maryland will host an accountable governance delegation from
            the Leningrad/St. Petersburg area in 2009.
      --In the area of human trafficking, one of Open World's veteran
            grantees, the Terrorism, Transnational Crime and Corruption
            Center, will be hosting some of their Russian partners and
            colleagues on a program focused on combating child exploitation
            and trafficking.
        Turning to post-visit initiatives for alumni, the Center plans,
    using private funds, to host two results-oriented 1- or 2-day thematic
    workshops in Russia, one of which will highlight Open World's
    nonproliferation program. Another 23 or so half-day events will be held
    in Russia and other Open World countries on topics proposed by alumni.
                         open world and shared funding
        In response to the language of the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009
    (Public Law 111-8), Chairman Billington and I have met twice with
    senior officials of the Department of State and with officials from the
    Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts to discuss shared funding. The
    Center has also discussed cost-share arrangements with the Russian
    Supreme Commercial Court. The Court has tentatively agreed to share the
    cost of bringing Russian commercial court judges to the United States
    on Open World for hosting by American judges. We remain committed to
    working with the Subcommittee and our Board of Trustees to pursue any
    alternative sources of funding, and we will report back on our findings
    by no later than May 30, 2009.
                        fiscal year 2010 budget request
        The Center's budget request of $14.456 million for fiscal year 2010
    is a 4 percent increase over the fiscal year 2009 request of $13.9
    million. Funding at this level will enable the Center to continue its
    proven mission of hosting young political, civic, and cultural leaders
    from Russia; maintain its important program for Ukraine; and continue
    smaller but growing programs in the Caucasus and Central Asia. The
    Board of Trustees believes that maintaining a robust grassroots-based
    Open World presence in Russia is necessary and important for future
    U.S.-Russia relations, but programs in expansion countries continue to
    account for a larger percentage of hosting than in the past.
        The budget request maintains hosting and other programmatic
    activities at a level of approximately 1,400 total participants, which
    remains far below the limit of 3,000 set in the Center's authorizing
    legislation. Actual allocations of participant slots to individual
    countries will be based on Board of Trustees recommendations and
    consultations with the Subcommittee and U.S. Embassies. The requested
    funding support is also needed for higher salary costs in fiscal year
    2010, as well as for increased logistical costs due to higher airfares
    and less favorable exchange rates
        Major categories of requested funding are:
      --Personnel Compensation and Benefits and other operating expenses
            ($1.43 million)
      --Contracts ($8.86 million--awarded to U.S.-based entities)
      --Grants ($4.16 million--awarded to U.S. host organizations)
        The Center also requests Subcommittee approval of an amendment to
    its statute. This proposed amendment will enable the Center to improve
    the Open World Program's administration and to build upon its
    successful civic and cultural exchange programs by encouraging
    interaction with and among program alumni, and by extending the
    cultural program to new countries if approved by the Board.
                                   conclusion
        State Department Under Secretary for Political Affairs William
    Burns said that Open World is the most effective exchange program of
    the many he was involved with while serving as ambassador to Russia
    and, earlier, as assistant secretary in the Bureau of Near Eastern
    Affairs. While Open World's results are often measured in quantitative
    terms, the Program has a profound impact that is captured in anecdotes
    and qualitative feedback from participants. The editor of a major
    Russian regional newspaper told his readers in a post-visit article
    that, after his Open World program in New Hampshire, he saw no basis
    for any future U.S.-Russia conflict (Volna, January 29, 2008). An
    alumna who sits on a Russian regional supreme court wrote an e-mail to
    Open World organizers stating: ``I can say unequivocally that the [Open
    World] visit not only changed my view of the Russian Federation's
    judicial system, but also brought about an overall change in my
    worldview as a whole.''
        Funding the 2010 Open World Program at the requested level 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
    renewed interest to U.S. foreign policy.
        The fiscal year 2010 budget request will enable the Open World
    Leadership Center to continue making major contributions to an
    understanding of democracy, civil society, and free enterprise in
    countries of vital importance to the Congress and the Nation. The
    Subcommittee's interest and support have been essential ingredients in
    Open World's success.
       open world proposed amendments for fiscal year 2010 budget request

    SEC. ____. OPEN WORLD LEADERSHIP CENTER UPDATE.

        (a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Open World
    Leadership Center Update Act of 2009''.
        (b) ``Act'' Defined.--In this section, the ``Act'' means section
    313 of the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2001 (Pub. L. 106-554
    1(a)(2) [H.R. 5657], 2 U.S.C. 1151) as amended by the Legislative
    Branch Appropriations Act, 2003 (Pub. L. 108-7, div. H, title I,
    Sec. 1401(a)), the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2005 (Pub. L.
    108-447, div. G, title I, Sec. 1501) and the Emergency Supplemental
    Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror and Tsunami
    Relief, 2005 (Pub. L. 109-13, div. A, title III, Sec. 3402(b)).
        (c) Board Membership.--The Act is amended in subsection (a)--
                (1) in paragraph (2)(A) by striking ``members'' and
            inserting ``Members of the House of Representatives''; and
                (2) in paragraph (2)(B) by striking ``members'' and
            inserting ``Senators''.
        (d) Extension of the Cultural Program to Eligible Foreign States,
    and Alumni Program.--The Act is amended in subsection (b) in paragraph
    (1)--
                (1) by striking ``cultural leaders of Russia'' and
            inserting ``cultural leaders of eligible foreign states''; and
                (2) by adding the following sentence at the end: ``The
            Center may also engage with program alumni in educational and
            professional development activities in eligible foreign
            states.''
        (e) Grant Program.--The Act is amended in subsection (b) in
    paragraph (2)--
                (1) by inserting ``and in eligible foreign states'' after
            ``United States''; and
                (2) by adding the following new sentence at the end: ``The
            Center may also award grants to program alumni in eligible
            foreign states to carry out activities directly related to
            their experience during their Open World visits to the United
            States.''
        (f) Use of Funds.--The Act is amended in subsection (b) in
    paragraph (3)(C)--
                (1) by striking ``Grant funds'' and inserting ``Funds'';
                (2) by striking ``and'' at the end of item (ii);
                (3) by adding a new item (iii): ``the costs of program
            activities conducted with program alumni in eligible foreign
            states; and''; and
                (4) by renumbering item (iii) to ``(iv)''.
        (g) Executive Director.--The Act is amended in subsection (d) in
    the first sentence by striking ``The Board shall appoint'' and
    inserting ``On behalf of the Board, the Librarian of Congress shall
    appoint''.
        (h) Reemployment of Annuitants.--The Act is amended in subsection
    (e) by adding the following new paragraph (3)--
                ''(3) Notwithstanding the provisions of section 4064 of
            title 22, United States Code, at the direction of the Board and
            consistent with the authority provided to legislative branch
            officials under sections 8344 and 8468 of title 5, United
            States Code, the Librarian may grant waivers of annuity
            restrictions upon reemployment of annuitants in Center
            positions.''
        (i) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall be
    effective on the date of enactment of this Act and shall remain in
    effect for fiscal year 2010 and fiscal years thereafter.

