[Senate Hearing 112-458]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 112-458
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012
=======================================================================
HEARINGS
before a
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
on
H.R. 2551
AN ACT MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH FOR THE FISCAL
YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2012, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
__________
Architect of the Capitol (except House items)
Congressional Budget Office
Government Accountability Office
Government Printing Office
Library of Congress
Office of Compliance
United States Capitol Police
U.S. Senate
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/
committee.action?chamber=senate&committee=appropriations
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
64-612 WASHINGTON : 2012
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,
http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center, U.S. Government Printing Office. Phone 202�09512�091800, or 866�09512�091800 (toll-free). E-mail, gpo@custhelp.com.
__________
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii, Chairman
PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi, Ranking
TOM HARKIN, Iowa MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky
BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama
HERB KOHL, Wisconsin KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas
PATTY MURRAY, Washington LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee
DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California SUSAN COLLINS, Maine
RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana MARK KIRK, Illinois
JACK REED, Rhode Island DANIEL COATS, Indiana
FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey ROY BLUNT, Missouri
BEN NELSON, Nebraska JERRY MORAN, Kansas
MARK PRYOR, Arkansas JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
JON TESTER, Montana RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
SHERROD BROWN, Ohio
Charles J. Houy, Staff Director
Bruce Evans, Minority Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on the Legislative Branch
BEN NELSON, Nebraska, Chairman
JON TESTER, Montana JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
SHERROD BROWN, Ohio LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina
DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii (ex THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi (ex
officio) officio)
Professional Staff
Lila Helms
Rachelle G. Schroeder (Minority)
Katie Batte (Minority)
Administrative Support
Maria Veklich
C O N T E N T S
----------
Thursday, March 3, 2011
Page
Architect of the Capitol......................................... 1
Office of Compliance............................................. 18
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Government Accountability Office................................. 45
Government Printing Office....................................... 54
Congressional Budget Office...................................... 61
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Library of Congress.............................................. 87
Thursday, May 12, 2011
U.S. Senate:
Office of the Secretary...................................... 121
Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper.............................. 192
United States Capitol Police..................................... 217
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012
----------
THURSDAY, MARCH 3, 2011
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 2:32 p.m., in room SD-138, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Ben Nelson (chairman) presiding.
Present: Senators Nelson and Hoeven.
ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL
STATEMENT OF STEPHEN T. AYERS, ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL
opening statement of senator ben nelson
Senator Nelson. The subcommittee will come to order
officially. Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome.
This is our first hearing of fiscal year 2012, and I want
to start by welcoming my new ranking member, Senator Hoeven,
from North Dakota, a former Governor.
I look forward to working closely with you, Senator, as I
did with my former ranking member and good friend, Senator
Murkowski.
I also want to welcome the other members of the
subcommittee: Senator Tester, Senator Brown, and Senator
Graham.
I look forward to having the additional assistance in
providing appropriations and oversight for the legislative
branch of our Government.
It seems a little odd to be meeting today, talking about
fiscal year 2012 appropriations, but we do live in interesting
times, and finishing up our fiscal year 2011 appropriations
bill has proven to be more than a slight challenge. Maybe the
greatest challenge I'll have today is to stay on track as we
discuss fiscal year 2012 requests while operating at fiscal
year 2010 levels during fiscal year 2011.
Nevertheless, we do meet today to take the testimony on the
fiscal 2012 budget requests from the Architect of the Capitol
(AOC) and the Office of Compliance (OOC).
I want to welcome our two witnesses today: Stephen Ayers,
Architect of the Capitol and Tamara Chrisler, Esq., Executive
Director of the Office of Compliance.
Mr. Ayers, when we met here last year, I introduced you as
``Acting'' Architect of the Capitol. And so, I want to first
congratulate you on your recent confirmation as the 11th
Architect of the Capitol.
Mr. Ayers. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Nelson. We appreciate your service over the last
few years and wish you all the best in this endeavor.
I also want to congratulate Ms. Beth Plemmons, on your
staff, for her recent appointment as CEO of Visitor Services.
Your budget request this year totals $706 million, an
increase of $104 million, or 17 percent, more than the current
year. And by ``current year'', I'm once again referring to
fiscal year 2010 enacted, which is what we are currently
operating under.
Mr. Ayers, you are understandably under an awful lot of
pressure to accomplish what you need to in keeping the campus
operating safely and efficiently. I, on the other hand, am also
under a great deal of pressure to control Government spending.
So, we'll need to work together to tighten this budget where we
can, without subjecting our Visitors Services employees to
hazardous conditions.
Included in your request is $179 million worth of line-item
construction projects, out of which two-thirds is for repairs
and improvements, campuswide, and one-fifth involve life
safety. Now, as important as these projects are, the reality is
that many of these will have to be suspended and wait until
another time.
Ms. Chrisler, the fiscal year 2012 budget request for the
OOC totals $4.8 million, an increase of $405,000, or 9 percent,
more than the current year.
As I just noted regarding Mr. Ayers' request, this is
something the subcommittee may not be able to support in the
current budget environment. However, we appreciate the efforts
that both of your agencies have made to work cooperatively
toward resolving the many fire- and life-safety needs around
the complex given the limited resources.
We look forward to your testimonies, in both cases, and to
discussing the status of health and safety conditions
throughout the Capitol.
And now it's my pleasure to turn to the ranking member,
Senator Hoeven, for any opening remarks that he may have.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR JOHN HOEVEN
Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Senator Nelson. I look forward
to working with you, as the Chairman, on this subcommittee, and
also want to thank both Mr. Ayers and Ms. Chrisler for being
here today, and look forward to listening to your testimony.
Like you, Senator Nelson, I bring a background as a
Governor to this job, and certainly in that respect, working
not only with a legislative body, as is the case with this
Congress, but also working on a budget. And, of course, as a
State, we had to balance a budget. I know that's true in
Nebraska, as well. And the Chairman's right, obviously--and
something that you all well know--that we have to work within
the confines that we have. And that is that we have a
significant and growing deficit and debt. And so we're going to
have to find ways to trim and prioritize. And that's part of
the process that we'll go through together and do the very best
job that we can.
Obviously I have a learning curve here with understanding
your budgets. It's certainly good to hear directly from you and
to work on this prioritization, and do the very best job we can
for the people that we represent. Your expertise is vital in
the process. I respect that greatly, and am going to work to do
the best I can to produce the very best budget within the
constraints that we have, both as we work through the balance,
of fiscal year 2011, but also as we to get into working on
fiscal year 2012.
And I'm very hopeful that, as we do, we're going to get
into a process where we go through that normal budgeting
process, where we do our subcommittee work, where we, you know,
have our authorizations, where we work on our appropriations,
where we provide that opportunity for testimony and input, and
that we bring those budgets up, and that we not only do our
subcommittee work, then we get to the full committee, and from
there to the floor, we take each of these appropriation budgets
up to the floor, have our debate--our colleagues in the House
do the same thing--and go do our subcommittee work in our
conference committee. And that is the process, and I'm very
anxious to get going on that for fiscal year 2012. So, we're
hopefully working ahead of the curve within the process that we
should have here in the Congress.
Throughout that process, and throughout this process, in
terms of finishing up fiscal year 2011, again, I do want to
emphasize that I certainly recognize that you're the experts in
this area and will do everything I can to take your input and
use it to best advantage. At the same time, we have limitations
we're going to have to work within and meet.
Senator Hoeven. Thank you for being here today.
Senator Nelson. Thank you, Senator.
Now I'd like to begin with the witnesses. If it's possible
to keep your opening statements to somewhere around 5 minutes
and submit the rest for the record, that would work best.
So, we'll start first, Mr. Ayers, with you, and then we'll
hear from Ms. Chrisler. So, please proceed.
SUMMARY STATEMENT OF STEPHEN T. AYERS
Mr. Ayers. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and Senator Hoeven.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today regarding our
fiscal year 2012 budget request.
Today, we face significant challenges as our facilities and
infrastructure continue to age and our mission continues to
expand. In fact, we currently have a backlog of nearly $1.5
billion in deferred maintenance and capital renewal projects
that, if left unaddressed, could greatly impact the safety and
security of the Capitol campus. And, as steward of this Capitol
campus, I know that investment in our aging and historic
infrastructure is vital. However, I also realize that the
current fiscal environment presents a very difficult challenge
for us to do more with less, and I think our budget request
reflects this challenge.
To ensure that we make the maximum use of every taxpayer
dollar, we continue to identify cost savings and efficiencies
and to aggressively address the most effective ways to use our
limited resources. We've implemented comprehensive performance
metrics, and they've led to significant improvements and cost
savings in our organization.
For example, we've recently reduced our inventory of
supplies on hand from $56 million down to $7.5 million. We've
consolidated information technology (IT) equipment across the
agency and eliminated 150 printers and fax machines. And we've
successfully leveraged the use of performance specifications,
thereby eliminating unnecessary design fees for several
projects. Little things like this add up, and we can use those
savings toward our more important projects.
We've utilized public private partnerships to finance
energy reduction projects, allowing us to invest appropriated
funds in higher priorities. We've also renegotiated several
leases to get lower rates, and have reduced our staff through
attrition, without impacting our ability to achieve our
mission.
AOC DEG.PRIORITIZED PROJECTS
In addition to implementing operational and business-
process efficiencies, we've carefully prioritized projects and
operational funding. We've examined all existing accounts,
identified available funds from nearly completed projects, and
took on additional risk by reducing our construction
contingency funding on several of these projects. And through
this effort, we funded nearly $15 million in new projects with
money that's already been appropriated to us. And this has
enabled us to further reduce our fiscal year 2012 request.
This budget reflects the highest requirements to prevent or
delay further deterioration in our buildings. We've also
included projects to improve security and safety across the
campus. And, in addition, Mr. Chairman, we have deferred nearly
$130 million of projects that are necessary and ready to
proceed.
AOC DEG.AOC'S COMMITMENT AND STAFF
Through the work of our professional staff, we're able to
address client needs on a daily basis, maintain our facilities
and mitigate the amount the project funds currently require.
However, even at this level of funding, the operational budget
alone won't enable us to defer projects indefinitely. In fact,
problems will only become more severe and, in the end, cost
more.
The AOC embodies a commitment to preserving and maintaining
the historic fabric of our country. And our fiscal year 2012
request reflects the seriousness with which we take this
commitment. We continue to be successful in our mission due to
the skilled work and talent of our dedicated staff. We
continually reap the benefits of their knowledge, skills, and
experience. And I'm proud and honored to lead this dedicated
team.
PREPARED STATEMENT
And their work has not gone unnoticed, as our 2010 customer
satisfaction surveys have shown again that more than 90 percent
of our customers are fully satisfied with the level of service
we provide them on a daily basis. And we're very proud of that.
Again, thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to
testify. And I would be happy to answer any questions you may
have.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Stephen T. Ayers
Mr. Chairman, Senator Hoeven, and members of the subcommittee,
thank you for the opportunity to testify today regarding the Architect
of the Capitol's (AOC) fiscal year 2012 budget request.
I would like to begin by expressing my thanks to this subcommittee
and to the Congress for its support of the AOC over the past several
years as we worked to fulfill our mission of serving the Congress and
the American people by maintaining and preserving the wonderful
historic treasures entrusted to our care.
We know first-hand the challenges of preserving historic buildings
and planning for current and future requirements. It requires
ingenuity, craftsmanship, perseverance, astute planning, diligence, and
judicious management of resources. Our staff works around the clock to
provide a safe and accessible environment for all who work and visit
here.
With the Congress' support, significant investments have been made
in the buildings and infrastructure. Today, we face even greater
challenges as the facilities continue to age and our mission continues
to expand. In fact, we currently have a backlog of nearly $1.5 billion
in deferred maintenance and capital renewal projects that, if left
unaddressed over a significant length of time, could greatly impact
safety and security across the Capitol campus.
As steward of the Capitol campus, I know that investment in our
aging and historic infrastructure is vital. However, we do realize that
the current fiscal environment presents a very difficult challenge for
the Congress, the AOC, and the American public to do more with less
funding. Our fiscal year 2012 budget request reflects this challenge.
We have carefully and systematically prioritized projects and
meticulously developed our operational funding.
To further ensure that we make the maximum use of every taxpayer
dollar, we continue to identify additional cost savings and
efficiencies, and to aggressively address the most effective way to use
limited resources. We have implemented comprehensive performance
measurements and metrics for nearly every aspect of our organization
and these have led to significant agency improvements and cost savings.
This data-driven management culture permeates our agency and gets
results. For example, by improving our internal controls and requiring
more extensive reporting, we have dramatically decreased leave errors
in our time and attendance process. We also have established goals to
improve efficiencies in our operations, such as our efforts to increase
procurement opportunities for small businesses. In fiscal year 2010, we
exceeded those goals by awarding more than $20 million in contracts to
small businesses.
Assisting me in these efforts is our Chief Operating Officer,
Christine Merdon. Ms. Merdon joined the AOC in September 2010, and she
brings a wealth of experience to our organization from both the public
and private sectors, including small business acumen.
She began her Federal career in 1981 as a cooperative education
engineering student for the Navy. After earning her Bachelor of Science
degree in 1987, from the University of Maryland in Civil Engineering,
she continued her career with the Navy as a project engineer and
project manager. In 1998, she received a Master of Science degree in
Civil Engineering.
In 1990, she joined the White House Military Office as a Project
Manager responsible for managing classified design and construction
projects at the White House, Camp David, and other Presidential support
facilities. In 1998, Ms. Merdon was hired by Clark Construction, LLC,
where she was project manager and superintendent for numerous projects
including the American Red Cross Headquarters, Bethesda Place II, and
the renovation of Baltimore's historic Hippodrome Theater.
Ms. Merdon joined McKissack & McKissack in 2000, where she ascended
to the role of Senior Vice President of Program and Construction
Management. Her responsibilities included operations and business
development for program and construction management contracts in
Washington, DC; Chicago, Illinois; and Los Angeles, California. There
she was responsible for the successful management of more than $11
billion in major construction projects and programs including:
Washington Nationals Major League Baseball stadium; O'Hare
Modernization Program; Eisenhower Executive Office Building life-safety
upgrades; Martin Luther King, Jr. National Memorial; Smithsonian
Institution's National Museum for African American History; and the
Lincoln and Thomas Jefferson Memorial Renovations.
Over the past several months, Ms. Merdon and I have been working to
save the taxpayers time and money. For example, we reduced our
inventory of supplies on hand from $56 million to $7.5 million. We are
also consolidating information technology equipment agency-wide and
have eliminated more than 150 printers and fax machines over the past
18 months. We have successfully leveraged the use of performance
specifications to avoid unnecessary design fees for several Senate
projects, and we are using in-house staff on many of our major
construction projects, which has resulted in saving hundreds of
thousands of taxpayer dollars.
We also modified how we staffed the postelection office moves,
bringing on temporary staff versus contracting out for the services,
which resulted in significant savings. During one of the hottest
summers on record last year, we expanded our energy curtailment program
from a few hours on ``gold days'' to 24 hours a day, 7 days a week
during State work periods. In addition, we have utilized public-private
partnerships to finance energy reduction projects, allowing us to
invest appropriated funds in other priority projects. At the Capitol
Power Plant (CPP), we utilized a ``free cooling'' initiative where we
used cold, outside air to create chilled water without running the
chillers, thereby conserving electricity and saving money. We also
renegotiated several leases to get the best rates, and we have looked
to reduce staff through attrition where we can without impacting our
ability to achieve our mission.
aoc deg.FISCAL YEAR 2012 CAPITOL BUDGET REQUEST
In addition to implementing these operational and business process
efficiencies, we have carefully and meticulously prioritized projects
and operational funding.
For example, in fiscal year 2010, we examined all of our existing
accounts, worked to identify available funds from projects that were
nearly complete, and took on additional risk by decreasing construction
contingency funding in some cases. Through this effort, we were able to
fund nearly $15 million in new projects with existing resources,
further decreasing our need for fiscal year 2011 funding. This, in
turn, enabled us to further decrease our fiscal year 2012 request.
Moving forward, we will continue to evaluate our ongoing projects,
assess associated risks to congressional operations, and continue to
find ways to fund projects with existing funds.
However, we also identified projects or requirements that could be
deferred, albeit not without significant risk. As funding is delayed,
the requirements will worsen, the risk will escalate, and when funded,
the projects will be more costly.
As a result of these exercises, we are requesting funding for only
the most urgent projects and operational shortfalls. Our fiscal year
2012 request of $706 million is nearly $50 million lower than our
fiscal year 2011 request, and represents a 6.5 percent decrease from
our fiscal year 2011 request.
The fiscal year 2012 budget request reflects the highest
requirements to prevent or delay further deterioration and system
malfunctions and/or failures. We have included more than $7 million for
projects to improve security on the Capitol campus, and $38.4 million
for life-safety projects.
As I noted earlier, we have identified projects that might be
deferred, but we have also assumed a level of risk in doing so. We will
rely on our operating budgets to manage these risks. This will enable
us to continue to maintain and sustain equipment, components, and
systems; however, it would not guarantee that we could provide the
necessary replacements in the event of system failure.
aoc deg.CAPITOL BUDGET REQUEST AND PROJECT PRIORITIZATION
We currently have a backlog of nearly $1.5 billion in deferred
maintenance and capital renewal projects. One of our greatest
challenges is to prioritize our efforts to ensure every taxpayer dollar
goes toward the most important work. We have developed a world-class
project prioritization process that ranks these projects based on the
condition of the facilities, and the level of maintenance required to
ensure they remain functional and viable working environments.
This triage process for facilities attends to the most serious
issues first, while addressing the necessary life-safety issues,
security requirements, energy-savings projects, historic preservation
measures, and the needs of our clients, while deferring the growing
need for Capitol improvement and Capitol construction projects until
later.
We believe we have built our fiscal year 2012 budget that best
balances these needs and requirements in these fiscally constrained
times. We are requesting $179.2 million for Capitol projects, which is
a $37 million or 17 percent decrease from the fiscal year 2011 Capitol
projects request. We also are recommending that an additional $129
million in necessary work, which is ready to proceed, be deferred to a
later fiscal year due to the austere budget environment.
We have several tools that we use to assess which facilities need
emergency care versus those that can be nursed along until funding
becomes available to address specific deferred maintenance and/or
capital renewal projects in those particular buildings. These tools
include facility condition assessments, the Capitol Complex Master
Plan, jurisdiction plans, and the Five-Year Capitol Improvements Plan,
which examines phasing opportunities, project sequencing, and other
factors to better facilitate the timing of the execution of major
deferred maintenance and capital renewal projects.
Our comprehensive prioritization process rates projects on a number
of objective factors to produce an overall hierarchy of importance.
During this process, projects are classified by type and urgency. The
projects are then scored against six criteria:
--security;
--safety and regulatory compliance;
--historic preservation;
--mission;
--economics; and
--energy efficiency and environmental quality.
We rank projects based on a composite rating consisting of
classification, urgency, and project importance. This year, we also
applied a criticality and risk-decision model to the overall
prioritization list, and the resulting outcome was used as one filter
to inform which projects should be included in the fiscal year 2012
budget request. We also recognize that our facilities need life-safety,
security, and functional improvements to provide a safe working
environment to support the Congress' mission, and our request reflects
improvements in those areas.
To further refine the data on which our planning is based, for the
past several years we have conducted independent, third-party facility
condition assessments. These assessments identify the most critical
issues in the facilities, and the objective data collected during this
process helps us identify the urgent needs that must be addressed.
The charts on the next page compare the facility condition index
from fiscal year 2009 to fiscal year 2010. While the condition of the
majority of congressional facilities, which are rated poor or fair,
have not changed significantly, facilities once rated as excellent are
beginning to trend downward. In fiscal year 2009, nine buildings were
rated in excellent condition. In fiscal year 2010, there were just six.
In fiscal year 2009, three buildings were listed as good. Now there are
seven.
Without regular and prudent investments made in these facilities,
this unfortunate trend will continue, and the deterioration will
continue, possibly to the point of impacting congressional operations.
We will work to reduce the deterioration to avoid operational impacts,
however, in this fiscally restrained climate; we will need to focus
resources on those activities and projects that most directly support
the Congress.
To provide us with a 20-year, strategic look ahead to queue up
priorities, investments, and projects, we use the Capitol Complex
Master Plan. We have worked with the Congress over the past several
years to develop the Master Plan and its related jurisdiction plans.
There are nine jurisdiction plans that describe the facilities that
are maintained and improved by each jurisdiction, detail the current
use of space, and identify long-term facility needs of each
jurisdiction. These plans help us make future decisions about facility
renewal requirements and new projects. For example, there may be
instances where major, whole building renovations should be undertaken
rather than a myriad of smaller projects.
The Capitol Complex Master Plan assumes incremental decisionmaking;
providing the AOC and the Congress with a blueprint for facility-
related decisionmaking and investment. It is an important tool because
it:
--Establishes stakeholder goals and direction on key decision points.
--Assesses physical condition and capacities of buildings.
--Identifies short- and long-range facility requirements.
--Addresses sequencing issues.
--Guides the Capitol Improvements Plan and funding requirements.
--Manages stakeholder and building occupants' expectations.
The Five-Year Capitol Improvements Plan helps us meet several goals
by analyzing all of the facility requirements, grouping them into
logical and economical sequencing and phasing, prioritizing the
resulting requirements using a set of objective criteria, and
establishing measureable outcomes.
The chart above provides a snapshot of proposed funding requests in
future years by appropriation. If investments are not made to address
the backlog of deferred maintenance and capital renewal projects, the
bow wave will continue to grow into a tidal wave of projects that could
potentially lead to catastrophic results including system failures or
building closures.
A large portion of our Capitol budget request is to address
deferred maintenance--$76.7 million or nearly 43 percent--that is
critical to prevent or delay further deterioration. Several of these
deferred maintenance projects that we are requesting funding for in
fiscal year 2012 also address life-safety and security issues.
These include:
--Utility Tunnel Improvement Program.
--Sprinkler system installation, Thomas Jefferson Building.
--Skylight replacement, Hart Senate Office Building.
--Structural repairs to underground garage, John Adams Building.
--West House underground garage rehabilitation.
--Modernize mechanical systems, Dirksen Senate Office Building.
Other Capitol projects will help improve energy efficiencies, and
thereby help save money, such as the relocation and replacement of 35-
year-old chillers at the CPP, and upgrading utility distribution system
components throughout the Capitol campus, including completing the
Utility Tunnel Improvement Program, or support our Government's time-
honored traditions with the construction of the stands and the planning
of the support activities associated with the 2013 Presidential
Inaugural ceremony.
aoc deg.LIFE-SAFETY ENHANCEMENTS AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY
IMPROVEMENTS
Two areas that are top priorities for our agency are safety and
energy reduction, and we continue to see dramatic results due to our
efforts in identifying and managing risks, and increasing efficiencies
and reducing energy consumption, which in turn, saves taxpayers money.
Just as we have a robust and successful project prioritization
process, we have a focused and proactive process in place to abate
hazards, and have made substantial improvements to the Capitol campus
infrastructure to enhance safety. With the Congress support, we have
made significant investments to improve fire and life-safety systems
within congressional buildings and on the Capitol grounds. As a result,
the Capitol campus is safer today than ever, as evidenced by a 59
percent reduction in hazards identified by the Office of Compliance
since the 109th Congress. This is particularly significant because the
amount of square footage of facilities that we maintain has
dramatically increased over the same period of time. Between the 109th
Congress and the 110th, the physical inventory that the AOC maintains
was increased by 10 percent in additional square footage. During the
111th Congress, another 3 percent was added.
Moving forward, we will continue to partner with the Congress to
execute life-safety projects in a planned manner that is fiscally
responsible, efficient, and effective in order to further protect those
who work in and visit the Capitol campus.
Capitol-wide energy reduction efforts have yielded great results
for the fifth year in a row. In fiscal year 2010, the Congress met the
Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007) requirement of
reducing energy consumption by 15 percent.
To reduce reliance on direct appropriations, we are using privately
financed public-private partnerships, known as Energy Savings
Performance Contracts, to fund the project work that needs to be
completed to conserve resources and reduce energy consumption. For
example, in the Senate, we have begun construction on the following
energy conservation projects:
--installing 31,000 energy-efficient lighting fixtures in each of the
Senate office buildings;
--upgrading existing pneumatic and electronic controls for heating,
ventilating, and air-conditioning systems with direct digital
controls;
--replacing existing transformers with high-efficiency transformers;
and
--installing removable insulation covers for steam valves to reduce
heat loss.
After implementation of all energy conservation measures over the
36-month construction period, the Senate office buildings are estimated
to potentially realize a 36 percent reduction in total energy
consumption, and approximately $3.9 million in annual energy savings.
We anticipate that this investment will save approximately 7 percent
annually toward the EISA 2007 goal.
In the House office buildings this past year, we installed 30,000
energy-efficient light fixtures, and converted 2,700 bathroom fixtures
to automatic, low-flow units. We have achieved a 23.3 percent reduction
in water consumption in the House office buildings from fiscal year
2009 to fiscal year 2010. In addition, approximately 1,250 bathroom
fixtures were diverted from landfills and sent to a local asphalt plant
for recycling. We also installed a new dimmable LED lighting technology
in the Rayburn cafeteria. In a matter of months, energy consumption for
lighting in the cafeteria was reduced by more than 70 percent.
After implementation of all energy conservation measures over the
30-month construction period, the House office buildings are estimated
to potentially realize a 23 percent reduction in total energy
consumption, and approximately $3.3 million in annual energy savings.
We anticipate this investment will save approximately 5.4 percent
annually toward the EISA 2007 goal.
In the Capitol Building, the following projects are ongoing:
upgrading existing light fixtures with high-efficiency lamps, ballasts,
and reflectors; modernizing Building Automation Systems, including
existing pneumatic and electronic controls for heating, ventilating,
and air-conditioning systems with direct digital controls, and
replacing air-handling systems.
After implementation of all energy conservation measures over the
27-month construction period, the Capitol Building is estimated to
potentially realize a 38 percent reduction in total energy consumption,
and approximately $2.2 million in annual energy savings. This will
contribute an anticipated 5 percent annually toward the EISA 2007 goal.
In addition, our employees are doing their part to help save energy
by using the mass transit and flexible work schedule programs. More
than 35 percent of AOC employees use public transportation to commute
to work. In addition, more than 930 AOC employees participate in the
flexible work schedule program, and more than 125 are enrolled in the
AOC's Telework Program.
Because the CPP plays a critical role in our long-term energy
conservation strategy, we are continually working to improve and
upgrade operations there. In December 2010, the CPP marked its 100th
anniversary of steady service of steam and chilled water to heat and
cool congressional buildings. In that century of service, the plant has
undergone significant changes as new buildings were built, and modern
equipment was installed. However, in order to continue to provide these
services into the future, significant investment is needed to replace
aging infrastructure and to install new, energy-efficient equipment.
Last year, with the assistance of the National Academy of Science,
we completed our Strategic Long-Term Energy Plan, which we are using to
guide our future energy program planning, and to identify and explore
options that will help realize continued energy efficiencies and
opportunities to save money.
After careful review of several technologies that can further
improve efficiencies and help meet future energy requirements of the
Capitol campus, we are planning to incorporate the use of cogeneration
at the CPP to generate on-site power. Cogeneration is the use of a
combustion turbine in order to generate both useful heat and
electricity. It is anticipated that the equipment would generate enough
electricity to operate the CPP, and the use of the heat generated from
this operation would produce enough steam to reduce reliance on the
existing boilers. This would increase system reliability and the
increased efficiency would help save money. The proposed cogeneration
system also would significantly reduce emissions while providing a
reliable source of electricity to the CPP and steam for heating
congressional facilities. We are proposing the use of a utility energy
services contract to finance construction of the cogeneration plant.
This public-private partnership leverages private funding allowing us
to initiate design and execute construction in a timelier manner, and
allows us to use limited appropriated funds for other priorities, such
as deferred maintenance or life-safety projects.
aoc deg.ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET REQUEST
Our fiscal year 2012 annual operating budget request for $436.4
million provides funding for continuing the critical activities of
operating and maintaining the infrastructure which supports the
Congress, other legislative branch agencies, and the public, as well as
other AOC essential mission support services. This is a slight decrease
from our fiscal year 2011 budget request. Some of these services
include safety, human resources, financial management, project and
construction management, planning and development, communications,
information technology, and procurement. In our effort to further
improve efficiencies and reduce costs, we are requesting funds to add
internal controls software tools, and to update obsolete planning and
project software.
Through the work of our in-house, professional staff, we are able
to address client needs on a daily basis, maintain facilities, and
mitigate the amount of project funds required at the present time.
However, even at this level of funding, the operating budget alone will
not enable us to defer projects indefinitely. The longer we delay in
addressing these issues, the more conditions will continue to worsen.
Ignoring these issues will not make them go away. In fact, the problems
will only become more serious and, in the end, cost more.
Mr. Chairman, one of the many areas in which our employees excel is
in the preservation of our heritage assets. We take great pride in
maintaining and conserving the national treasures entrusted to our
care, and last year our efforts were recognized with the 2010 Award for
Outstanding Commitment to the Preservation and Care of Collections.
Heritage Preservation and the American Institute for Conservation of
Historic and Artistic Works presents the award to the organization that
has been exemplary in the importance and priority it has given to
conservation concerns, and in the sustained commitment it has shown to
the preservation and care of cultural property. The AOC was recognized
as ``a model of exemplary stewardship of the historic collections in
its care.''
It was a great honor to receive this award because it recognized
the efforts of our talented and dedicated staff that work to preserve
these irreplaceable treasures, serve the Congress, and welcome millions
of visitors every year. They take great pride in what they do and they
put their unique and special skills to work every day to ensure our
U.S. Capitol continues to stand as a powerful and iconic symbol of our
Government.
aoc deg.AOC ACCOMPLISHMENTS
Receiving this award was one of many significant achievements the
AOC recorded this past year. As I mentioned earlier, we have
implemented comprehensive measures and metrics across the agency that
have led to significant improvements. For example, we continued to
improve our cost accounting procedures and internal controls, and
received our sixth consecutive clean audit opinion from independent
auditors on all of our financial statements. In addition, our annual
building services customer satisfaction surveys for fiscal year 2010
again showed that a large majority of our customers are satisfied or
very satisfied with the level of service the AOC is providing them.
Not only do we take care of our customers, we take care of our
people. We are committed to being the best in our industry, and we have
implemented several programs to recruit and retain the best talent. To
further this goal, worker safety remains one of our top priorities, and
we have successfully reduced our injury and illness rate by 75 percent
since fiscal year 2000. We reduced the claims rate of 17.9 injuries per
100 employees in fiscal year 2000, to fewer than 4 injuries per 100
employees in fiscal year 2010.
Our talented staff have completed a number of projects this past
year in our efforts to maintain and preserve the historic assets
entrusted to our care, including painting the Capitol dome as an
interim step to protect and weatherproof the cast-iron structure;
repairing and replacing the Thomas Jefferson Building's lantern windows
and frames, as well as conserving the Blashfield mural, ``Human
Understanding'', and installing a lift system to provide access to the
House rostrum, and allowing, for the first time in the Chamber's
history, a Representative in a wheelchair to preside over a House
session.
Our employees work tirelessly on the front lines to create a
positive first impression of the Congress, the Capitol, and public
stewardship. In 2010, the Capitol Visitor Center welcomed its 4
millionth visitor. At the U.S. Botanic Garden, more than 1 million
guests enjoyed its amenities and educational programs, including the
annual orchid show.
CONCLUSION
Mr. Chairman, the AOC embodies a commitment to preserving and
maintaining the historic fabric of our country, including the U.S.
Capitol Building and its iconic dome that serves as a symbol of our
country and our Government.