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                               COPYRIGHT BACKLOG

        Senator Nelson. Dr. Billington, regarding copyright, I
    understand that after a fairly significant investment of
    taxpayer dollars, the new $52 million electronic copyright
    registration system is experiencing some challenges and that
    there is a significant backlog in requests for copyrights. In
    fact, according to a May 19 Washington Post article, since
    implementing the new system, the time to process a copyright
    has tripled, growing from 6 to 18 months with further delays
    expected.
        First of all, do we know what our current backlog is and
    what we might be doing and what we can do to overcome this
    situation?
        Dr. Billington. Well, Mr. Chairman, we realize that there
    is an ignorant truth regarding this issue. We are, of course,
    in the process of transforming from a paper-based system to an
    electronic system. And already 53 percent of the claims come in
    the electronic mode. We expect that to increase by about 80
    percent by fiscal 2011, so the time required to complete a
    copyright claim will diminish.
        We have thoroughly briefed the subcommittee staff on the
    extensive program that the Register has developed to deal with
    the 8-month delay in the paper claims. Part of the problem is
    the time required to track new registration specialists. They
    have now accelerated that. They have taken other steps to
    improve operations, including key entry quality assurance.
        In the last 4 months they have hired 17 new people. In the
    last 2 years they retrained the entire staff. But it isn't
    simply a simple matter of retraining. It is a matter of
    retraining both on a new system and new processes. That has
    been completed. Seventeen new registration specialists are
    already processing registrations. We expect some improvement.
        Perhaps the Register--if you want more detail, we could
    give it to you now, or we could provide you with detailed
    account from the Register herself, Marybeth Peters, who is I
    believe----
        Ms. Peters. Right here.
        Dr. Billington. Yes. Would you like more detail on this? We
    are certainly conscious of it, and it is a serious problem. The
    total reengineering of the copyright processes was accomplished
    on time and was as we had scheduled it. But as with other
    reengineering projects of massive scope, it comes with
    challenges.
        We could provide you a detailed plan how we are doing with
    this and the progress that has been made for the record, if
    that would----
        Senator Nelson. That would be helpful. And as part of that
    for the record, if you would help us understand how you might
    keep from incurring additional costs in smoothing the process
    to get on track?
        Dr. Billington. All right. Do you want to hear that now, or
    should we provide that for the record?
        Senator Nelson. Oh, no. For the record.
        Dr. Billington. Yes, sir. We would be glad to.
        Senator Nelson. Thank you.
        [The information follows:]

        The total cost of the Copyright Office's business process
    reengineering project was approximately $48.8 million, of which $15.5
    million was spent on the development of a new electronic Copyright
    Office registration system, or eCO. As of June 14, 2009, the number of
    claims in various stages of processing in eCO (including an estimated
    count of the most recently received unopened/unprocessed mail receipts)
    was 535,288. The accumulation of such a large number of claims in
    process is a result of relatively low production following
    reengineering implementation. Low production was caused by there being
    insufficient staffing in the key areas of registration, information
    technology, and in-processing; a massive training effort involving the
    majority of staff necessitated by the substantially new positions that
    were created as part of the reengineering effort and implementation of
    the new IT system; and processing bottlenecks caused by new operations
    needing further refinement.
        In response to these issues, the Office has taken the following
    actions:
      --From late 2008 through the end of April 2009, the Office hired a
            total of 17 new Registration Specialists (a nearly 20 percent
            increase in the number of Registration Specialists on staff),
            and the new hires are already reviewing claims as part of an
            accelerated training program. In addition, the Copyright
            Technology Office is preparing to fill several new positions,
            to bring in the expertise needed for its expanded role in the
            Office's processing operations; and the Receipt, Analysis and
            Control Division is also preparing to hire additional staff in
            the In-Processing Section.
      --In accordance with an agreement negotiated with AFSCME Local 2910,
            the union representing employees in professional job series,
            all registration employees were given 1 year of training and an
            additional 90 days to reach written performance requirements.
            As of February 2009, all employees completed a minimum of 1
            year of hands-on training working in the reengineered
            processing environment, and the additional 90 day period pushed
            the effective date of the performance requirements into May
            2009. In cases where employees are still operating below the
            minimum performance level, additional training continues.
      --Through a continuous improvement program, the Office has initiated
            workflow adjustments to achieve more efficient processing. For
            instance, a change to the dispatch procedures whereby the time-
            consuming task of wanding deposit copies to portable
            receptacles was dropped, resulting in a significant increase in
            the volume of copyright deposits dispatched each week and
            freeing Registration Specialists to spend more time registering
            claims.
      --Incremental enhancements to the IT system, based on feedback from
            internal and external users, have also improved productivity in
            the registration area and provided for a better eCO experience
            for remitters. Examples of enhancements to the IT system
            include developing better sorting and searching capability in
            the Registration Specialist's active cases queue so that staff
            can better organize and monitor pending cases; and extending
            the maximum time available for uploading electronic files from
            30 to 60 minutes for a single session, which provides remitters
            greater capability to submit large digital files.

                       TECHNOLOGY INFRASTRUCTURE UPGRADES

        Senator Nelson. In your opening statement, you mentioned
    your fiscal year 2010 request includes approximately a total of
    $20 million for technology infrastructure upgrades for the
    Library, and a $20 million increase is very difficult to
    accomplish in the current fiscal environment. So my question is
    could this project be funded incrementally over the next, say,
    3 to 4 years to flatten down the cost expense of any particular
    1 year so as not to bust the budget, if you will?
        Dr. Billington. Well, I think probably some adjustment
    could be made there, but this is not just a one-time
    investment.
        Senator Nelson. No, no. I know that.
        Dr. Billington. I think in terms of stretching it out a
    little bit, sure, we would be happy to discuss that with you.
    By taking an incremental approach, we have been able to learn
    from our experience. We haven't invested in the technology
    infrastructure for 10 years now, but at this point, we have
    really a lot of deferred maintenance, a lot of catch-up to do
    with the systems.