Our fiscal year 2012 budget request reflects the seriousness with
which we take this commitment. We understand the challenges that an
austere fiscal environment presents, and we have developed this budget
request in an effort to balance our stewardship responsibilities with
fiscal responsibility.
We have been successful in our mission due to the tireless work of
our skilled craftsmen and professional staff who maintain and preserve
our national treasures. Their efforts ensure that we continue to
provide exceptional services to the Congress, and they have prevented
catastrophic system and facility failures to date. The full measure of
the dedication they display in their jobs may be difficult to measure,
but we continuously reap the benefits of their knowledge, skills, and
experience. I am very proud to lead this wonderful and dedicated team.
We look forward to continuing to work with this subcommittee, the
congressional leadership, and our oversight committees to address our
mutual concerns for conserving the past while planning for the future
of the Capitol and the facilities for the Congress and the American
people.
I would be happy to answer any questions you might have.
Senator Nelson. Thank you.
Ms. Chrisler.
OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE
STATEMENT OF TAMARA E. CHRISLER, ESQ., EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE
Ms. Chrisler. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Hoeven.
I'm honored to appear before you today on behalf of the
OOC. As you know, the OOC is a small agency with a broad
statutory mission established by the passage of the
Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (CAA). The OOC is
required to carry out a Dispute Resolution Program (DRP) for
employing offices and employees, inspect legislative branch
facilities for compliance in safety and health and disability
access laws, promulgate regulations for implementation of
applicable laws under the CAA, and educate members of the
covered community about their rights and responsibilities under
the act. These are our mandates. This is the work you have
asked us to do.
With the continued support of this subcommittee, we have
been able to do our work. You have allocated the resources
necessary for us to complete required inspections, you have
authorized needed personnel to manage our Safety and Health
Program and to oversee the implementation of the settlement
agreement to abate life-threatening hazards in the Capitol
Power Plant (CPP) utility tunnels.
Mr. Chairman, it was through your efforts on this
subcommittee, and your membership on the Rules Committee, that
a blue ribbon panel of architects and fire-safety experts was
convened to provide an independent assessment of fire-safety
issues in the Russell Senate Office Building.
Indeed, it is this subcommittee's dedication to fire-safety
issues that paved the way for the OOC and the Office of the AOC
to engage in a cooperative effort to set abatement priorities
among the fire- and life-safety hazards present in legislative
branch facilities.
Surely, the scheduling of the two agencies today to appear
before you is reflective of the subcommittee's commitment to
address these issues promptly and comprehensively. With the
sustained support of this subcommittee, the OOC can continue to
do the work that you've asked us to do.
For fiscal year 2011, the OOC requested approximately
$298,000 in additional funding to support several initiatives,
two in particular: the development and implementation of the
risk-based inspection, an abatement approach that the
Conference Committee on fiscal year 2010 directed OOC to
institute; and essential improvements to our anticipated and
increasingly inefficient IT infrastructure.
OOC deg.RISK-BASED APPROACH TO INVESTIGATIONS
The first is the risk-based approach. This approach to
inspections and abatement allows the OOC to target the riskiest
workplaces and work activities, such as machine shops, high-
voltage areas, and boiler rooms, where the risks are highest. A
risk-based approach is resource-intensive because our staff
will carefully examine written programs, observe employees
while they work, and engage them in discussion to determine
their understanding of safety programs. It's different than
just conducting an inspection of a building. It takes more
time, but it's cost effective and it makes sense. And it's what
you've asked us to do.
We'll focus our assistance on reducing the on-the-job
injuries and illnesses, and remedy those violations that pose
the more serious threats to worker safety, which, in the end,
will save money, with fewer injuries and accidents, fewer
illnesses, and less workers compensation.
OOC deg.NEED FOR INSPECTORS
The OOC approached the 2012 appropriations cycle knowing
that only minimal funding would be available. That being the
case, we did not seek contract funding for a safety and health
inspector, despite the facts that, one, we have fewer
inspectors, one fewer inspector than in the past; two, the
risk-based approach requires more time and expertise than
inspections in the past; and three, we are facing roughly 18
million square feet of legislative branch workspace to inspect
this fiscal year and next.
Our efforts to obtain a nonreimbursable detailee from the
Department of Labor or another executive branch agency has
failed, as fiscal and other constraints have prevented other
agencies from supplying a detailee. As a result, the OOC will
be unable to offer the same level of service as in prior years.
We won't be able to inspect every workspace. Instead, we'll
rely on employing offices to conduct self-inspections of
certain lower-risk offices and administrative areas.
OOC deg.IMPACT OF BUDGET CUTS
Should there be cuts below the current spending level of
fiscal year 2010, the OOC will be forced to cut back on the
services that you have mandated.
Funding our DRP facilitates parties' ability to reach
confidential settlements at an early stage of the process. A
reduction in this funding might force us to reduce the number
and duration of our contracts with mediators and hearing
officers, which may impact the success of early resolution. For
example, just last week, the OOC was able to provide additional
mediation services to parties in a particular case. These
additional services enabled the parties to reach an amicable
settlement. A cut to these resources would mean less mediation
time, thus diminishing the likelihood of favorable settlements.
The result is protracted litigation involving depositions,
testimony, pleadings, appeals, all of which are resource
intensive and all of which put an unnecessary drain on taxpayer
dollars.
PREPARED STATEMENT
As I stated, the OOC is realistic about the available
resources in fiscal year 2012. We understand the challenges
faced by the Federal Government and, in particular, this
subcommittee. We recognize the need to present a bare-bones
appropriations request, so we've done just that. What that
leaves us with, however, with is reduced services. Our work is
vital to the Congress. We administer basic fundamental rights.
With the requested funding, we can ensure that these
protections continue to be administered.
I thank you for your time, and am happy to answer any
questions you have.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Tamara E. Chrisler
Mr. Chairman, Senator Hoeven, and distinguished members of the
subcommittee, I am honored to appear before you today on behalf of the
Office of Compliance (OOC). Joining me today are General Counsel Peter
Ames Eveleth; Deputy Executive Director Barbara J. Sapin; Deputy
Executive Director John P. Isa; and Budget and Finance Officer Allan
Holland. Collectively, we present to you the OOC's request for
appropriations for fiscal year 2012, and we seek your support for our
request.
For fiscal year 2012, the agency is requesting a total of
$4,782,000, a $106,509 or 2.28 percent increase over the agency's
fiscal year 2011 requested appropriations level of $4,675,491, and an
increase of $405,001 or 9.25 percent increase from the fiscal year 2010
enacted appropriations level of $4,377,000. This funding would provide
the OOC with the resources necessary to continue the most critical
services that are required by the Congressional Accountability Act of
1995 (CAA). As discussed below, however, even with the requested
funding, certain mandatory services will be beyond our means. The
minimal increase for fiscal year 2012 includes funding for increased
costs of administrative services from the Library of Congress (LOC) and
funding for basic operations to perform our core programs:
--administrative dispute resolution services, safety and health and
disability access inspections; and
--education and outreach services, all of which are mandated by the
CAA.
The OOC is a small agency with a broad statutory mission.
Established by the passage of the CAA, this agency was created by the
Congress to administer the workplace rights laws, safety and health
laws, and public accessibility laws that applied to the private sector
and, in the case of some laws, to the rest of the Federal Government.
The CAA requires that the OOC carry out a dispute resolution program
(DRP) for employing offices and employees; inspect legislative branch
facilities for compliance with safety and health and disability access
laws; promulgate regulations for implementation of applicable laws
under the CAA; and educate members of the covered community about their
rights and responsibilities under the act. These are our mandates; this
is the work you have asked us to do.
Over the years, this subcommittee has demonstrated a real
appreciation for the work performed by the OOC. In particular, this
subcommittee has shown strong support for our safety and health program
by allocating the resources necessary for us to complete the required
inspections of legislative branch workplaces. Further, the subcommittee
has authorized needed personnel to manage our safety and health program
and to oversee the implementation of the settlement agreement that is
abating the life-threatening hazards in the Capitol Power Plant (CPP)
utility tunnels. Mr. Chairman, it was through your efforts on this
subcommittee and your work on the Rules Committee that a Blue Ribbon
Panel of architects and fire-safety experts was convened to provide an
independent assessment of fire-safety issues in the Russell Senate
Office Building. Indeed, it is this subcommittee's dedication to fire-
safety issues that paved the way for the OOC and the AOC to engage in a
cooperative effort to set abatement priorities among the fire- and
life-safety hazards present in legislative branch facilities. Surely,
the scheduling of the two agencies to appear before you today is
reflective of the subcommittee's commitment to address these issues
promptly and comprehensively.
With the sustained support of this subcommittee, the OOC has been
able to ensure that legislative branch workplaces are subject to the
same laws applicable to workplaces in the private sector and other
Federal agencies. Our fiscal year 2012 requested increase is minimal:
$106,509, almost half of which is attributable to the LOC increased
charge for administrative services it provides to this agency. The
remainder of the increase reflects additional costs due to inflation
and for minimal operational costs. We have essentially presented you
with a flat budget for fiscal year 2012.
ooc deg.WHAT WE CAN DO WITH FISCAL YEAR 2011 AND FISCAL YEAR
2012 FUNDING
In fiscal year 2011, the OOC requested an additional $298,491 in
funding to support several initiatives:
--the development and implementation of the risk-based inspection and
abatement approach that the Conference Committee on fiscal year
2010 legislative branch appropriations directed the OOC to
institute;
--essential improvements to our antiquated and increasingly
inefficient IT infrastructure; and
--the salary increase required by Federal law.
For the fiscal year 2011 appropriations cycle, staff of the OOC
examined our programs in conjunction with our statutory mandates and
made significant efforts to streamline our appropriations request to
reflect the country's and the Government's economic difficulties. As a
result, we presented an appropriations request that contained only
those items necessary to meet the most fundamental of our statutory
mandates.
Fiscal year 2012 funding at the requested level (inclusive of
fiscal year 2011 requested funding) will allow the OOC to employ the
risk-based biennial inspection and abatement approach contemplated in
the fiscal year 2011 budget request. This risk-based approach is
resource-intensive for our agency, but should result in cost savings
across other agencies in the legislative branch. This approach allows
the OOC to target the riskiest workplaces and work activities, such as
machine shops, high-voltage areas, and boiler rooms. We would
concentrate our limited resources on areas where the risks are highest
(the CPP and hazardous chemical storage rooms, for example); focus the
technical assistance we provide on reducing on-the-job injuries and
illnesses; and remedy those violations that pose the most serious
threats to workers' safety. Of course, cooperation with the AOC's
staff, as well as with other employing offices, is an integral part of
the development and implementation of this approach. Working with the
employing offices, our inspectors would carefully review and assist in
the development of written safety programs that protect employees who
work with certain hazardous materials. Our staff will observe employees
while they work to determine their understanding of safety programs
designed to protect against injuries. A careful examination of fire
prevention programs is essential in the many Capitol Hill facilities
that have serious life-safety deficiencies.
This subcommittee's support of the OOC's requested appropriations
for fiscal year 2011 and fiscal year 2012 will allow the OOC to
continue to work with high-quality mediators and hearing officers. One
of the OOC's core statutory functions is to provide confidential and
timely counseling, mediation, and hearing services to assist employees
and employing offices in resolving workplace rights claims, such as
discrimination and harassment. Supplying the parties with highly
skilled mediators and hearing officers allows the OOC to equip the
parties with the tools necessary to reach amicable agreement and to
fairly resolve and adjudicate claims.
In addition, fiscal year 2012 funding at the requested level
(inclusive of fiscal year 2011 requested funding) will allow the OOC to
update its out-of-date communications and IT systems to improve
efficiency and enhance the security of vital information. The OOC's IT
systems are the warehouse for workplace rights claims filed against
Members of Congress. Accordingly, it is essential that these systems
use the best security measures available to protect your confidential
information. The OOC has already begun collaborative efforts with the
LOC to share services and develop OOC IT systems that maintain the
confidentiality of this information and meet the highest of security
standards.
ooc deg.WHAT WE CANNOT DO EVEN WITH WHAT WE REQUESTED
Our fiscal year 2012 request is basically flat. We approached
fiscal year 2012 knowing that only minimal funding essential to meet
the bare requirements of our mission would be available. That being the
case, we did not seek contract funding for a safety and health
inspector despite the fact that we have one fewer inspector than in the
past. In our fiscal year 2010 and fiscal year 2011 budget requests, we
noted our need for such an inspector, but indicated our intention to
fill the need by obtaining a nonreimbursable detailee from the
Department of Labor or other executive branch agency. Fiscal and other
constraints have prevented other agencies from supplying such a
detailee, and we have been advised that no detailee will be available
in the foreseeable future. The need remains, however: the risk-based
approach requires more time and expertise than the inspections of the
past. At the same time, we are facing roughly 1 million additional
square feet of legislative branch work space (to add to the existing 17
million square feet) that is expected in fiscal year 2011 and 2012. As
a consequence, our agency will be unable to offer all the services
described above at the same level as in prior years. Some services may
be reduced, while others may need to be discontinued altogether. In
particular, the tradeoff is that we will not be able to inspect every
workplace; instead, we will rely on employing offices to self-inspect
certain lower-risk offices and administrative spaces. While we intend
to inspect high-hazard workspaces, our ability to inspect all such
areas is likely to be limited as well.
ooc deg.WHAT HAPPENS WITH CUTS BELOW CURRENT LEVELS
Should there be cuts below the current spending level of fiscal
year 2010, the OOC will be forced to cut other services, as well as
associated resources. As a statutorily mandated service agency, our
business is largely driven by requests to our office--requests for
information, requests for counseling, requests for mediation, requests
for technical assistance, requests for inspection. Given that our
agency's visibility has increased over the years, we are currently
receiving more requests than we have in the past, from employees and
employing offices alike. Consequently, any gap between our resources
and our work will be immediately apparent to the covered community.
The OOC's staff remains small. There are no overlapping functions.
Thus, reductions to our resources could require us to eliminate not
only positions, but entire programs as well. Should our resources be
reduced below current levels, we will be faced with cutting back the
services that you have mandated, and the delivery of remaining services
may suffer.
Specifically, as mentioned above, the OOC will struggle to meet our
safety and health mandate even if our request is fully funded. Further
reductions will mean fewer electrical shops inspected, less time
observing workers' use of hazardous chemicals and reduced reviews of
fire prevention programs in buildings with deficient emergency exits.
The result would likely be more workplace injuries and illnesses, which
in turn require higher workers' compensation costs, more overtime hours
and reduced productivity--all on top of the pain and suffering
experienced by the injured employee. Further cuts would thus be both
painful and counterproductive.
Additional reductions would likely force us to reduce or even
terminate our disability access activities. We are obligated to ensure
that members of the public do not confront barriers when seeking access
to their elected representatives. With full funding, we will survey the
routes between public transportation and congressional buildings to
ensure that they are barrier-free. Any cuts below present levels may
require us to discontinue this effort.
In addition, funding for our DRP facilitates parties' ability to
reach confidential settlements at an early stage of the process. A
reduction in funding might force us to reduce the number and duration
of our contracts with mediators and hearing officers. These resources
are vital to the success of early resolution efforts. In fact, just
last week, the OOC was able to provide additional mediation services
for the parties to a particular dispute. These additional services
enabled the parties to reach an amicable settlement. A cut to these
resources would mean less mediation time, thus diminishing the
likelihood of favorable settlements. The result is protracted
litigation--involving depositions, testimony, pleadings, appeals--all
of which are resource-intensive, and all of which put an unnecessary
drain on taxpayer dollars.
CONCLUSION
As stated above, the OOC is realistic about the available resources
in fiscal year 2012. We understand the challenges faced by the Federal
Government, and this subcommittee in particular. We recognize the need
to present a bare-bones appropriations request; so we have done just
that. What that leaves us with, however, is reduced services. The OOC's
work is integral to the safety and health of each and every employee of
the legislative branch; it is essential to the fair workplace that the
Congress provides; and it is needed by people with disabilities who,
like all other citizens, deserve access to their elected officials. Our
work is vital to the work of the Congress: we administer basic,
fundamental rights for individuals, and we do so because you have
determined that you want these protections. With the requested funding,
we can ensure that these protections continue to be administered.