                      THE CHALLENGE OF RISING EXPECTATIONS

        We are somewhat the victims of our own success, having put
    15.3 million items--primary documents of American history--
    online, mostly with private money that we were able to raise
    for that purpose. We now find that with the World Digital
    Library there are enormous expectations, and the educational
    impact and usage also are multiplying. The number of States
    that are setting up programs through the Library for training
    teachers and the educational use of the Internet is increasing.
        So the burden is very, very heavy, and we really have, I
    think, enhanced our programs with the addition of the new
    electronic offerings. By the way, 10 days ago I was in Russia.
    The new library system that they have opened in St. Petersburg,
    which has considerable promise, has borrowed many of the
    electronic features that we now offer, even working with the
    same American contractors that we have used.
        This system will greatly increase the demands made by
    Americans all over the country to use Library of Congress
    content for educational purposes. We have to address our search
    and discovery capabilities, which were established a long time
    ago but need to be updated.
        Anyhow, we could certainly discuss this matter with your
    staff and with you.
        Ms. Jenkins. I was just going to say that same thing.
        Dr. Billington. Does anybody want to add to that? I think
    the point is to have an integrated information architecture
    that can be upgraded, can be developed to accommodate the
    unpredictable new demands that will be made.
        Incidentally, in addition to this, there is a request for
    GLIN funding, for the Global Library Information Network, whose
    usage has increased 400 percent just this last year. There are
    also requests for the legislative information system, involving
    all of the legislative branch agencies for which we have
    special responsibility, as well as to enhance the Congressional
    Research Service (CRS) capacity.
        So this is a Library-wide business, and it is a question of
    establishing a platform for the whole thing now that we have
    pretty much a full picture of what we are going to do. We see
    the demand for it. But we would be happy to work with you to
    try to stretch this out a little bit. I do want to caution that
    it can't be stretched out too much because we have already
    stretched programs out for 10 years.
        We financed a lot of this because we were saving money by
    downgrading our mainframe legacy system, and we diverted funds
    that might have been used for that as we went along. But that
    really wasn't adequate, and we now think we have done a
    definitive analysis of needs. And we will follow through in
    various organizational ways to make sure that this does deliver
    an integrated system, which will make it possible for us to
    upgrade with efficiency. There is another approach that many
    Government agencies and others use, and that is to come up with
    an ideal system that addresses specific requirements.
        But when you have an ideal system, things keep changing. We
    are now trying to fix it so that we are on a solid basis for
    future growth and won't have to keep coming back periodically
    for anything quite as dramatic as this.
        Senator Nelson. We appreciate that, and we will be happy to
    work with you, see what we can do over a rational, reasonable,
    appropriate period of time.
        Thank you very much.
        Dr. Billington. Thank you.

                             OVERSEAS FIELD OFFICES

        Senator Nelson. Senator Murkowski.
        Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Dr. Billington, let me ask you about the overseas field
    offices. I understand that there are six different field
    offices located in our U.S. Embassies in Jakarta, Rio de
    Janeiro, Cairo, New Delhi, Nairobi, and Islamabad. And it is my
    understanding that they were originally established to acquire
    materials in parts of the world that lacked a mature and
    reliable book trade.
        The annual cost of operating these field offices is about
    $15 million, and I know that there have been questions directed
    to you as to whether there may be more cost-effective ways of
    acquiring the publications that the Library gets through these
    field offices. I understand that there is a study under way
    that GAO had recommended to look specifically at this.
        Can you give me an update as to where that study is and to
    what extent the study is looking at other means that we might
    be able to acquire this type of information short of funding
    additional field offices?
        Dr. Billington. Well, the study that I think you are
    referring to was begun in January of this year. The Associate
    Librarian for Library Services, Dr. Marcum--Dr. Deanna Marcum,
    who controls the 52 different units within Library Services, a
    very broad span of responsibilities, she formed a small working
    group to analyze this whole problem of the overseas offices. It
    is not really a problem. I think it is more an opportunity.
        The working group was charged with addressing whether they
    were acquiring and processing materials that are otherwise
    unobtainable. Are they being collected? Is what we are
    collecting the most desirable? Are the overseas operations
    conducted in a cost-effective manner? And the current
    operations, are they sustainable over the long and short run?

                      BREADTH OF INTERNATIONAL COLLECTIONS

        The working group will address this in a final report to be
    delivered to GAO on July 22. In fiscal 2008, our overseas
    offices acquired almost 300,000 items for the Library's
    collection. This compares to 443,000 items acquired for the
    Library's collection from other foreign sources.

                  SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS TO FOREIGN COLLECTIONS

        So it is roughly two-thirds of what we have acquired in the
    continuing quest dating back to Jefferson's Library, which had
    books in 16 languages and set the precedent for the
    universality of these collections. Items from the overseas
    offices are well more than one-half of what we collect from
    other foreign sources, a total of about 750,000 items from
    foreign sources acquired for the Library's collections overall.
        Now the differential between what the Library of Congress
    has and what any other institution has is going to increase
    because in the other major research libraries around America,
    there has been a sharp reduction in foreign acquisitions
    because of the economic crisis and endowments and so forth. And
    it has always been very large.
        If you look where the overseas offices are, they happen to
    be almost uniformly in places where the book trade is not
    developed. So you don't really have alternative modes of
    gathering things, for instance, in Islamabad, Pakistan; New
    Delhi, India; Jakarta, Indonesia; Cairo in Egypt; and Nairobi
    in Kenya; and then Rio de Janeiro.
        It really is a unique source of published material that you
    won't get anywhere else. No book dealer would have discovered
    the mimeographed copy in an obscure Afghan town of the
    autobiography of Osama bin Laden. Nobody even knew that such a
    thing existed. It was a mimeographed form from the early 1990s,
    from a very obscure village in Afghanistan.
        So these offices have many native employees who fan out and
    have regular sweeps through precise areas of the world that are
    of particular concern to us. And so, I think it is a unique
    resource.