On behalf of the Board of Directors and the entire staff of the
Office of Compliance, I thank you for your support of this agency. I
would be pleased to answer any questions.
AOC deg.BUDGET CUTS AND IMPACT
Senator Nelson. Thank you. Thanks, to both of you.
If it's okay, maybe we can do about a 5-minute round of
questions, here.
First of all, as it relates to the AOC, your fiscal year
2012 budget totals $706 million, which, as I said, is an
increase of $104 million, or 17 percent. It's not exactly the
right direction, but as you explained it might have been even
more if you had been unrestrained in how you could approach
this.
What would be the impact of an actual cut of 5 percent or 6
percent or 7 percent to the current budget, without any
increase, but a cut? And give us some idea of what you would
have to defer, what you would have to put aside, and what you
would have to reduce in overhead expenditures.
Senator Nelson. You can it to give us, generally; and then
for the record, you can do it--to lay it out in more detail.
But, just for the moment, give us some idea of what that impact
would be.
Mr. Ayers. Absolutely. Mr. Chairman, the overarching theme
would be--we have two large portions of money in our budget.
One is our operations and maintenance budget and the second
part is our capital improvements or line-item construction
project budget. And on that line-item construction project
portion, we have a really good prioritization process that
presents to the subcommittee a list of the projects that need
to be done, that are in priority order. We do that as a tool to
help the subcommittee, and us, work collectively to make
adjustments to that.
So, typically what we would do is move the funding line
from where we've recommended it up to wherever that budget cut
needs to be. So, in essence, the first thing that would happen
is many of the projects and capital improvements that we have
identified in our budget would be cut. So, that would then
increase our backlog of deferred maintenance and capital
renewal work; the condition of our facilities would deteriorate
and worsen. As I know you know, those projects that ultimately
need to be done and will cost a little more later.
On the operational side, we would work to find areas where
we can be more efficient. We would work to find areas where we
can cut services. We would work across the legislative branch
to see where there are any areas of duplication which we can
eliminate to begin to work to reduce the operational side.
Senator Nelson. It was noticed that the increase in your
operation budgets has been 47 percent over the past 6 years.
That's why I raise the question of what would be the impact on
your operations. I understand the capital accounts would be--
for construction improvements--would--could be deferred, but
what about the operational--the growth in operational expenses
over that period of time of 6 years? You're only accountable
for part of that, but maybe you can explain that.
Mr. Ayers. Well, I think much of that increase in growth
comes from new mission requirements. A great example of that is
opening the Capitol Visitor Center (CVC), 2 years ago, where we
have approximately 250 employees there in the CVC. So, that
represents probably the biggest increment of that operational
growth in those salaries that you see on the operations side of
our budget.
Senator Nelson. That's what I was hoping you would point
out.
Now, this is one of those smaller items, but I don't know
what the impact would be. I note that you recently updated your
Web site and logo; and so, I'm assuming that that results in
all kinds of other changes to literature, printing
requirements, and so forth. In the decision to do that, did you
consider what the cost would be, versus the necessity to incur
the costs at this challenging budget time?
Mr. Ayers. We did. And that was one of the important tenets
that we used to make that decision. What we've done is
eliminate the need for stationery. We created a logo that's
computer printer friendly. We since we've changed that logo, we
no longer purchase preprinted stationery. Our logo is all
generated--and our memoranda are all generated from our
computer system. So, we think, ultimately, in the end, that
will save money.
In addition, our approach with our staff has been, ``Use
all existing resources. Don't throw anything away. Use
everything you have before you switch to using these new
products.''
Senator Nelson. That's all I have, for the moment.
Senator Hoeven.
Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
AOC deg.PROJECT PRIORITIZATION PROCESS
This is a question I would address to each of you. Just
putting in context I anticipate our resource base being for the
balance of this cycle, and then going into 2012. Right now, if
you look at the legislation that the House has passed, they're
at a total of about $60 to $61 billion below the current
spending level, which is the fiscal year 2010 spending level.
That's the spending level we're at now. So, that's one number
that's out there.
On the Senate side, the majority in the Senate has said,
``Well, more in line, or in keeping with the administration
budget, we should hold funding about at the current spending
level.'' So, if you take those two as ends of the spectrum, and
then there's certainly the possibility that we could end up at
one of those, or somewhere in between. In that context, what
I'd like you to do is talk in terms of these budgets, rather
than--in both cases, you've submitted budgets with increases;
and, in the case of the AOC, I think it's 6.5 percent increase
from the fiscal year 2011, and I think it's around 9.5 or 9.6
percent in the case of the OOC.
So, I think, in terms of a level budget to a budget where
you could be looking at up to a 10 percent reduction, or in
that range, prioritize for me how you would work to get to that
level, and then even with a reduction. Talk about that
prioritization in terms of operating budget and people, and
then also your project budget.
Mr. Ayers, maybe you'd like to start.
Mr. Ayers. I'd be happy to. First, I haven't had the
opportunity to explain the project prioritization process
before, Mr. Hoeven. So, I'd like to take a minute to do that.
It really is a good process that we've worked really hard,
over a number of years, to put together. First, it takes every
capital project that comes to us, from ourselves or our
customers or our consultants or whomever it is, and puts it
through a process where we evaluate it and give it a numeric
score with a set of predetermined criteria on mission,
economics, energy, regulatory compliance, security, and
historic preservation. We evaluate the whole project and give
all of those elements a numeric score. Then we also determine
whether it's an immediate requirement or of immediate urgency,
or high or medium or low. Then, last, we categorize that
project as either deferred maintenance through the spectrum to
capital construction; deferred maintenance being something
that's broken that needs to be fixed. Capitol construction, on
the other end of the spectrum, is something that's new
construction.
So, then our algorithm prioritizes these hundreds of
projects that come in to us, and ultimately delivers what you
see in our budget request: a list of prioritized projects where
you literally can move the line from the bottom of the list up
and still have confidence that what remains are the highest-
priority projects for us to execute.
So, that would be the first thing we'd do. We would use
that tool and move that line up to where that reduction needs
to be.
And similarly, we would go through our operational budget
with the same kind of tenacity to make reductions across the
board in all of our operating budgets and our overhead rates
and our lease rates and, you name it, to get to that objective.
AOC deg.ADDRESSING DEFERRED PROJECTS WITHIN BUDGET CONSTRAINTS
Senator Hoeven. Well, I'm still obviously new to this
process, but I expect, at some point, we're going to have a
number that we're going to have to achieve. So, I want to
commend you--and I may have to come back, in my next 5 minutes,
to you, Ms. Chrisler--and certainly want to do that.
I have that prioritization right in front of me, both for
construction projects and for deferred. I think that's an
excellent way to do it. And I think you went right where I kind
of thought you might, and rightly so. Because, at some point,
that is probably how we're going to have to do this. We're
going to have to work through these projects and do as many as
we can within the constraint that we're given, and then balance
that with--going back to that operating line and having you
talk about--and working with our analysts, saying, ``Okay, what
do we do there?'' In other words, in a sense, you've almost and
rightly so--prepared yourself, on the project side, both for
new projects and for deferred. And I commend you for that.
But, we're going to have to mix that in with the operating
side, and take a hard look there. And I know, when you're
talking about with people it's tougher, always. So, you know,
we really need to work with you on that piece. Also, in terms
of how we marry up the deferred versus the new projects. And,
of course, that's going to be a function of what, in your
expert judgment and those of your people, which deferred items
absolutely need to be done.
I know sometimes it comes down to it would be cheaper and
better to do it new and--you know, if you had the dollars, that
is perhaps the most cost-effective way to go. But, in some of
these cases, we may have to go to the deferred maintenance to
keep it going for another 5 years or 7 years, versus perhaps
what we'd like to do otherwise.
So, I think you've got a good start here, and I think
that's the direction I would try to work with you in terms of
probably setting up these different scenarios so we're prepared
for the number that we're ultimately going to get, in terms of
the budget we have to achieve.
And, Ms. Chrisler, in my next 5 minutes, I'd love to come
and kind of go through some of the same things with you.
Ms. Chrisler. Thank you.
Senator Hoeven. Yes.
AOC deg.BLUE RIBBON PANEL
Senator Nelson. Well, Ms. Chrisler, you mentioned the blue
ribbon panel that met. Could you give us what their
recommendations were, or what their conclusions were, with
respect to, first, the Russell Senate Office Building stairs.
That was an issue that we spent time on last year. It still
raises questions about how you deal with life-safety issues in
connection with historic buildings. So, maybe you can give us
what you've taken from their report, their recommendations.
Ms. Chrisler. The blue ribbon panel has submitted its final
report. I know the Rules Committee is waiting to receive that
report. Our office has taken a look at it and has prepared a
response that we would be happy to provide for the record. We
would also be happy to provide that to the Rules Committee once
they have received the final report.
There are a number of recommendations that the panel made
with respect to different options. And, so that I don't
misquote those----
Senator Nelson. Sure enough.
Ms. Chrisler [continuing]. Recommendations, I'd be happy to
provide them for the record.
[The information follows:]
Under the life-safety code, buildings on Capitol Hill must provide
protected exit routes so that their occupants will be able to safely
leave the buildings during an emergency evacuation without being
exposed to fire, smoke, or toxic gasses. Because the Russell House
Office Building (RHOB) does not have enclosed stairwells or other
protected escape route, the General Counsel of the Office of Compliance
(OOC) issued a citation (Citation 19) in 2000 to require that this
life-threatening hazard be abated. In 2008, the Architect of the
Capitol (AOC) developed a plan to abate this hazard (known as the
Senate Alternative Life Safety Approach or SALSA) that was subsequently
approved by the OOC general counsel. The SALSA plan was designed to
provide an alternative to enclosing monumental stairways within the
RHOB. It proposed to create separate ``fire zones'' within the building
that would both contain the fire and provide protected areas within the
building and would enable occupants to either completely exit the
building or be sheltered in place, free from exposure to fire, smoke,
and toxic gases. This compartmentalization would be accomplished by
installing fire-rated doors mounted flush with corridor walls that
would be closed automatically upon activation of fire alarms.
Thereafter, at the request of the Senate Committee on Rules and
Administration, the AOC established a Blue Ribbon Panel (Panel) of
experts to address concerns about the effect the SALSA plan might have
on the historic fabric of the RHOB.
In its final report, dated August 23, 2010, the Panel assessed both
fire-safety and historic-preservation concerns. As the Panel found, the
hazards in the RHOB include unprotected exit pathways, insufficient
emergency exit capacity, and excessive exit travel distances in
contravention of life-safety code requirements. It concluded that fire-
safety hazards in the RHOB could be rectified ``in a manner that is
consistent with historic preservation goals.'' The Panel considered
three design options, along with the AOC's SALSA plan, to address the
deficiencies and proposed nine ``general recommendations'' to be
implemented in addition to whichever design option was selected. The
general recommendations are divided into immediate, short-term, and
long-term recommendations. The immediate recommendations involve attic
improvements (removal of stored combustible materials or installation
of automatic sprinkler protection along with smoke barriers and
compartmentalization), basement workshop and storage improvements
(removal of the furniture refinishing workshop, enclosing other
workshops with 1-hour fire separation and removal of combustible
materials in the basement corridor), and inspections (develop and
implement an annual inspection program focusing on fire prevention best
practices). As to these items, the Panel concluded that they ``will
have a significant impact on the level of fire safety in the buildings
and are envisioned as viable, discreet, and relatively easy to
accomplish. These improvements should be undertaken as soon as
possible.''
The short-term recommendations involve providing smoke control in
the atrium and providing a remote means of egress for all assembly
spaces with occupant loads exceeding 50 persons. The long-term
recommendations include adding protective materials to the attic roof
structure, modifying, or replacing the HVAC systems to eliminate air-
transfer openings, providing fire stopping for or replacing utility
shafts and floor openings, and removing the combustible courtyard
structure.
The Panel evaluated SALSA and the three design options by
considering the historic preservation goals as well as nine life-safety
objectives:
--maintaining structural integrity during a fire;
--separating hazardous areas from the remainder of the building;
--restricting smoke movement from rooms to the exit corridors and to
other areas of the building;
--providing protected occupant egress paths;
--restricting vertical smoke movement in the Atrium;
--restricting vertical smoke movement throughout the building;
--providing adequate egress capacity;
--limiting exit travel distances; and
--creating contiguous protected exit paths.
While the Panel acknowledged that SALSA together with the general
recommendations would meet these nine safety objectives, the Panel
dismissed this as an option because it failed to meet historic
preservation goals.
The Panel did not evaluate option 1 in detail. It provides for an
extended automatic sprinkler system for fire and smoke control,
improvements that already are underway. Option 2 would meet both the
historic preservation goals and the life-safety objectives because, in
addition to extending sprinklers and smoke detectors, it provides for
compartmentalization of the RHOB into separate fire zones. This is
accomplished by installing fire-rated pocket doors within the walls
that are activated only in the event of a fire thereby preventing the
spread of fire and toxic gasses while creating protected areas for
occupants to escape safely from the building. Option 3 would also meet
the historic preservation goals and life-safety objectives through the
use of a smoke control system, perhaps in conjunction with
compartmentalization, to limit the amount and extent of fire spread in
the building. However, the Panel cautioned that the feasibility and
potential benefit of this approach have not been evaluated and would
require further technical investigation and computational fire and
egress modeling.
In sum, design option 2 and the AOC's SALSA plan, together with the
general recommendations, address all of the life-safety objectives that
the Panel identified. Design option 3 requires further study and may be
neither technologically nor economically feasible. Design option 1,
which the Panel found provided the least potential for risk reduction,
addresses none of the identified life-safety objectives.
The OOC has concluded:
--In addition to whichever design option is selected, each of the
general recommendations developed by the Panel for improving
the level of fire safety should be implemented on an immediate,
short-term, and long-term basis as soon as practicable.
--Design option 1, unlike the other options, does not create separate
fire zones in order to compartmentalize and therefore limit the
area of smoke and fire spread. Hence, it would neither prevent
the spread of fire, smoke, and toxic gases throughout the RHOB
nor address the building's lack of exit capacity or excessive
travel distances. Hence, it would not abate citation 19.
Consequently, the OOC cannot support this option as currently
proposed. Vertical compartments reduce the number of occupants
exposed to the effects of a fire, allow the occupants to egress
horizontally (an essential feature for those who are physically
unable to use stairs), reduce exit travel distances, increase
available egress capacity, and create areas of safety to
protect occupants from the effects of a fire in an adjacent
compartment. That said, we assume that the AOC will continue to
extend automatic sprinkler protection and upgrade the fire
detection and alarm system to provide area smoke detection
throughout the building as contemplated by option 1.
--Design option 2, if implemented with the general recommendations,
would abate citation 19. Options 2a, 2b, 2c and SALSA, in
conjunction with the general recommendations, all are
sufficient to establish a reasonable level of fire protection
within the RHOB. Unlike the cross-corridor solid doors in the
SALSA plan that would remain open except in an emergency, all
variations of option 2 involve installation of concealed cross-
corridor accordion (Won Door) partitions. The three variations
of option 2 differ in cost, extent of compartmentalization
within the building, the degree of building intervention, and
level of fire protection.
--Design option 3 requires extensive further study and computer-
generated smoke modeling to determine its feasibility and
benefit. Accordingly, without such information, the OOC is
unable to opine on the merits of this option at this time.
Thus, we agree in major part with the Panel's findings respecting
fire and life-safety conditions as well as the measures necessary to
achieve an acceptable level of fire safety.