                          OVERSEAS OFFICE SUBSCRIBERS

        Seventy-five other research libraries across America, in 32
    States, participate in the program. Anybody who wants to
    collect foreign language materials from those parts of the
    world will depend on this source. So it not only benefits the
    Library of Congress, it benefits other institutions across the
    country.
        We will give you the full report, though, in answer to your
    question, on July 22.
        Senator Murkowski. Do you get any contribution from any
    other countries? You just noted how everyone else benefits. Is
    anybody else a participant financially?
        Dr. Billington. There are, I think, some Canadian libraries
    who are subscribers. Maybe Dr. Marcum would like to fill in a
    few details on that?
        Dr. Marcum. Oh, I will just speak loud enough for you to
    hear. There are 75 libraries in 32 States that are
    participating. These are mostly United States research
    libraries, but also there are other national libraries that
    participate. The British library, for example, is one of the
    participants.
        They cover the cost of the materials, and they pay an
    overhead fee as well that helps us----
        Senator Murkowski. The amount that is in this year's budget
    request is $15 million. What would you anticipate you get from
    the other participating countries? And I won't hold you to a
    figure, of course, just off the top.
        Dr. Marcum. Roughly, they cover the costs of the materials,
    plus about 10 percent overhead.
        Senator Murkowski. So what would you anticipate that to be?
        Dr. Marcum. I could get that and get back to you.
        Senator Murkowski. If you could, I would appreciate that.
        Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        [The information follows:]

        Fiscal 2008 receipts from the sale of collection materials by the
    overseas offices were $3.346 million. Fiscal 2009 receipts are
    projected to be $3.019 million.

        Dr. Billington. It is an interesting phenomenon that the
    amount of published material continues to grow. You read things
    in the popular press about how digitization is going to replace
    published material and particularly ephemera, things like this
    essentially mimeographed book by Osama bin Laden. Forms of
    communication like this, which you would never get from an
    organized book dealer, but which represent the opinions of
    smaller groups, groups that may become of great importance.
        It was very important that we had collected audiotapes on
    the Left Bank in Paris because that was the only record we had
    when the radical Islamist revolution occurred in Iran, and the
    speeches by the new regime that was coming in, they were first
    rehearsed there. But more and more, there are more
    participants, and we are getting access to them and having
    fruitful conversations as everyone wants to join this World
    Digital Library and demonstrate the cultural treasures of their
    own countries around the world.
        So the international collection, I think, of the Library of
    Congress is very unique. It helps everybody else in the
    country, encourages them, and gives them a reasonable
    alternative. But we will give a full report to the Government
    Accountability Office (GAO) on July 22. And any specific
    questions, further questions Dr. Marcum will be happy to answer
    for the record on this. As you can see, I am rather positive
    about these offices overseas. I have visited quite a number of
    them, and they have very good relations.

                         CAPITAL SECURITY COST SHARING

        One of the reasons that they are costing more is because we
    have to pay--the State Department now levies a rather
    substantial charge that is unfortunate, but perhaps necessary,
    and that is for running them because they have run historically
    through the Embassies, and they are now charging a substantial
    fee, which they didn't a few years ago.
        Senator Nelson. Senator Pryor.
        Senator Pryor. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

                           FORT MEADE MODULES 3 AND 4

        I want to thank the panel for being here, and it is good to
    see everybody again.
        I would like to start, if I may, with a storage issue, and
    that is you requested $3.5 million to implement Fort Meade
    Modules 3 and 4. And as I understand it, the budget also
    requests $16 million in funding to begin construction of Module
    5.
        Tell us, if you can, about this idea of storage when,
    again, the popular perception is that things are going digital,
    and we are investing more and more to store physical books at
    the same time you are asking for money to do more digital. Tell
    us how that works.

                RETRIEVAL, PRESERVATION, AND COLLECTION SECURITY

        Dr. Billington. Well, it isn't solely storage. It is a
    question of efficient retrieval. It is a question of
    preservation. It is a question of security.
        The two modules that we have fully operational at Fort
    Meade attained 100 percent retrievability, which is absolutely
    amazing. So that you can work in the 21 reading rooms we have
    here on Capitol Hill, you can get in a short space of time,
    with 100 percent certainty, delivery from these very scientific
    kinds of semi-automated storage modules--and they are
    controlled for preservation of these materials.
        Most people don't realize that books produced since 1850 in
    the United States and in most of the world are perishable.
    Everything on which knowledge and creativity is recorded is
    degrading, and the Library of Congress has a unique
    responsibility to preserve a lot of this material.
        Now we had Amazon in for a pro bono inspection not long ago
    to see if there are any alternatives to storage because they
    have a huge storage and inventory management program, and they
    said there is no alternative but additional space. You cannot
    simply put books on the floor. There is no way of retrieving
    them, and a new plan is being developed.
        Modules 3 and 4 will be up and running by July. So there is
    a request for making them operational. Once we get the building
    built, it is essential that we move the collections there, and
    make these modules fully operational. We are 8 years behind on
    this project, but Modules 1 and 2, which are fully functional,
    have been extraordinarily successful. To get 100 percent
    retrieval in any huge library system is amazing.
        We get 2, 2.5 million new physical objects and I don't know
    how many terabytes of digital material every year to add to the
    inventory. And you have to store this, but you have to be able
    to preserve it, and you have to do this in environmentally safe
    and defensible facilities. I have said at times that you have
    to have Fort Knox to pay for it. But this is Fort Meade.
        Now as audio-visual materials have been taken care of with
    the support of the Congress at our new facility in Culpeper,
    that whole facility was created by the Packard Humanities
    Institute at a cost of at least $150 million, more likely at
    full valuation close to a $200 million donation. So the big
    capital expense was made by them in partnership with the
    Congress.

                    SPECIAL COLLECTION STORAGE REQUIREMENTS

        Implementing Modules 3 and 4 is particularly tricky because
    these are for special collections, not just for books that can
    be nicely stacked and easily, almost robotically, retrieved in
    a large facility. These are, for example, maps, many of which
    require special cases. But this should be the final rounding
    out of facilities for preserving the special collections, which
    in the Library include unique and enormous manuscripts, and
    many kinds of nonprint things. They are all unique formats, but
    have to be stored properly--so that is rather expensive.

                              FORT MEADE MODULE 5

        Module 5 is in the Architect of the Capitol's budget, of
    course. But we strongly support that investment. To preserve a
    comprehensive collection of the world's knowledge is a very
    expensive and complex undertaking.
        We have a network. It is not just the overseas offices that
    purchase things. It is also exchanges. We exchange Government
    publications of the United States for important materials. We
    have exchanges with hundreds, even thousands of institutions
    internationally.
        Senator Pryor. Dr. Billington, let me interrupt there and
    just ask one quick follow-up, and then I have another question.
        Dr. Billington. Yes.