The Panel's final report also contained a legal analysis of the
OOC's citation authority. We agree with parts of this analysis and
strongly disagree with other parts. We agree to the extent it
recognizes that the OOC has clear authority to issue citations for
alleged violations of the Congressional Accountability Act (CAA), that
the OOC's issuance of a citation for these types of hazards is
consistent with Occupational Safety and Health Administration's
practices regarding similar historic buildings, and that these hazards
can reasonably be viewed as a violation of section 5 of the
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSHAct). However, we do
take strong issue with the report respecting two significant matters as
to which we believe it is in substantial error. First, it questions the
authority of this office to require compliance with the safety and
health standards promulgated by the Secretary of Labor under the OSHAct
absent adoption by OOC of regulations incorporating those standards and
approval of those regulations by the Congress. The analysis disregards
the plain language of the CAA requiring employing offices to comply
with the standards. In so doing, it ignores the well-recognized
distinction between ``standards'' and ``regulations''. Only the OOC
promulgated regulations that implement standards, unlike the standards
themselves, require congressional approval. The legislative history of
the CAA supports this interpretation of the CAA. Second, the analysis
errs by challenging the exclusive authority of the general counsel of
the OOC to make compliance decisions and to enforce its citations.
Again, the CAA makes plain that this enforcement authority lies
exclusively with the general counsel of the OOC.
Senator Nelson. Sure. We'd like them for the record. But,
can you give us, generally, some idea of whether--and maybe
this is a better question for Mr. Ayers, as an architect--are
they consistent with architectural integrity? Because that was
one of our concerns. Obviously, we want things to be safe. But,
we don't want to destroy the architectural integrity. Were the
recommendations, do you think, consistent with that?
Mr. Ayers. I think so, Mr. Chairman. The group did go out
and look at a number of other historic buildings, both locally
and in other cities, and determined that other buildings in
other jurisdictions have implemented the kind of controls we're
looking to implement, as well. And many jurisdictions have
decided to implement them, and some have decided, ``We're not
going to implement them.'' I think the blue ribbon panel gave
us a series of recommendations that go from ``do nothing,'' was
one of their recommendations, through sort of a sliding scale
of implementing full building smoke compartmentation throughout
the building. I think, ultimately, the answer will be somewhere
in between.
Senator Nelson. Okay. Thank you.
AOC deg.CAPITOL DOME PROJECT
For the Capitol dome project, last year you requested, we
had included, in our fiscal year 2011 bill, $20 million for
repairs to the Capitol dome; and because of the continuing
resolution, the funding has not been made available. Can we
still begin the project, given the timeframe of the 2013
Inaugural? I think that was one of the time points that was
important. Or, will we have all kinds of construction going on
in the Capitol dome at the time of the Inaugural?
Mr. Ayers. We certainly cannot let that happen, Mr.
Chairman----
Senator Nelson. Right, exactly.
Mr. Ayers [continuing]. And rest assured, we won't.
Senator Nelson. All right.
Mr. Ayers. We've looked at that, and we think we can still
implement that project up until June of this year. If we don't
receive that money prior to June, we think it's best to
postpone it until after the 2013 Inaugural. It's about a year-
and-a-half in construction. So we're comfortable with June of
this year.
Senator Nelson. Okay. And if we do put it off--obviously,
deferred maintenance has its challenges--does it create any
more extraordinary issues, in terms of life safety or
deterioration of the dome?
Mr. Ayers. I wouldn't characterize it as extraordinary, no.
Waiting from 2011 until 2013 would not be extraordinary, in my
mind, but deterioration will increase.
Senator Nelson. But, we are going to have to do it----
Mr. Ayers. Yes. It is of immediate urgency.
Senator Nelson [continuing]. As I understand it.
Mr. Ayers. Yes, sir.
AOC deg.UTILITY TUNNEL REPAIRS--RADIO PROJECT
Senator Nelson. On the utility tunnel repairs, you
requested $17.4 million. Are you on schedule to complete the
repairs in 2012, recognizing we're still dealing with
continuing resolutions?
Mr. Ayers. Yes, Mr. Chairman. We are on schedule. We're
very confident we will complete that required work by June
2012.
Senator Nelson. And I know you also have some
responsibilities for the Capitol Police (USCP) radio project,
the facilities portion. Can you give us a bit of an update on
your work with the USCP radio modernization effort, recognizing
how important it is for that to function the way we want it to
function for Capitol Hill's security?
Mr. Ayers. I'd be happy to. That is a very important
project. We have four overarching responsibilities as part of
our work on that project. One is the design and construction of
the primary site. The second is the design and construction of
the mirror site, or the backup site. Third, is the creation of
pathways and conduits for the antenna, to be run throughout all
of the office buildings here on campus. And then, the last part
of that is coordinating throughout the District of Columbia,
finding places and antenna towers to lease antenna space and
get utilities to that space.
So, on the primary site, we are nearly finished with that.
I think we're about 95 percent complete with construction. On
the mirror site, we've just awarded the construction contract.
We'll be finished with that by July or August of this year, so
both of those are within schedule. The antenna infrastructure
within the buildings is proceeding well and on schedule. We've
completed a number of buildings, like--the CPP and the USCP
headquarters, among others, are complete, and others are in
progress. And we're comfortable with the schedule there. And
then, finally, the leasing of antenna sites throughout the
city; we are just now getting started on that process,
identifying the sites and working with the radio manufacturer
or, radio designer, U.S. Naval Air Systems Command, to study
the interference between their system and other antennas that
are on the sites that we've outlined.
Senator Nelson. Thank you. I know Senator Hoeven will be
interested in the radio project, given that when 9/11 occurred,
it was clear that our radio facilities were totally inadequate
to deal with the communications required on Capitol Hill,
perhaps just in ordinary circumstances, let alone the emergency
that we experienced. So, when Sergeant at Arms Gainer and Chief
Morse are here, we'll probably go into that a little bit more.
Thank you.
AOC deg.REDUCING COSTS/SERVICES
Senator Hoeven. Well, I'm not too surprised to hear that. I
think there were a lot of places around the country--found out
on 9/11 that, in terms of their radio systems and
interoperability that they had some challenges. So, I'm not too
surprised to hear that.
Ms. Chrisler, maybe you could comment a little bit on some
of those level to a reduction in funding. How--and I know
you're certainly personnel-intensive, in terms of what you do--
how would you approach that?
Ms. Chrisler. Thank you for the question. And it's
something that we've thought about.
As you mentioned, our agency is heavily personnel- and
resource-reliant, with respect to our infrastructure. The other
side of that same coin is that the work that we have is largely
controlled by the congressional population, with respect to our
DRP. We have counseling services, mediation services, hearing
services, and administrative dispute resolution services that
we offer to employees and employing offices when they need
them. So, they come to us when they need us. So, it's not as if
it's a cost or an amount of work that we can control. If, by
some instance, 100 employees come to our office in a given
month, requesting our services, we're mandated to provide those
services. So, in some respects, the costs that we incur are not
within our control.
Even with that in mind, there are things that we've thought
about. There are things that we have done to reduce the cost of
our services. We've engaged in interagency agreements with
executive branch agencies and other agencies to reduce the cost
of our mediation and our hearing services. We have
contemplated, and have tried to organize, teleconferences for--
we have a five-member board of directors, who are experts in
the substantive areas of our office and live across the
country. They convene in Washington, DC, periodically, for
meetings. We try to cut those meetings down and hold them
telephonically so that we can save costs. So, the cost-cutting
efforts that we've made continue.
Looking forward at a reduction in our funding means that we
will have to reduce--prior to reducing services, we'll have to
look at a different way to do business. Perhaps, the additional
mediation services that we offer employees, we won't--and
employing offices--we won't be able to offer. We may have to
limit the rounds of mediation. We may have to limit our
services in other respects. So, not eliminating the services,
because it's a--it's a mandate of the statute, but reducing the
duration of the contracts, reducing the number of contracts,
renegotiating our contracts with other entities, is something
that we've looked at, as well. That's the services.
The other side of that is that we have staffing that would
more than likely need to be reduced. Within our Safety and
Health Program, we have inspectors. We're short one inspector
now, so we're--with additional cuts, we would be looking at
additional shortages, which is difficult to conduct the work
that we are mandated by the statute to do, and in a--in a cost-
effective way. The risk-based approach to inspections and
abatement is the smart way to do things. But, it is resource-
intensive. So, looking at where we're going to save money. Are
you going to save money on the front part? Or, are we going to
save money on the back part? And the back part is where the
money--the real savings comes in, because we're looking at
reduction of illnesses and injuries and accidents and workers
compensation. That's a real savings.
Similar with the DRP. We have the mediation, so we can cut
funding and cut services on the front end, or do we want to cut
it on the back end? Cost savings when we enter into an amicable
settlement between the parties, as opposed to engaging in the
protracted litigation.
These are the considerations that we've made.
Senator Hoeven. So, if your requirement to handle these
cases for remediation, and so forth, remains the same, and you
have a smaller resource base, does that mean it just generates
a backlog? Is that essentially what ends up happening? Or what
are you anticipating?
Ms. Chrisler. Right. Pardon me. That's one of the results.
We would have the backlog. And again, we would have to reduce
the services. So, yes, the services would be offered in the
dispute resolution, but they wouldn't be offered to the level
that we offer them now. We work with the parties exhaustively
for them to reach a mutually acceptable settlement or a
mutually acceptable agreement. You know, we may not be able to
extend services that comprehensively. We may just be able to
just give them the bare bones and meet the requirements of the
statute, as opposed to engaging with them and helping them meet
the solution that's best suited for them. That's on the dispute
resolution end.
On the safety and health end, we may not be able to conduct
inspections of every facility. We've--we completed three
comprehensive biennial inspections. So, each Congress, we've--
for the last three Congresses, we've conducted comprehensive
inspections. So, we've seen a lot of places. We've worked with
the employing offices in a lot of areas. So, we may not, to the
extent that we have in the past, conduct inspections of
absolutely every facility. We may rely on the offices to
conduct self-inspections. And then we would spot check and go
to those areas that have the highest risk. So, yes, we would be
offering the services that we're required to, but at a much
lower level.
Senator Hoeven. Are there statutory changes that come to
mind that would help you streamline any of that process?
Ms. Chrisler. As I sit here, I can't think of a statutory
change that would assist us in that, because the statute is
requiring that we offer the services that are necessary to give
the protections that the act contemplates, that we offer the
inspections, and that we engage in administering the rights
that the statute is providing to employees and employing
offices. So, it's not a matter of amending the statute. That
would result in limiting the protections, which I don't think
anyone is really looking to do.
Senator Hoeven. Okay. But, I think it's something to think
about if there are statutory changes that would strengthen your
ability to do some of these things more effectively or more
efficiently, in a streamlined way--contract for services, any
number of things--you ought to think about it. And then,
depending on the wishes of the Chairman, I do have another
question about your computer system, but I can come back----
Senator Nelson. You can go ahead.
Senator Hoeven. Okay.
You're operating on a computer system that requires, as I
understand it that each of your employees use two computers.
And I have to use two BlackBerrys, because one's personal and
one's for all the Senate stuff. And I do my best to keep all
that in the right spot. But, one's personal, so I really only
have one BlackBerry for Senate use. But, my understanding is
that your employees are having to operate with two work
computers, which doesn't seem like the most cost-effective or
efficient way to do things. So, if you would, just explain why
that's the case and then what your plan is to migrate away from
it, and the costs involved the one time, and then the savings
you would hope to realize.
Ms. Chrisler. Sure. Thank you. And you're absolutely right,
it's not effective--it's not efficient way to conduct business.
And as we migrate to a more technological society, it hinders
the work of our staff. It prevents us from telecommuting. It
prevents us from accessing documents remotely. The reason
behind it is because of the location of the agency and the way
that our IT structure is designed. Right now, our agency is
physically located in the Adams Building of the LOC. And as a
very small agency, we, in essence, piggyback on their server to
connect with the outside world. So, we have one computer that
connects to the LOC's server that allows us to access the
Internet and communicate with the outside world. The LOC has--
administers that network. And we have an internal network,
where we keep our confidential information claims that
discrimination--claims that--are filed against Members of
Congress--all confidential information that we maintain under
the statute, we maintain within our internal server. So, we
have two computers that we work on. It's not efficient. It is
cost prohibitive. But, because of the way our office functions
and the mandates that we have, it's the best way for us, at the
moment, to protect that information.
What we're doing is working with the LOC to be able to
migrate our two computers into one and put up a firewall so
that we can maintain the protection of the information, but
still be connected to the system, because that is very cost
effective for our agency--to be able to utilize the LOC's
network for the external--the Internet purposes. As a very
small agency with, what you see, a very small budget, having
the fiscal--the financial responsibility of maintaining that on
our own would just be costs that are unnecessary----
Senator Hoeven. Right.
Ms. Chrisler [continuing]. Given the situation that we have
now. So, putting that firewall up and--will allow us to migrate
to the one box.
Senator Hoeven. Mr. Chairman, I have a couple followups.
Should I continue, or would you----
Senator Nelson. Yes, go ahead.
Senator Hoeven. Okay.
Well, then building the security system or the firewall is
the issue, right? In other words, it's most cost effective for
you to use the LOC computer. As you said, small agency. That
makes sense. So, you're on their server and so forth.
Ms. Chrisler. Right.
Senator Hoeven. So, the real issue is just programming,
building an adequate firewall for that secure information.
Ms. Chrisler. That's right. And that's a cost and that we
have requested in prior appropriations requests. It's something
that we continue to work with the LOC on. Right now, they're
engaged in an extensive restructuring of their security
systems. And they have been working with us on migrating to one
box, but we've made some modifications to that plan, because of
the changes that they're making to their security system. So,
we continue to work with them to get that firewall up. Once
that's in place, we can move forward for our cost savings. And
the numbers, I can provide for you for the record.
Senator Hoeven. Do they, in essence, act as a service
bureau, where you just pay them a fee out of your budget for
the use of their time on their servers and their computers? Is
that how it works?
Ms. Chrisler. We have an interagency agreement with the LOC
that involves a lot of different things, and one of them is for
the IT work.
Senator Hoeven. And are they actually building that
security system, or firewall, so that you then can migrate to
the one computer, and it's just a matter of them getting that
done?
Ms. Chrisler. I don't think they're building it. We've got
IT staff within our agency that have taken this initiative, and
we're working collaboratively with the LOC from our end. And
so, I don't think they're needed to build it, but they--we need
their help to implement it, of course.
Senator Hoeven. And they're working on that now.
Ms. Chrisler. Well, they are--they've indicated that they
will continue to work with us once they've met some other
priorities that they have.
Senator Hoeven. Okay. If you could have them give us that
cost, that anticipated time to build it, and then what the
resulting savings might be, that would be helpful.
[The information follows:]
The Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 requires the Office of
Compliance (OOC) to maintain confidentiality of certain information
that is brought to our agency. As a result, we currently maintain a
dual network system: one internal/closed system (which consists of
servers, desktops, custom applications, and an email system) to allow
for the maintenance of confidential information, and one external/open
system, provided by the Library of Congress (LOC) to allow for access
to the Internet. The OOC maintains agency data within the closed
network.
This configuration allows the agency to maintain confidential
information; however, there are many drawbacks in the current
separation of the networks. There are significant costs associated with
maintaining the internal network infrastructure; the cost of updating
two computers (one for the external and one for the internal) is an
additional expense incurred by the agency; and the loss of productivity
for each OOC employee to use two computers daily is an inefficient way
to conduct business.
The OOC has designed a plan to install a firewall on the backbone
of the LOC network. This design will allow the OOC to eliminate the
internal network and move all OOC servers, custom applications and data
to the open LOC network, where our Internet-accessible desktops
currently sit. The firewall will provide the necessary security
measures required to maintain the confidentiality of OOC data. The
OOC's information technology staff will no longer need to maintain an
internal email system or internal desktops, and the human resources
costs associated with operating in a dual network environment will be
eliminated.
The OOC expects to realize the following from the elimination of
the internal network:
--One computer for each employee, rather than two;
--Offset a forthcoming $50,000 cyclical computer desktop replacement
cycle in fiscal year 2012; and
--A significant decrease in annual productivity costs.
Currently, the OOC loses 3 percent of productivity per staffer,
daily, as a result of our current configuration. Given an agency of our
size, with our limited resources and the multiple job duties performed
by each staffer, a 3 percent daily loss is comparable to a 30 percent
loss in a larger agency.
Ms. Chrisler. Thank you. And I want to thank you for your
question about changes to the act. That is something that we
will think about. We'll talk to Rachelle and Lila about and----
Senator Hoeven. Well, sometimes you have to go through a
series of steps which may make sense or, based on the statute,
now that you've been doing this you may want to say, ``You
know, if we didn't have to do a couple of these things, we
could still get a good outcome.''
Ms. Chrisler. Sure.
Senator Hoeven. So. If there is something like that.
Ms. Chrisler. Thank you.
Senator Hoeven. You bet.
Senator Nelson. In that regard, Ms. Chrisler, probably the
act requires you to take certain actions for inspections. It
doesn't specify how many or how often or that you have to do
it, which is what--I believe--you are trying to do as
judiciously as you can and with as much effort toward
protecting life, fire, and safety issues. So, maybe it wouldn't
be required to change the language authorizing you to do it,
and empowering you to do it, unless it's too specific and you
can't meet the requirements because of the reduction in staff.
Ms. Chrisler. That is--that the language within this--the
OSHA inspection section is something that we will definitely
take a look at and sit down and examine thoroughly to address
the amount of inspections. I do believe it does say ``every
Congress.'' So, there--it gives us that requirement that we do
have to do this every Congress. And it may say ``each
facility.'' So, it may be specific. But, we'll take a look at
it and follow up, as necessary.
Senator Nelson. And if it needs to be modified, it wouldn't
necessarily prohibit self-inspections with oversight. Is that
possible?
Ms. Chrisler. I'm sorry?
Senator Nelson. Well, if we did change the language in some
way, you could still have directions for inspections without
prohibiting self-inspection. In other words, authorizing some
self-inspections with your oversight, with your requirements,
and then seeing if they comply.
Ms. Chrisler. And I think that we would want to maintain
that relationship.
Senator Nelson. Absolutely.
Ms. Chrisler. Yes.
Senator Nelson. I understand that. Yes.
AOC deg.INTEGRATING FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS
Now, we've been thinking, for some time, how we can realize
some cost savings and efficiencies by converting the all the
legislative branch agencies' financial management systems to a
single entity. And we're back to the LOC. The General
Accounting Office has found this idea to be a logical approach.
And, as a first step, the USCP recently went through a very
successful conversion of their financial management. We're not
talking about IT, here, as much as it is financial management
system to the LOC's. Mr. Ayers, have you looked at perhaps
doing that, from the standpoint of your office?
Mr. Ayers. We have begun to, Mr. Chairman--we have begun to
consider that. Our proposal was to let the USCP do it first----
Senator Nelson. Yes, sure.
Mr. Ayers [continuing]. Quite frankly, and shake out the
bugs for us. And I think they've done that. It was successful.
And there were very few and very minor issues with that
conversion. I think that has paved the way for the rest of us
in the legislative branch to do the same thing.
AOC deg.GAP ANALYSIS
Senator Nelson. Well, I have to ask you, Ms. Chrisler, has
Dr. Billington already done that in your case? Are you looking
at it yet?
Ms. Chrisler. This is something that our agency has been a
part of for some time now.
Senator Nelson. Yes.
Ms. Chrisler. Yes.
Senator Nelson. And he continues to collect his money, I
suspect.
Mr. Ayers, have you done what might be called the ``gap
analysis'' that might be important to close in that connection,
now that perhaps the first entity, the USCP have been able to
go through it? Because there will be a gap to close.
We have not done a gap analysis. We do think that one
should be done before we move our appropriations over and our
financial management systems over. We obviously did convert, a
year ago, as you may know or may recall, Mr. Chairman, that we
were using a company, that was hosting our financial management
system. We competed that and moved it to a different company,
and saved $1 million a year in doing just that.
So, we're familiar with those conversions. We do think a
gap analysis is necessary. But, we've not done one yet.
Senator Nelson. You did mention that you're working on the
CPP. I notice you're requesting $16.4 million for the east
plant chiller relocation project. Is that as a result of the
question of compliance, the citation that was issued some time
ago?
Mr. Ayers. No, Mr. Chairman, that's not a result of a
safety problem or anything from the OOC or citation or anything
like that.
AOC deg.ENERGY REDUCTION REQUIREMENTS
There are two areas in the CPP where we make chilled water.
One of them is in the west plant, and there's money in our 2012
request to upgrade some of those chillers. And, similarly,
there are two relatively new pieces of equipment--I think they
date from 2003--that are in the east plant that are not
connected to the west plant. We need to move them into the west
plant to utilize those pieces of equipment. So, that's what
those two projects are.
Senator Nelson. I see. Will we realize any savings from the
House's decision to discontinue the Greening the Capitol
Initiative? In other words, I know that initially, there are
costs associated with conversion, but not converting, will we
save some money up front that would perhaps cost us on the back
end later?
Mr. Ayers. Would you repeat the question?
Senator Nelson. Well, what I'm saying is, the House has
decided, as I understand it, to discontinue the project called
``Greening the Capitol.'' In other words, making it much more
energy efficient, with some changes to requirements that would
do it. For example, if you look at your fiscal year 2012
budget, do you have anything in that budget for the greening
project that if they prevailed, would not be spent for that
project up front, recognizing that investing up front for the
greening project could end up being cost effective at a later
date? But, there could be some cost savings up front of not
having the money spent.
Mr. Ayers. Yes, I understand. I think if that program is
discontinued, I think the immediate savings would be the staff
that are focused on that, that are funded by the Chief
Administrative Officer of the House. I think, subsequent to
that, in the AOC's appropriation, we have a number of energy-
savings projects that we think are required for us to meet the
energy savings and----
Senator Nelson. But, they wouldn't necessarily be a part of
that initiative.
Mr. Ayers. They would not. Not necessarily, no.
You know, all of the--or, most of the energy saving
initiatives and ideas that come out of that office, we are the
implementer of those. And ultimately, they help us meet our
statutory energy reduction goals.
Senator Nelson. But it also raises the questions about,
Where do you cut and what do you cut?
Thank you.
Senator Hoeven. Thanks, Mr. Chairman, just a couple other
questions.
Mr. Ayers, how would you, in terms of both this concept of
a level budget and then even a 10 percent reduction budget, so
I know what those scenarios look like, and that we're prepared.
And I also think that that will lead you to come back to me and
really point out the tough spots. And we'll do what we can.
AOC deg.DEFERRED MAINTENANCE VS. NEW PROJECTS
But, under that scenario, just address, for a minute, how
much you bring in on the deferred, versus how much on the new.
That's one question. Because there may be some correlation
there. In other words, if you don't do new--some of the new
stuff, you may have to do more of the deferred, and so forth.
And again, that may be something you have to kind of analyze.
That would be one question.
The other is, in these projects, both the new and the
deferred, does that affect your personnel cost? In other words,
are all the costs of doing those projects--is the personnel
cost, the operating variable cost, built in there? Or, if
you're not doing some of those new projects, then does that
make a difference in terms of what your other operating and
personnel costs are?
So, those two questions.
Mr. Ayers. Yes, sir. I think there may be a little
confusion over the two lists that we provided in our budget
that you may have before you. One of those lists, and the first
one, is called our ``Recommended Project List''. And I think
that totals $179 million.
Senator Hoeven. $179,168,000.
Mr. Ayers. Correct.
Senator Hoeven. Not including the $50 million that's in
what you call this ``House Historic Buildings Revitalization
Trust Fund'', which I'm going to ask you about, too. So.
Mr. Ayers. Yes.
Senator Hoeven. That's the list I'm looking at.
Mr. Ayers. So, that list is the list of projects that we
recommend be funded.
The second list that we include in our budget, simply for
information purposes only, is the second page there. That's a
list of projects that I've considered. My staff has brought
them to me. They're ready to execute. And we have made the
decision to defer those and not seek the money for those.
Senator Hoeven. Oh, so that's not deferred maintenance.
Mr. Ayers. No, no.
Senator Hoeven. That's actually deferred projects. So, this
$128,982,000 is--that's what's coming someday, not----
Mr. Ayers. Yes.
Senator Hoeven [continuing]. Deferred maintenance that
needs to be addressed.
Mr. Ayers. Some are deferred maintenance, many of them.
They need to be addressed. But I've made the decision not to
request them this year.
AOC deg.OPERATIONS BUDGET PERSONNEL COSTS
Senator Hoeven. So, your priority list is your priority
list. Got that. Then what about the variable costs?
Mr. Ayers. The way we approach these capital improvements,
most of those have personnel costs built into them. And
typically, if we do a major construction effort, we obviously
will have to ramp up staff at the beginning and throughout it;
and at the end, that staff then departs. And we do that,
typically, through consulting services, construction management
companies, and companies that provide program and construction
management. Those kinds of costs are built into the numbers you
see before you. However, our staff typically remains the same
size. We hire consultants to help us through the ups and downs
of various capital improvements.
Senator Hoeven. So, it won't affect your other personnel
and operating costs.
Mr. Ayers. Not generally.
Senator Hoeven. How far we go down that list, which we'll
see, won't affect your other operating line.
Mr. Ayers. Well, I think we could fund all of those
projects in our project operations budget, and staff would not
go up, because we would hire consultants to temporarily help us
with those. When the projects are over, the consultants go
away.
Senator Hoeven. Then the----
Mr. Ayers. So, our operations side stays the same.
Senator Hoeven. Okay. Then the other thing, as it relates
to the operating, is, you know, with our analysts, we'll want
to make sure that you go through and really look at the
operating, vis a vis how far we go down that capital project
line. I mean, it's going to be important to hit the right
balance there, particularly in your case. Obviously, in Ms.
Chrisler's case, it's tougher, because it's pretty much all
people and operating. But, we need a good balance, so we're
taking a good look at the personnel and the operating line.
AOC deg.HOUSE HISTORIC BUILDINGS REVITALIZATION TRUST FUND
The second thing is, if you would, just tell me how this
$50 million works, on what you refer to as the ``House Historic
Buildings Revitalization Trust Fund''.
Mr. Ayers. Yes, sir. On the first one, you're absolutely
right, finding that right balance between the capital budget
improvements--the operating budget. And our look at that is
that, as we tighten the capital projects, the value and the
necessity for the operating budget increases, because we're not
doing the projects, we're not revitalizing, and we're not
replacing equipment; therefore, our staff that keeps this
equipment running day-to-day becomes more and more important to
that. So, finding that balance, you're absolutely right, is
important, and not cutting one or the other one too deeply.
On the House Historic Building Revitalization Trust Fund,
we think that that's a really important approach to the long-
term viability of the Capitol campus. There are--as you see--
have seen in our budget, there are some major building
revitalizations that are before us--5 years out, 10 years out,
15 and 20 years out. And those building revitalizations could
cost a half a billion or a $1 billion, depending upon what
building they are. And to be able to accommodate a project of
that magnitude and make a request of $750 million in one fiscal
year, and to have the legislative branch be able to appropriate
that in one year, for us to execute the building
revitalization, we don't think is a sustainable approach, and
we don't think it's reality, quite frankly.
So, we think a better approach is to invest in our future,
and invest in our infrastructure incrementally, and to build up
a corpus of funds so that when a historic building needs to be
revitalized, we have money there to do it.
And I think, second, with that--and most importantly to
me--is that if we don't do that, that money will then compete
for the projects, the deferred maintenance projects that are on
this list. And those deferred maintenance projects won't get
done. And that's when I think we really get in trouble with our
building systems and our infrastructure.
Senator Hoeven. Well, and you, being an architect, would
have a good understanding of how best to do that. That's a
better approach than a phased approach, where, if it were $50
million, one option would be to put $50 million in that fund to
build to a certain number that you can do the whole project.
Another approach would be to say, ``Okay, we're going to do
phase one of five phases, or whatever. And we're going to do
$50 million worth of work.'' So, that's a better approach than
a phased approach, is what you're saying?
Mr. Ayers. Well, I think both of those are viable
approaches, quite frankly.
Senator Hoeven. Okay. Is it project dependent? Is that kind
of how that works?
Mr. Ayers. It typically is project dependent. It depends.
There are efficiencies and inefficiencies in both of those
approaches. Phasing, obviously, is a little more inefficient.
And when we have to move people out of a building, it become
extremely complicated.
AOC deg.BUDGET CHALLENGES
Senator Hoeven. Sure.
Is there anything that either of you would want to bring up
that I haven't asked you about? I mean, is there something
that, as you look at these budgets, or as we've talked about
these things today, that you think it's important to bring up
that we haven't talked about?
Mr. Ayers. Not me.
Ms. Chrisler. I think that we've talked about the
significant issues. I would love to be able to maintain the
line of communication and continue to meet with Rachelle and
Lila so that we can work through these issues as we explore the
different levels that you've mentioned and, you know, deal with
the challenges that we face.
Senator Hoeven. Thank you. And I think that's absolutely
the right approach. And I appreciate that.
Thanks.
Senator Nelson. Yes, I would agree 100 percent with that.
We're facing a situation where a number of our colleagues are
out there with a number or a percentage for cuts, in search of
a plan. Our approach is to find the plan and work our way into
it, so that we don't get into a situation where, in order to
meet the objective, somebody thinks we should close the CVC 2
days a week, or something like that.
What we want to do is preserve the security on Capitol
Hill. We want to preserve the integrity of the structures on
Capitol Hill. We want to preserve the function of Government on
Capitol Hill. We're just faced with doing it in tight times.
And so, working together, I think, will help us develop the
smoothest possible approach to meeting all those objectives,
and doing the best we can with the taxpayers' money in the
process.
So, thank you. I've asked everything I plan to ask today,
except I'll ask the same thing of my colleague--``What question
haven't I asked that I should ask?'' You know, I guess that's
sort of the way to hear it. If you think of something, please,
during our continuing discussions, share it.
Mr. Ayers. Thank you.
Senator Nelson. Thanks, to both of you.
Ms. Chrisler. Thank you.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
were submitted to the agencies for response subsequent to the
hearing:]
Questions Submitted to Tamara Chrisler
Questions Submitted by Senator John Hoeven
BUDGET CUTS
Question. How would a reduction in appropriated funds affect your
operations, services, and programs?
Answer. We believe that any reduction in our funding below current
levels would be a false economy because such action would only serve to
shift costs to or increase costs for other legislative branch agencies
as well as the judicial branch.
Based on our analysis, we have determined that any reduction in
funding for our occupational safety and health program would seriously
jeopardize the risk-based inspection process we have inaugurated at the
urging of this subcommittee. The importance of our biennial inspections
in identifying and reducing hazards cannot be overemphasized: during
the 109th Congress, we identified more than 13,000 serious hazards; in
the latest biennial inspection in the 111th Congress, we found 5,400
hazards--a significant reduction in hazards and a corresponding
increase in safety. The safety and health inspections are currently
being performed with a skeletal staff consisting of one full-time
employee and one full-time contractor. With higher-risk areas being
dispersed over an area that is greater than 17 million square feet, the
inspection staff is spread as thin as it can be. The risk-based
inspection program requires that the work of these inspectors be
supplemented by staff that can thoroughly analyze the procedures being
followed in higher-risk areas such as the machine shops, mechanical
spaces, and utility areas so that hazards can be identified. This staff
must then work with the employing offices to adjust processes and
procedures so that potential hazards are minimized or abated. To
perform this process in a collaborative manner requires more time and
resources than simply performing walk-through inspections and issuing
citations wherever violations are found. While we are confident that
implementing this risk-based inspection process is worth the time and
resources the Congress has invested in the program because it will
result in a significant reduction in injuries illnesses, and the
related costs incurred by legislative branch agencies when these
injuries and illnesses occur, we are also very cognizant that we have
stretched our resources as far as we can to provide this enhanced
service. As it stands now, we are uncertain whether we will be able to
complete this targeted schedule with our current level of funding. Any
further reduction in funding would probably force us to abandon the
risk-based approach and return to an enforcement method involving walk-
through inspections and citations. This would mean that the anticipated
savings in injury costs associated with the risk-based program would be
lost.