                         STORAGE CAPACITY AT FORT MEADE

        Senator Pryor. And the quick follow-up is how long before
    you are at capacity with units 4 and 5? How long into the
    future is that going to carry us?
        Dr. Billington. Well, and I asked----
        Senator Pryor. I am sorry. I said 4 and 5. I mean 3 and 4.
        Dr. Marcum. Modules 3 and 4 will be for special collections
    materials. These are the maps, the photographs, the
    manuscripts, rare books, and so on. Those modules will be
    filled as quickly as we can move materials into them because we
    are already well beyond capacity here on Capitol Hill. So every
    square foot is accounted for already in those two modules.
        Module 1 is completely filled. Module 2 will be filled with
    books from the general collections in the next few months.
        Senator Pryor. So it will be at capacity in the next few
    months?
        Dr. Marcum. Yes, Modules 1 and 2. So it is very important
    that we have Module 5 to proceed with the books from the
    general collections. We have books stacked up on the floors.
    There is no more expansion space here on Capitol Hill.
        Senator Pryor. So if you get I think you said 2, 2.5
    million books a year, how long will it take you to fill Module
    5?
        Dr. Marcum. It will take--we take in about 1,200 items a
    day into our collections. That includes both books and special
    collections. So we could fill modules fairly quickly. It would
    probably take a couple of years to move things from the
    collections to modules.
        Senator Pryor. I guess part of what I am asking is does
    that mean in 2 years you will come back and say we need a new
    Module 6? Is that----
        Dr. Marcum. We already have a plan for 13 modules over a
    long period of time. But it is important, I think, for us to
    say, too, that global book publishing is increasing quite a lot
    every year. Even though digital is a very important part of our
    world, book publishing continues to increase. And we are
    collecting internationally. We have a lot of materials----

                               LAW LIBRARY, GLIN

        Senator Pryor. And the last question I had--and I am sorry,
    Mr. Chairman--I did have this one question about the Law
    Library. There is a budget of $19.9 million, which is a $4
    million increase. Some of this is for the Global Legal
    Information Network. And as I understand it, there is also some
    interest in the private sector to help pay for some of this,
    but there may be some legal barriers. Could you tell us about
    that?
        Dr. Billington. Well, we hope very much that that will
    develop. We have been working with committees of the American
    Bar Association and others to discuss this. The Law Library has
    had a dramatic increase in the use of its global information
    network.
        For instance, the President is just today or just yesterday
    in Saudi Arabia. The only online resource for information about
    the laws of Saudi Arabia is in the Global Legal Information
    Network, that now has 36 member nations. It covers the laws of
    51 jurisdictions worldwide. We have to sustain the underlying
    GLIN technology.
        There are other challenges. You have to move, change the
    classification of a large amount of legal material to make it
    more easily accessible. We are working on that.
        And we are in the process of hiring a new law librarian. We
    have excellent interim leadership with Ms. Scheeder. Is she
    there? Oh, right. And she may want to add something to this
    from the Law Library.
        Senator Pryor. Well, just----
        Dr. Billington. But there are no legal barriers. There have
    never been legal barriers to receiving funds from private users
    of the Law Library. We are working closely with the House
    Administration Committee to add additional gift language to
    encourage this, and we are also working with some committees,
    particularly of the American Bar Association, to see if they
    have often expressed desire to beef up various things in the
    Law Library, if they might contribute something.
        I think there is no question that the world's best
    collection of international law contributes a great deal to the
    private practice of law, as well as to the Congress and the
    judiciary and to the executive branch of our own Government. So
    we are working as aggressively as we can on that. I can't
    report sensational results. But we hope this will be a part of
    what happens in the next year or two.
        Senator Pryor. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Nelson. Thank you, Senator Pryor.

                          DIGITAL TALKING BOOK PROGRAM

        I have something that might be a little bit different for
    you to talk about. Can you tell us a little bit about the
    digital talking book project? I can get you away from talking
    about numbers and percentages and things like that. It might be
    something you might be anxious to tell us about.
        Dr. Billington. Well, I think that the digital talking book
    program is making pretty good progress. We have already, I
    think, received the first 5,000 machines, and we are going to
    get a lot of feedback on their use. But we are proceeding
    according to schedule.
        It is a very important program. As you know, blind people
    read a lot more than sighted people, and this is a service that
    is very central to the long-term mission. And I think it is
    proceeding well. Maybe Dr. Marcum would want to add a word or
    two about it, but I think it seems to be going well.
        We are moving from a traditional analog universe to a
    digital universe, but it seems to be going well within the
    multiyear development program. This is another example of how
    we are moving into the digital universe for one of our most
    important constituencies.
        And of course, this is administered through local libraries
    everywhere. So it is not something that is dispensed here in
    Washington. It is a really unique national service.
        Dr. Marcum. I think that is the story. Everything is on
    schedule. The players are being produced and the books are
    being produced, and it is exactly as we had planned it.
        Senator Nelson. Can you give us some idea of the scale or
    the size of the project? Is this like everything else that you
    do there? I am sure it is big. The question is how big?
        Dr. Billington. Well, do you want to----
        Dr. Marcum. Kurt Cylke is here. We are going to have Kurt
    Cylke answer.
        Senator Nelson. We have an awful lot of help going on here.
    That is okay.
        Mr. Cylke. This project is a $100 million project
    approximately. There are 800,000 blind and visually handicapped
    people that are using the program now. Dr. Billington and Dr.
    Marcum are correct. We shipped the first 5,000 machines out to
    nine individual libraries and designed a final test to make
    sure that the machines were working well.
        We gave permission to begin production, mass production, to
    the Shinano/Plextor Company in Japan. Production started on
    Monday of this week. They will be producing 23,000 machines a
    month for the first 3 months, 20,000 machines a month after
    that, and the initial run-up will begin the first week of
    August.
        Senator Nelson. Thank you.
        I don't want to leave Ambassador O'Keefe out here now.
        Ambassador O'Keefe. Thank you, sir.
        Senator Nelson. I was interested--after you visited my home
    State and Lincoln in the State of Nebraska with the Open World
    delegates, apparently they were inspired to start up a program
    back in their own countries like the 4-H program that we enjoy
    in America. And yesterday, I must have had my picture taken
    with 100 or more 4-H-ers from Nebraska.
        So I am proud of that program, and it is not limited to our
    State, but maybe you can explain a little bit how you bring
    delegates to the various locations in our country and where
    they come from and how this works?

                NOMINATION OF PARTICIPANTS AND PROGRAM PROCESSES

        Ambassador O'Keefe. Yes, sir. Thank you for that question.
        We work very closely with host organizations and the hosts
    themselves. We often follow the enthusiasm. The thing that I am
    most surprised about--as I mentioned, we went to 44 States in
    fiscal year 2008--is how broad this enthusiasm is.
        In the nomination process, we draw from several sources. We
    draw from the host countries organizations from the U.S.
    Embassies and some of the host country institutions: For
    example, councils of judges. But a substantial number of
    delegates, over one-third, come from organizations in the
    States and cities in the United States themselves.
        The particular group that came to Lincoln was actually
    nominated in Russia. And what we look for is shared interests.
    The individual who came to Lincoln was at a university, and
    very interested in organizing young people. And not only did he
    get the 4-H idea, but he also noticed the ramps for people with
    physical handicaps during his trip to the United States, which
    were not at his university. On his return, he installed a
    similar ramp. This is a small thing. But little by little, if
    you are bringing more than 14,000, it has a cumulative effect.
        What we tell our delegates and what I told 50 Russians who
    came here this morning was that their journey begins when they
    get back home. What we want to see and what we hope they do is
    form partnerships. This is what often happens. The person who
    visited Lincoln could implement the concept of a 4-H-type club
    because he has people back in the United States with whom he
    can discuss ideas.
        Senator Nelson. Thank you.
        Senator Murkowski.
        Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Ambassador, I would like to go back to the issue that I
    raised in my opening remarks, and that is why a foreign
    exchange program belongs in the legislative branch bill. I
    understand that our House counterparts have been encouraging
    you to seek either some or all funding from the State
    Department and that there has apparently been some kind of a
    report underway.
        Can you give me just an update on what is going on with
    that report, what you are finding? And just kind of help me
    understand how you ended up in this particular part of the
    legislative branch budget.

             OPEN WORLD'S PLACEMENT AND ROLE IN LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

        Ambassador O'Keefe. Senator, thank you.
        I will just start with saying when I was first approached
    about becoming Executive Director of Open World, I had the same
    question you did. Why is this in the legislative branch? And I
    think, like many converts, I became very enthusiastic.
        The board of trustees submitted a report last year around
    this time addressing that particular question. I don't want to
    take up too much time, but, in essence, what the board found
    was that by not being any part of an administration policy,
    Open World is uniquely placed to operate in all of these
    countries where relations may go up and down, but we, as part
    of the legislative branch, are not constrained.
        And we also find that by being associated with the
    legislative branch, we can draw a much broader range of
    individuals who might not otherwise want to go on an executive
    branch program.
        I think the second thing is that we--as Senator Nelson
    alluded to, are driven by constituent interests. And so what we
    try to do is link to people in your States and determine what
    they are interested in, then find counterparts so we can create
    these partnerships.
        For example, in Alaska, Carolyn Jones, who is in Rotary in
    Alaska, was our person of the year last year because of her
    extensive work in working with people from Russia coming to
    Alaska, especially for those in the Dal'nii Vostok, in the
    regions that are on the Pacific Rim as is Alaska.
        The report which we submitted on May 30 asked us to
    determine the feasibility of funding from the State Department
    and from the judiciary. Dr. Billington and I went to the State
    Department as soon as we saw the portion of the appropriation
    for 2009 and discussed possibilities with Under Secretary
    Burns.

               FUNDING OPTIONS AND ALTERNATIVE SOURCES OF FUNDING

        I had several follow-up meetings and presented a proposal.
    The proposal was for 50 percent funding from the State
    Department foreign operations appropriation. I have to be very
    honest, and I was honest in the report. The feasibility of the
    State Department funding for fiscal year 2010 is unlikely. It
    is not completely out of the question, but unlikely.
        One of the things that I sought also from the State
    Department and something which is in process, which might help,
    is that the Georgia supplemental is moving forward right now.
    It is $240 million in the House, $200 million in the Senate, I
    believe. Twenty million dollars of that is designated for
    democracy programs. We could fit in there.
        And should we have our Georgia program funded from that,
    that would be able to reduce our budget by a like amount for
    this year. And that decision comes, I presume, in a month or
    so.
        Just so I am clear, we are constantly looking for cost
    shares. We receive $1.5 million in in-kind contributions, and
    we received another, let us see, $330,000 in gifts, and a
    $530,000 grant from the NEA, appropriated money given to us to
    run a cultural program. We do seek these other sources.
        In addition to those sources, as part of the May 30 report,
    I said that we would submit an action plan on our fundraising
    external to the appropriation process--in other words,
    foundations and other donors.
        Senator Murkowski. What might you anticipate in, say, 2009
    and 2010 then?
        Ambassador O'Keefe. I am no expert in this field, which in
    a way makes the process a little longer. But in talking to the
    individuals and then starting to put this together, what we
    would expect is that whatever we get in 2010, when I come here
    next spring or next June, those funds would be backed out of
    our 2011 appropriation.
        We have requested $1.3 million from the United States-
    Russia Foundation. I don't know whether we will get that. I
    think we may get a portion of it. Should they provide some
    funding, we will reduce our fiscal year 2011 request.
        We will be approaching other foundations. We have a member
    of our board, former Representative Bud Cramer from Alabama,
    who has agreed to walk through the door with us. But what he
    said was before we do anything, whoever we are asking has to be
    warmed up. He said very warm. We are doing our due diligence
    because we only have one chance, and we have to do it right
    when approaching these foundations, especially at a time when
    their endowments have dropped 30 to 50 percent. It appears
    that, in general, they are only funding their ongoing
    commitments, not new ones.
        Senator Murkowski. Yes, it is a tough landscape out there.
    I think we all appreciate that. But I think we also recognize
    that if you want to do any further expansion that the key is
    going to be in these partnerships and in these cost-sharing
    efforts that it sounds like you are pursuing very aggressively
    already.
        Ambassador O'Keefe. Yes, ma'am. And I will keep you and the
    chairman informed of the progress. And as I say, I understand
    that this kind of activity is a long process.
        Dr. Billington, of course, is a master at it. So I am
    trying to learn at his knee.
        Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