Moreover, as we look to the immediate future, the Office of
Compliance (OOC) sees an increased need for thorough inspections of
higher-risk areas as maintenance and capital improvement projects are
being deferred in order to save costs. Deferral of capital projects not
only increases maintenance costs, but increases the need for frequent
safety inspections. If facilities use mechanical and electrical systems
well beyond their useful life expectancy, the risk that these systems
will fail and cause fire or injury increases dramatically. It may make
sense to defer expensive capital improvement projects during this time
of budget constraints; however, it must be recognized that this type of
deferral will also increase the need for maintenance and inspection
(and the costs associated with them). When these systems reside in
buildings with known egress and fire-hazard deficiencies, the failure
to be vigilant about safety inspections can be catastrophic. Interim
measures such as increasing fire prevention through the use of
inspections are a cost-effective way to allow continued use of outdated
facilities and systems while maintaining an acceptable level of safety.
Similarly, any reduction in the OOC's funding would reduce our
Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) inspections and would be more
than offset by the increased costs that the Architect of the Capitol
(AOC) would incur. As it stands, ADA inspections can only be performed
occasionally when we are able to squeeze time out of the schedules of
employees and contractors who are assigned to other duties. There is no
specific funding for this program so there is nothing there to cut. In
addition, this program is being administered in a way that should
result in significant savings. The ADA requires that new construction
and alterations be designed and constructed in strict compliance with
the ADA Standards for Accessible Design. In the past, the AOC has
incurred additional costs when it was discovered that alterations and
new construction did not comply with the ADA standards. The OOC is now
finding ways to work with the AOC at the design and preconstruction
stages to ensure that new construction and alterations comply with the
ADA, thereby saving the costs associated with re-constructing completed
projects so that they comply with the standards. Our inspection of the
Capitol Visitor Center, prior to the completion of construction, is a
perfect example of how ADA inspections result in cost savings.
In addition, reducing funding to our employment dispute resolution
program would result in diminished services and not in any net savings.
The success of the confidential counseling and mediation program is
largely due to the OOC's ability to offer these services in an
expedited manner. The Congressional Accountability Act (CAA) requires
that counseling be completed within 30 days of the request for
counseling and that mediation, which lasts 30 days, be commenced within
15 days of the end of counseling. See CAA Sec. Sec. 402 and 403. Based
upon our experience with this program, we have found that employment
disputes can often be resolved efficiently and less expensively when
access to confidential mediation services can be provided before the
parties incur substantial costs, become entrenched in their stances,
and begin ``trying'' their cases in the press. We, therefore, believe
that any cuts to this program will reduce the level of mediation
services and drive up the cost of unnecessary litigation.
The OOC also anticipates that the number of requests for counseling
relating to employment disputes will increase as funding for
legislative branch offices is reduced. These budget cuts will result in
more layoffs and terminations, which in turn will likely result in more
employees filing requests with the OOC challenging those layoff and
termination decisions. Furthermore, because the cuts are occurring
throughout all levels of Government, more terminated and laid-off
employees will be unable to obtain another Government position after
termination or layoff. This too is likely to fuel an increase in the
number of employees filing with the OOC. As unemployment rates
increased in the private sector during the last few years, the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) saw a dramatic increase in the
number of discrimination complaints filed with its offices. In fiscal
year 2010, the EEOC received almost 100,000 complaints (99,992). In the
10 years between fiscal year 1997 and 2007, the EEOC consistently
averaged approximately 80,000 complaints per year (fluctuating between
75,428 and 84,442). In the last 3 years, the EEOC is averaging closer
to 95,000 complaints per year (95,402 in fiscal year 2008, 93,277 in
fiscal year 2009, and 99,992 in fiscal year 2010). The OOC anticipates
that it, too, will experience a large increase in the number of filings
as budget cuts cause staff reductions. Again, we do not believe that it
makes sense to reduce funding for these services at a time of overall
budget cuts because this is a time when both the need for these
services will be increasing and the probable litigation costs incurred
by not providing these services will undoubtedly surpass any apparent
savings associated with cutting the services.
CHANGES TO THE CAA
Question. Please describe any statutory changes that could help
make your programs or processes more ``streamlined'' or efficient or
that would otherwise save money?
Answer. Pursuant to section 102b of the CAA, each Congress, the
board of directors prepares a report analyzing current laws and
determining whether those laws should be made applicable to the
legislative branch. This most recent 102b report ``Recommendations for
Improvements to the Congressional Accountability Act'' not only
provides key recommendations, but also focuses on how these
recommendations can produce cost savings across the legislative branch.
SAFETY AND HEALTH AMENDMENTS THAT WILL RESULT IN COST SAVINGS
Subpoena Authority in Safety and Health Investigations.--Unlike the
Department of Labor (DOL) and other State and Federal entities,
subpoena authority in aid of investigations was not given to the OOC
under the CAA. This exemption limits the OOC's ability to investigate
promptly and effectively safety and health hazards within congressional
workplaces. Currently, the OOC is dependent on information that is
voluntarily provided by employing offices and employees when it
conducts safety and health investigations. In some instances, the
absence of investigatory subpoena authority has significantly
contributed to protracted delays in investigations, which results in
additional personnel costs for OOC staff conducting the investigation
and congressional staff responding to the investigatory requests.
Inordinate delay or provision of only partial information results in
faulty witness recollection, the lack and loss of evidence, untimely
completion of inspections, and unnecessarily prolonged employee
exposure time to hazardous conditions.
Safety and Health Recordkeeping.--The recordkeeping requirements
included in section 8c of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of
1970 recognize the need for full and accurate information to administer
effectively a safety and health program. With records, the OOC could
better pinpoint worksites with high numbers of injuries and illness and
identify and analyze their causes and use targeted safety programs to
reduce and prevent such hazards.
At the urging of this subcommittee, the OOC is no longer conducting
the type of ``wall-to-wall'' inspections that were performed during the
prior three Congresses. Beginning with the 112th Congress, the OOC has
implemented a risk-based inspection process that allows us to focus our
inspections on higher-risk areas. We implemented this risk-based
process by hiring an Occupational Safety and Health Program Manager who
has experience working in the insurance industry performing risk-based
assessments of safety hazards. She has worked with the employing
offices to develop a risk-based inspection process that focuses on
higher-risk areas and allows lower-risk areas to be self-inspected by
the employing offices based upon criteria established by the OOC, with
oversight and spot-checking also provided by the OOC. We believe that
this approach to inspections is consistent with the existing statutory
language which grants sufficient discretion to the OOC's general
counsel regarding the procedure and methods used to conduct the
biennial inspections mandated by CAA Sec. Sec. 215(e).
While the OOC has implemented this process by compiling a tentative
and somewhat speculative list of higher-risk areas, the OOC has been
hampered in its ability to identify higher-risk areas because there is
no requirement in the CAA that legislative branch agencies maintain
injury and illness logs or records. Nor does the CAA require that these
logs or records be provided to the OOC when they are being maintained
by agencies.
Without these logs and records, the OOC general counsel cannot
access the information needed to develop fully and efficiently a
targeted risk-based inspection program aimed at the causes and
prevention of occupational injuries and illnesses, as was envisioned by
this subcommittee. As the DOL recognized, ``analysis of the data is a
widely recognized method for discovering workplace safety and health
problems and tracking progress in solving these problems.'' See,
``Frequently Asked Questions for OSHA's Injury and Illness
Recordkeeping Rule for Federal Agencies'', www.osha.gov/dep/fap/
recordkeepingfaqs.html.
In February 2004, the then General Accounting Office (GAO) issued
its report, Office of Compliance, Status of Management Control Efforts
to Improve Effectiveness, GAO-04-400. In its report, the GAO made a
number of recommendations to improve the OOC's effectiveness, one of
which was to increase ``its capacity to use occupational safety and
health data to facilitate risk-based decisionmaking'' to ensure that
the OOC's activities contribute to ``a safer and healthier workplace.''
(pp. 4, 14). The inability to acquire relevant and targeted employing
office accident and injury data (OSHA section 8(c)(2)) hinders the
general counsel's effort to tailor the biennial inspections, focusing
its limited resources on work areas that have the highest incidence of
illness or injury.
WORKPLACE RIGHTS AMENDMENTS THAT WILL RESULT IN COST SAVINGS
Notice Posting of Rights.--Almost all Federal anti-discrimination,
anti-harassment, safety and health, and other workplace rights laws
require that employers prominently post notices of those rights and
information pertinent to asserting claims for alleged violations of
those rights. By providing such notices, employees have a clearer
understanding of their rights. Such notices also serve as a reminder to
supervisors and co-workers that certain behaviors, such as sexual
harassment, are not tolerated in the congressional workplace and that
there are legal consequences for such behaviors. By deterring such
behavior, it is anticipated that workplace conflict would diminish and
the Congress would spend less money and time defending against
discrimination claims.
Mandatory Anti-discrimination/harassment Training.--The private
sector and Federal executive branch have long recognized the benefits
of mandatory anti-discrimination training for all employees. Much like
with ethics laws, managers who do not understand their obligations
under workplace rights laws are bound to run afoul of them. By helping
managers to better understand workplace rights laws, compliance with
those laws improve. Furthermore, managers will know how to quickly
address such workplace strife rather than allowing it to fester and
grow, resulting in greater legal consequence. It also informs employees
about their workplace rights and how workplace conflicts can be
resolved. The short amount of time spent on anti-discrimination
training ``at the front end'' can prevent much greater time spent on
litigation. The OOC is looking into the possibility of implementing
this training through computer-based programs, a method that appears to
be on the increase in the private sector. This could prove to be cost-
efficient as well as effective.
Consolidation of Dispute Resolution Programs for All Legislative
Branch Agencies.--Another area of potential statutory change involves
expanding the coverage of OOC procedures to include those legislative
branch agencies currently excluded from some of the provisions of the
CAA, i.e., the Library of Congress (LOC), the Government Accountability
Office (GAO), and the Government Printing Office (GPO). Such a change
would be consistent with ongoing efforts to consolidate specific
services in particular legislative branch offices, such as
consolidating all police and security services with the U.S. Capitol
Police (USCP) (eliminating a separate LOC police force), moving all
accessibility services to a separate Congressional Office of
Accessibility Services (eliminating separate House and Senate offices),
and implementing a uniform financial management system across all
legislative branch agencies. Pursuant to a mandate from the House
Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee on the Legislative Branch in
fiscal year 2005, this issue has been under study since fiscal year
2006 by the foregoing agencies. The OOC could accelerate this process
to identify potential cost savings that would result from such a
legislative change.
Although the GPO is part of the legislative branch, it is not
subject to any of the provisions of the CAA. Most GPO employees are
included in the Federal competitive service and employment laws that
apply generally in the executive branch apply at GPO. While covered
under their own statutory schemes, the GAO and LOC are not subject to
the provisions of the CAA providing protections in the areas of
employment discrimination, Fair Labor Standards, labor-management
relations, genetic information use and disclosure, veterans'
preference, and disability access to public services and
accommodations. The GAO and LOC, however, are subject to the provisions
in the CAA relating to occupational safety and health, and presumably
to those provisions covering polygraph use and procedures, worker
adjustment and retraining, uniformed services employment and re-
employment, and family and medical leave.
In the areas where there is no coverage under the CAA, GAO, LOC,
and GPO utilize their own internal procedures and staff to provide the
processes and procedures they are otherwise required to provide by law.
In some cases, these agencies also use related agency employment
dispute resolution panels or executive branch agencies. Thus, in
addition to its own internal processes, the GAO is subject to the
dispute resolution procedures of its own Personnel Appeals Board. Labor
relations matters of the LOC are regulated by the Federal Labor
Relations Authority and the GPO is covered by employment dispute
agencies of the executive branch (the Merit Systems Protection Board,
the EEOC, the Office of the Special Counsel, and the Federal Labor
Relations Authority). Many of the processes used by the LOC, GAO, and
GPO are duplicative of the services provided to the legislative branch
by the OOC under the CAA.
The mandatory counseling and mediation provisions of the CAA
provide a cost-effective means to resolve employment disputes. Indeed,
these procedures are already in use by such agencies of the legislative
branch such as the AOC, the Congressional Budget Office, and the USCP.
Employing offices within the House of Representatives and the Senate
also utilize the case processing procedures of the OOC. The CAA's
hearing process is a cost-effective alternative to litigation for all
parties. Consolidating all counseling, mediation, and hearing services
for all legislative branch agencies with the OOC would eliminate the
needless duplication of resources that is currently occurring in the
LOC, GAO, and GPO.
Recordkeeping.--Another recordkeeping recommendation involves
workplace rights other than those listed above with respect to safety
and health. Most Federal workplace rights statutes that apply to
private and public sector employers require the employer to retain
personnel records in a certain manner and for a certain period of time.
Although some employing offices in the Congress keep personnel records,
there are no legal requirements to do so under the CAA. Mandating these
requirements would assist in speedier resolution of claims because
documentary evidence would be available to assist in adjudicating the
merits of an employee's claims: employers would be able to use records
to assist in demonstrating that personnel actions were carried out in a
nondiscriminatory manner; employees would be able to show that the
employer acted improperly; mediators may use such records to assist the
parties in arriving at a resolution; and hearing officers may use such
records to determine the merits of a case and whether certain cases
should proceed to a hearing or be dismissed without a hearing. In the
absence of such records, both parties must present their evidence with
lengthy depositions and witness testimonies, all resulting in increased
expenditure of taxpayer dollars.
Whistleblower Protections.--The Congress has long recognized
whistleblowers as saving taxpayer dollars by exposing waste, fraud, and
abuse. The anti-retaliation provisions of the CAA only provide
protection to employees who exercise their rights under current
provisions of the CAA, and provisions for disclosures of alleged
violations of law, abuses, or mismanagement are not included in the
CAA. If the CAA were amended to include whistleblower protections, the
OOC would not investigate or prosecute claims of waste, fraud, or abuse
(the proper authorities would); rather employees who face retaliation
for reporting waste, fraud, or abuse to the proper authorities would
bring retaliation claims through the confidential alternative dispute
resolution process as they would any other workplace rights claim. As
in the private sector and Federal executive branch, congressional
staffers would have whistleblower protections and the Congress would
witness the taxpayer savings that whistleblower protections bring.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
Senator Nelson. The hearing is recessed.
[Whereupon, at 3:42 p.m., Thursday, March 3, the hearing
was concluded, and the subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene
subject to the call of the Chair.]
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012
----------
THURSDAY, MARCH 17, 2011
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 2:28 p.m., in room SD-138, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Ben Nelson (chairman) presiding.
Present: Senator Nelson.
GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE
STATEMENT OF GENE L. DODARO, COMPTROLLER GENERAL
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR BEN NELSON
Senator Nelson. This meeting will come to order. Senator
Hoeven is not going to be able to join us today. So we will
proceed as we would ordinarily.
We meet this afternoon to take testimony on the fiscal year
2012 budget request from the Government Accountability Office
(GAO), the Government Printing Office (GPO), and the
Congressional Budget Office (CBO).
And I am happy to welcome today our witnesses--Gene Dodaro,
Comptroller General; William Boarman, Public Printer; and Doug
Elmendorf, Director of the CBO.
I want to reiterate a few of my concerns going into fiscal
year 2012. Here, in Washington, it is clear that we need to get
serious about controlling and cutting costs. And I can't fix
the entire problem of overspending in the Congress, but I hope
we can set an example here in the legislative branch.
I started this process last year, as everyone here and the
witnesses can attest to, when Senator Murkowski and I worked
together to make reductions to this bill. And this year, it is
the goal of Senator Hoeven and I, to work together to make even
further cuts to next year's budget.
Cutting spending for the Congress is an effort to lead by
example. In many ways, our message, to paraphrase Harry Truman,
is, ``The buck shrinks here.''
I appreciate the contributions made by each of our agencies
in assisting the Congress in its service to the country. We are
truly grateful for the work you do, and we look forward to
hearing from you and discussing your budget requests.