                 CHAIRMAN BILLINGTON ON OUTLOOK FOR OPEN WORLD

        Dr. Billington. No one is a master of the financial
    problems that we are in, but I was going to say I might just
    add, on behalf of the board, that there is, I think, a feeling
    that there has been a certain hesitancy of the business
    community to themselves invest very heavily. But there have
    been some pioneers and that is including some from Nebraska who
    have been very imaginative and consistent on this.
        And I think the opinion generally is that there is a
    reasonably good chance that with new presidents in both
    countries--and I mean, I had a conversation with the president
    of Russia on this, and he didn't make any promises. But he
    expressed great appreciation for this program, and it seems to
    me that just 10 days ago there have been indications that they
    are thinking about and, at one point, planning to do a parallel
    program to bring Americans over.
        Whether that will materialize or not is not clear. But I
    certainly think that there is a good chance that more people
    will be thinking of this as a possible area in which they
    should become re-interested. So I think this year is rather
    crucial if we can continue to validate the program.
        I think another point about being in the legislative branch
    is that if you are dealing with countries that are struggling
    one way or another with the rule of law, which is the main big
    program in this Open World program, and are legitimizing the
    importance, independent importance of legislatures and
    judiciaries, that having something directly approved by the
    legislative branch of Government is itself something that helps
    make a kind of statement.
        People, I think, understand also the fact that this is not
    just Russia. We actually--the board increased, at the Congress'
    recommendation, the allocation to Georgia when they were in
    some difficulty. And I think, for instance, if it were possible
    to include part of the Georgia program in this special
    supplemental, that money would be--that would lower the amount
    that we would need for this program since the board has voted
    to double the amount in Georgia to sort of help them out at the
    same time that we are continuing with the Russian program.
        So I think this is kind of a crucial year to try to sustain
    the program. And I think it is beginning to register seriously
    that this has been a direct program of the American people and,
    in fact, through their elected representatives, many of whom
    have involved themselves one way or another, have been
    hospitable to and received these delegations when they come
    through.

                   OPEN WORLD ALUMNI--TRANSFORMING EXPERIENCE

        I have been in Russia to speak at the dedication of this
    new library system. And it is amazing. I met a great many
    alumni of the program. They have all been very much impressed.
    But at the same time, they have all gone back, all 13,000
    Russians that have come have gone back. That has never before
    happened. These are average age 38, one-half of them women.
    That has never before happened in Russian history.
        And this is a transformative thing, and you have 10 percent
    of the duma, 15 percent of the Supreme Court are alumni of this
    program. You have a really transformative initiative within the
    legislative branch, and that, in itself, is something that
    people comment on.
        And that it is a statement of fact that the knowledge-based
    democracy, if you want to have an accountable, participatory
    government, they have to have access to knowledge. And so, you
    have permitted us and sustained us in this digital age to
    establish a kind of facilitative leadership role without being
    a dominant overbearing force, and I think this kind of program
    is separate now from the Library. It is only accidentally
    linked with me.
        But it was conceived and signed in the legislative branch
    of Government, and it has been sustained. I think it has now
    registered even at the highest levels in Russia that this is
    something rather remarkable that the Congress has done. And so,
    just a thought.
        Ambassador O'Keefe. Madam Senator, if I could just add two
    quotes, which I think exemplify what we do?
        This is from the chairman of the Atlanta-Tbilisi Sister
    City Committee. And he says, ``Through my involvement in the
    Open World program, I have come to see that in these tough
    economic times, we must make special effort to nurture personal
    ties. Personal ties with foreign emerging leaders also
    strengthen business ties, and business ties strengthen
    democracies. Open World makes our country and countries like
    Georgia stronger in many ways. I am grateful to Congress and
    Open World for fostering such relationships.''
        And the co-chairman of the Helsinki Commission from the
    House side noted that Open World has been both ``important for
    and responsive to Congress.'' We have other quotes, but I just
    wanted to give you a flavor for what we do for the Congress.
        Senator Nelson. Well, I want to thank both of you, and Ms.
    Jenkins as well and Dr. Marcum for your contributions, and for
    others who suggested things from back in the audience as well.
        It has been very helpful for us to understand the budgetary
    requests and to understand the programs that you are engaged
    in, that you are expanding. We appreciate the enlightenment,
    and we look forward to continuing to work with you. And we want
    to thank you very much.

                         ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

        And I want to thank my colleague and ranking member,
    Senator Murkowski. We found that we are both very fiscally
    responsible and at the same time want to make sure that we do
    the appropriate work in recognizing the needs, but also the
    limitations that we have. So thank you so very much.
        [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 Lisa Murkowski
        Question. Last year, GAO recommended that the Library develop a
    digital strategy. Does the Library have a digital strategy that GAO has
    concurred in? In developing the strategy, how did the Library assess
    the needs of its stakeholders for the different types of digital
    content planned? How does the digital strategy support the $15 million
    investment LOC proposes for fiscal year 2010 and future years?
        Answer. The Executive Committee of the Library prepared one digital
    strategy for the Library, taking into consideration the guidance GAO
    had given us. Each of the Service Unit heads is responsible for
    bringing the needs of their stakeholders to bear in developing the
    digital strategic plan. The $15 million budget request for 2010 is to
    support this digital strategic plan and is outlined in the last chapter
    of the plan.
        Question. Library Services is proposing $1 million to undertake a
    study of the current use of technology as a first step to developing an
    enterprise architecture. Yet LOC requests a base increase of $15
    million for the Office of Strategic Initiatives to redesign and
    reconfigure the Library's online delivery infrastructure, among other
    things. How will the Library Services study will be used and why should
    the Library proceed with information technology infrastructure
    investments before the study is completed?
        Answer. Library Services is a large and diverse operation with
    unique requirements. As such, a thorough understanding of the workflow
    and current use of technology is a part of developing the future IT
    environment for LS and LC. Documenting the current LS environment feeds
    into the documentation of future requirements for new software and
    hardware solutions. This is a typical step in the systems life cycle
    development methodology.
        The requirements gathering work has already started with the
    initial ten divisions that are currently under review. The $1 million
    would allow us to complete this stage for the remaining Library
    Services' Divisions and to start the next phase in the areas that
    pertain to LS and its Divisions. This work will create the integrated
    administrative and operational workflow and the standardization of our
    databases that is unique to LS.
        A common architecture is needed for the institution. We do not
    recommend stopping the work on IT infrastructure improvements while
    waiting for the completed requirements document. In this way the
    underlying architecture can be in place and will allow faster progress
    once the SU requirements are documented. During the ITS refreshment,
    the ITS staff will be meeting with the Service Units about their plans
    thereby guaranteeing institutional continuity and integration.
        Question. How will the Library use technology improvements to
    achieve greater efficiencies and potentially less need for physical
    storage?
        Answer. The Library is collecting and creating an increasing amount
    of digital content, and at some point we fully expect the majority of
    materials will come to us in electronic forms. The reality currently is
    that the production of physical materials has not slowed; it has
    continued to increase. Moreover, there is very little overlap between
    the physical and the digital. It is not a matter of selecting one over
    the other. The Library, with funding from the Alfred P. Sloan
    Foundation, has established a book digitization center, which can
    create digital copies of physical books at the rate of 1,000 volumes
    per week. Once digitized, the physical objects are sent to Fort Meade
    for long term preservation, thus freeing up some space in the stacks.
    The reality, though, is that the Library receives 1,000 new volumes per
    day, so digitizing 1,000 older materials each week will not keep pace
    with the demand. The Library has a unique responsibility as the
    national library to collect materials in the formats in which they are
    produced, and we cannot continue to do so without sufficient storage
    for both physical and digital materials.
        Question. What skills are needed to accept, manage, and make
    available an increasing volume of digital content? Has the Library
    undertaken workforce planning that would address the changing skill
    sets needed?
        Answer. The Library identified an initial set of basic digital
    proficiencies that are needed for librarians and curatorial staff
    across the agency. These include navigating the online public access
    catalog (OPAC) and staff subscription databases, adapting to the
    changing role of libraries and librarians, and understanding the
    increased role of digital resources in the Library. Further, basic
    digital proficiencies for subject specialist positions were identified
    and include advanced web searching, working within the various modules
    of the Integrated Library System (Voyager), understanding emerging
    licensing issues, and metadata. In addition, the Library's Federal
    Library Information Center, in consultation with other federal
    libraries, library associations, and the Office of Personnel
    Management, developed the ``Federal Librarian Competencies.'' These
    competencies define the knowledge, skills, and abilities needed in
    areas such as data preservation and long term access, data authenticity
    and authorship, and intellectual property. As the Library hires new
    staff, it reviews existing position descriptions and determines the
    knowledge, skills and abilities needed for these jobs through a
    structured job analysis process. Digital competencies and other needed
    skills are analyzed and reflected in each vacancy posted and drive the
    selection process. Also, Library Services is developing a ``Knowledge
    Navigators'' plan to train staff to work in the 21st century library
    using their expertise, skills, and talents in a digital environment.
        Question. LOC has requested $7 million to continue the Teaching
    with Primary Sources program. Can this program be used to improve
    distance learning opportunities for educators in rural areas?
        Answer. The Library has requested no additional funding for the
    Teaching with Primary Sources (TPS) program in 2010. The Library is
    launching an online database, TPS Direct, on June 30, 2009. TPS Direct
    will offer any educator, at any time, the ability to customize
    professional development activities from the TPS program for use at the
    school, district or state level for delivery in a face-to-face, online
    or blended format.
        Distance learning outreach is already taking place in Alaska
    through a TPS Regional Grant. Following the TPS workshops that were
    held in Anchorage the week of June 1, a series of webinars and
    asynchronous discussion forums will be led by Elizabeth James,
    Assistant Professor of History, University of Alaska Anchorage
    professor, and Peggy O'Neill-Jones, who manages TPS regional activity
    in the Western part of the United States.
        Question. CRS is requesting $1.8 million for ``enhanced access to
    CRS expertise'' in fiscal year 2010. Please prioritize the elements
    within the $1.8 million request and the amount of funding that will
    allow a staged implementation of CRS's enhanced access.
        Answer. The $1.8 million in fiscal 2010 would accomplish the
    following elements:
      --$0.9 million to design a framework for CRS information systems and
            data sets that can provide an integrated, interrelated, and
            interoperable research environment;
      --$0.6 million to procure the software needed to implement the new
            framework; and
      --$0.3 million to customize the software and begin implementation of
            the plan.
        If the software procurement and implementation was delayed 1 year:
      --$0.9 million would be required in fiscal 2010.
      --The cost in fiscal 2011 would increase from $1.3 million to $1.8
            million
        --$0.6 million added for cost of software.
        --$0.1 million in software maintenance costs avoided.
      --The cost in fiscal 2012 would increase from $1.0 million to $1.3
            million to complete the initial deployment actions.
      --The cost of continued services, maintenance, and enhancements would
            be $1.0 million in fiscal 2013 and beyond.
        Question. Please describe the process you use to ensure the quality
    of your work products, and specifically the process you use to validate
    the factual accuracy of the information in your reports.
        Answer. CRS makes every effort to ensure that its work meets
    several critical quality criteria: it must be accurate and clearly
    articulated; authoritative; objective, non-advocative, non-partisan,
    and without political bias; and must be in conformance with Service
    standards and client expectations of confidentiality. At the same time,
    CRS responses to congressional needs must be timely. Requests are often
    accompanied by tight deadlines that must be met if the information
    provided is to be of value to the client.
        For product quality assurance CRS relies first and foremost on the
    professional competence of its analysts and researchers. CRS experts
    form the ``first line of defense'' against error, but are then backed
    up by a multi-level review process that is designed to ensure product
    quality and adherence to CRS standards and policies. This multi-level
    review starts with scrutiny by Section Research Managers who oversee
    the work of sections of approximately a dozen analysts assigned by
    subject matter expertise. Following that review, a research division
    review (by one of five research divisions) is conducted that ``clears''
    the document to be sent to the Office of Review, overseen by an
    associate director, for final clearance and delivery to the client.
    This final review stage addresses primarily matters of policy (focusing
    on objectivity and balance) but is also a ``fail safe'' for matters of
    accuracy, clarity, and authoritativeness. Throughout the process,
    starting with the author and through the Office of Review examination,
    emphasis is also placed on peer review and inter-divisional review.
    Given the multi-faceted and inter-disciplinary nature of CRS work,
    every effort is made to bring all relevant CRS expertise to bear on the
    issues addressed. This is in keeping with CRS collaborative research
    methodologies that start with the author, and is critical to the
    production of appropriately integrated and comprehensive products for
    the Congress.
        As you know, the high volume of congressional demands places
    significant pressure on CRS analysts and information specialists. While
    we believe that the process outlined above minimizes the risk of
    mistakes, the challenge of avoiding human error is ever-present. When
    we learn of any errors it is Service policy to respond immediately to
    any concerns and to take swift action to make any appropriate
    corrections.

                             CONCLUSION OF HEARINGS

        Senator Nelson. The hearing is recessed.
        [Whereupon, at 3:42 p.m., Thursday, June 4, the hearings
    were concluded, and the subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene
    subject to the call of the Chair.]