Mr. Dodaro, last year when you appeared before this
subcommittee, I introduced you as Acting Comptroller General of
the GAO. So I want to congratulate you on your confirmation as
the eighth Comptroller General of the United States and also to
recognize you for being the first career GAO employee to
achieve this impressive milestone. That is really quite an
accomplishment, and obviously, we wish for you to continue your
good work and have our good wishes.
This year, the GAO is requesting a total of $556.8 million,
the same as the fiscal year 2010 enacted level, and a total of
3,220 full-time equivalents (FTEs). I appreciate the work that
you and your staff have put into keeping the GAO's budget
request flat this year, and I look forward to hearing the
specifics of the request, specifically where we might, if
necessary, as we think it would be, to make some additional
cuts.
As you know, unfortunately, no good deed goes unpunished.
And so, we will try to avoid having that happen. But thank you.
This is your first time appearing before this subcommittee
since your December 29 appointment to the post of Public
Printer, Mr. Boarman. Congratulations on your appointment, and
welcome.
And I understand that the GPO recently celebrated 150 years
of service to the Federal Government, and I would like to
congratulate you and your entire staff on that accomplishment,
as well. The GPO is requesting a total of $148.5 million, which
is $1 million, or 0.7 percent, more than the fiscal year 2010
enacted level.
Dr. Elmendorf, it is always good to see you and good to see
you again here today. The CBO is requesting $46.8 million in
fiscal year 2012, an increase of roughly $1.7 million, or 3.8
percent, more than the current year. As you and as I have
discussed, there are some explanations that would be very
helpful in relating previous years to the current year request,
and I look forward to discussing the particulars of your budget
in just a few minutes.
Now let us begin, I would like to call on Mr. Dodaro for
your opening statement, followed by Mr. Boarman, and then Dr.
Elmendorf. And I hope, if you could, keep your opening
statements as brief as possible, perhaps as little as 5
minutes. But we wouldn't want to shut down your opportunity for
opening comments.
SUMMARY STATEMENT OF GENE L. DODARO
Mr. Dodaro. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I appreciate the opportunity to be here today to discuss
the GAO's budget request for fiscal year 2012. I want to make
sure we answer all your questions, so I will be very brief. I
would like to make just four points.
The first has to do with the breadth and scope of the GAO's
support to the Congress. Second, is the return on investment
that the Congress and the taxpayers receive as a result of
their investment in the GAO. Third, is the importance we place
on having a dedicated, skilled, and motivated workforce. And
fourth, briefly, the rationale for our budget submission.
First, in terms of the breadth of our support to the
institution of the Congress, the GAO supports every standing
committee of the Congress, and 70 percent of the subcommittees
have requested our assistance. We issue hundreds of reports and
testimonies every year across the full breadth of the Federal
Government's responsibilities--from healthcare to defense. Just
last week, for example, we testified at 13 hearings on
everything from flood insurance to cybersecurity.
The return on investment last year, as a result of the
Congress and agencies implementing our recommendations, was
$49.9 billion in financial benefits. That is an $87 return for
every $1 invested in the GAO.
Beyond this record, more than 1,300 other documented
benefits occurred as a result of the GAO's work that didn't
result in financial benefits, but resulted in improved service
to the public or greater efficiencies and effectiveness of
Government programs. For example, recommendations that we made
improved oversight of nursing home safety.
Eighty-two percent of our recommendations are implemented
over a period of time. So we think we make--on a continual
basis--a good effort to help ensure the accountability of the
Federal Government and improve its performance.
Now these accomplishments aren't possible without
dedicated, talented people, and at the GAO we have a
multidisciplinary workforce, as you know. We put a lot of
effort into making sure that we have the right skills and types
of people, both in technical disciplines and subject areas. To
work on this, we provide support in making sure that they keep
their training up to date so that we are using the most state-
of-the-art methodologies and technologies. And we also put a
big investment on working with our employees.
As you know, and as you have commented in the past, we are
rated as one of the best places to work in the Federal
Government. We are very proud of that record. We work hard with
our employees and with our union to have good, constructive
ongoing relationships. We value that, and we are making good
progress in that regard.
Last, as the auditor of the consolidated financial
statements of the Federal Government, I am acutely aware of the
fiscal stress that our Government is under. And as we have said
for a number of years, it is on an unsustainable long-term
path. But I also recognize that during these times of making
decisions on where to cut and how to allocate resources, that
GAO's services are even that much more important to the
Congress in order to help it make the best decisions possible
to eliminate waste, to deal with a variety of issues, and to
make cuts without having unintended negative consequences on
the citizens.
PREPARED STATEMENT
And so, therefore, we put forth what we believe to be a
prudent, modest request. We have tried to gain as many
efficiencies as possible, and we believe, with the request that
we have put forward, that we can meet the highest-priority
needs of the committees across the Congress.
I know this subcommittee will give careful consideration,
as you have in the past, to our request, and I look forward to
answering your questions.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Gene L. Dodaro
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Hoeven, and members of the
subcommittee: I appreciate the opportunity to be here today to discuss
the Government Accountability Office's (GAO) budget request for fiscal
year 2012. I want to thank the subcommittee for its continued support
of the GAO. We very much appreciate the confidence you have shown in
our efforts to help support the Congress in carrying out its
constitutional responsibilities and to help improve Government
performance and accountability for the benefit of the American people.
With this subcommittee's support, in fiscal year 2010, the GAO
provided assistance to every standing congressional committee and 70
percent of their subcommittees. Our work yielded significant results
across the Government, including financial benefits of $49.9 billion--a
return on investment of $87 for every $1 invested in the GAO. In
addition, we documented more than 1,300 other benefits resulting from
our work that helped improve services to the public, promote improved
management throughout Government and change laws, such as the Improper
Payments Elimination and Recovery Act of 2010.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ GAO-11-2SP, United States Government Accountability Office
Performance and Accountability Report Fiscal Year 2010 and GAO-11-3SP,
Summary of GAO's Performance and Financial Information Fiscal Year
2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recently, we issued two major reports that underscore the GAO's
continuing value in helping the Congress and the administration reduce
costs and improve Government, particularly in a time of reduced
resources.
--First, just last week on March 1, 2011, we detailed 81
opportunities to reduce duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation.\2\ These opportunities span a range of Federal
Government mission areas such as agriculture, defense, economic
development, energy, general government, health, homeland
security, international affairs, and social services. Within
and across these missions, our report touches on hundreds of
Federal programs, affecting virtually all major Federal
departments and agencies. By reducing or eliminating
unnecessary duplication, overlap, or fragmentation and by
addressing the other cost-saving and revenue-enhancing
opportunities contained in the report, the Federal Government
could save tens of billions of tax dollars annually and help
agencies provide more efficient and effective services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ GAO-11-318SP, Opportunities to Reduce Potential Duplication in
Government Programs, Save Tax Dollars and Enhance Revenue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
--Second, our high-risk update issued on February 17, 2011,
identified 30 Federal areas and programs at risk of fraud,
waste, abuse, and mismanagement, and those in need of broad-
based transformation. Solutions to high-risk problems offer the
potential to save billions of dollars, dramatically improve
service to the public, and strengthen confidence and trust in
the performance and accountability of the U.S. Government.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Our 2011 High-Risk List is included in Appendix I.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Looking ahead to fiscal year 2012, the GAO is acutely aware of our
dual responsibilities in a time of fiscal austerity. First, the
Congress has rightly come to rely upon the GAO to help identify
billions of dollars in cost-saving opportunities to tighten Federal
budgets or to point out revenue enhancement opportunities. We know our
mission becomes ever more critical when the Nation faces difficult
financial times. But second, the GAO must also ensure it meets this
responsibility while implementing all possible cost savings in its own
operations without diminishing our traditionally high-quality work that
lays the foundation for critical decisionmaking and oversight by the
Congress.
Accordingly, we are seeking only to maintain our fiscal year 2010
funding level of $556.8 million in fiscal year 2012 and plan to
maintain our current authorized staffing levels. While operating at
this funding level with no increase poses challenges, the GAO is
committed to reducing our own costs as much as possible in order to
absorb the additional demands and increasing costs of the coming year
without additional resources. Our budget request attempts to balance
tradeoffs and assumes that we will be able to manage at reduced funding
levels, and try to maintain our staffing levels to provide insightful
analyses on the most important priorities for congressional oversight
and decisionmaking.
However, if the GAO's funding is reduced below the requested level,
more drastic measures would be needed, such as reductions in our staff
capacity, which would result in increased delays in responding to
congressional requests, limit our ability to provide timely responses
to support congressional oversight, and reduce the number of requests
that we could complete.
gao deg.THE GAO'S EFFORTS HELP THE CONGRESS ADDRESS DOMESTIC
AND INTERNATIONAL CHALLENGES
The GAO stands ready to serve the Congress and the American people
at this historically critical juncture and is uniquely positioned to
help address our Nation's challenges and identify opportunities.
Pressures to reduce the Federal deficit following an economic recovery
will mean a greater need for analyses of programs and their
effectiveness, as well as a reduction in improper Federal payments and
closing the gap between taxes owed and paid.
Congressional demand for GAO services remains high as evidenced by
our workload. We expect that trend to continue as a result of the
pressures on Federal finances and our economy. For example, we will be
working to produce future annual reports outlining duplication,
overlap, and fragmentation as well as opportunities to reduce costs and
enhance revenue. Additionally, the Wall Street Reform Act contained 44
new statutory requirements or authorities for GAO assistance, including
audits related to the Federal Reserve.
Our past performance is evidence of the critical role our dedicated
staff play in helping the Congress and the American people better
understand issues, both as they arise and over the long term. For
example, in fiscal year 2010, the GAO issue-area experts testified 192
times before the Congress on a wide range of issues, ranging from air
cargo, border and cyber security issues and the Department of Defense's
planning for the drawdown of United States forces from Iraq to the
Medicare prescription drug program, processing of disability claims and
funding for broad band services.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ A list of selected issues on which GAO staff testified before
the Congress during fiscal year 2010 is included as Appendix II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The GAO's strategic plan for serving the Congress and the Nation,
highlights the broad scope of our efforts to help the Congress respond
to domestic and international challenges, such as:
--threats confronting U.S. national security interests;
--fiscal sustainability and debt challenges;
--economic recovery and restored job growth; and
--advances in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.
The GAO seeks not only to help position the Government to better
manage risks that could compromise the Nation's security, health, and
solvency, but also to identify opportunities for managing Government
resources wisely for a more sustainable future.
Our strategic plan covers the following goals and objectives:
Goal 1.--Help the Congress address current and emerging challenges
to the well-being and financial security of the American people.
--Financing and programs to serve the health needs of an aging and
diverse population;
--Lifelong learning to enhance U.S. competitiveness;
--Benefits and protections for workers, families, and children;
--Financial security for an aging population;
--A responsive, fair, and effective system of justice;
--Viable communities;
--A stable financial system and consumer protection;
--Responsible stewardship of natural resources and the environment;
and
--A viable, efficient, safe, and accessible national infrastructure.
Goal 2.--Help the Congress respond to changing security threats and
the challenges of global interdependence.
--Protect and secure the homeland from threats and disasters;
--Ensure military capabilities and readiness;
--Advance and protect U.S. foreign policy interests; and
--Respond to the impact of global market forces on U.S. economic and
security interests.
Goal 3.--Help transform the Federal Government to address national
challenges.
--Analyze the Government's fiscal position and opportunities to
strengthen approaches to address the current and projected
fiscal gap;
--Identify fraud, waste, and abuse; and
--Support congressional oversight of major management challenges and
program risks.
Our strategic plan framework is included in Appendix IV.
gao deg.CONSTRAINED FISCAL YEAR 2012 BUDGET REQUEST
Our requested funding level of $556.8 million will allow us to try
to support a staffing level of 3,220 FTEs to provide insightful
analysis on the most important priorities for congressional oversight
and decisionmaking. We will continue to outreach to the Congress to
understand and set priorities to ensure that we focus on the most
important issues for congressional oversight.
Although operating under a flat budget for 3 years provides
significant operational challenges, we have carefully considered our
resource requirements and made tradeoffs to ensure that we try to
maintain our staff capacity within our current funding level to allow
us to provide the Congress with high-quality, timely, and objective
analyses of Government programs, operations, and finances--information
that the Congress needs to make policy choices, ensure transparency and
accountability, and protect the taxpayer.
However, since 80 percent of our budget covers staff compensation
and benefits, our flexibility to control costs without diminishing our
staff capacity is limited. Without additional funding in fiscal year
2013 and beyond, we would need to reduce our staff capacity which would
increase the delay in starting work on congressional requests, limit
our ability to provide timely responses and analyses to support
congressional oversight, and reduce the number of requests that we
could undertake.
gao deg.the gao maintains effective workforce relations
We could not have achieved our level of performance without the
hard work and dedication of our professional, diverse, and
multidisciplinary staff. Recognizing that the GAO's accomplishments are
a direct result of our dedicated workforce, we continuously strive to
maintain a work environment that promotes employee well-being and
productivity. We are also proud of the results from our 2010 annual
employee feedback survey, which indicate that employee satisfaction
continues to increase and that we continue to make progress toward our
goal to create a more inclusive work environment. In 2010, the GAO was
once again rated second on the list of the ``Best Places to Work'' in
the Federal Government by the Partnership for Public Service.
The GAO regularly seeks and values the input we receive from our
employee organizations. Recently, we reached tentative agreement with
the GAO's Employees Organization--International Federation of
Professional & Technical Engineers, Local 1921--on a master contract
that has since been ratified by its members and is pending legal
review. We are also working with our Employee Advisory Council and the
Diversity Advisory Council on a range of issues.
CONCLUDING REMARKS
I believe that you will find our prudent budget request is fiscally
responsible and essential to ensure that we can maintain our capacity
to assist the Congress in this challenging period in our Nation's
history.
We have a proven track record of helping the Congress evaluate
critical issues of national importance and improving the transparency
and accountability of our national government. Our new strategic plan
for serving the Congress through fiscal year 2015 provides the
framework for reporting on progress toward our institutional goals.
We remain committed to providing accurate, objective, nonpartisan,
and constructive information to the Congress to help it conduct
effective oversight and fulfill its constitutional responsibilities. I
appreciate, as always, your careful consideration of our submission and
look forward to discussing our proposal with you.
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Hoeven, members of the subcommittee,
this concludes my prepared statement. I would be pleased to respond to
any questions that you or other members of the subcommittee might have.
gao deg.APPENDIX I.--THE GAO'S 2011 HIGH-RISK LIST
Strengthening the foundation for efficiency and effectiveness:
--Management of Federal oil and gas resources (new);
--Modernizing the outdated U.S. financial regulatory system;
--Restructuring the U.S. Postal Service to achieve sustainable
financial viability;
--Funding the Nation's surface transportation system;
--Strategic human capital management; and
--Managing Federal real property.
Transforming the Department of Defense (DOD) program management:
--DOD approach to business transformation;
--DOD business systems modernization;
--DOD support infrastructure management;
--DOD financial management;
--DOD supply chain management; and
--DOD weapon systems acquisition.
Ensuring public safety and security:
--Implementing and transforming the Department of Homeland Security
(DHS);
--Establishing effective mechanisms for sharing and managing
terrorism-related information to protect the homeland;
--Protecting the Federal Government's information systems and the
Nation's critical cyber infrastructures;
--Ensuring the effective protection of technologies critical to U.S.
national security interests;
--Revamping Federal oversight of food safety;
--Protecting public health through enhanced oversight of medical
products; and
--Transforming the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) process
for assessing and controlling toxic chemicals.
Managing Federal contracting more effectively:
--DOD contract management;
--the Department of Energy's (DOE) contract management for the
National Nuclear Security Administration and Office of
Environmental Management;
--NASA acquisition management; and
--Management of interagency contracting.
Assessing the efficiency and effectiveness of tax law
administration:
--Enforcement of tax laws; and
--Internal Revenue Service (IRS) business systems modernization.
Modernizing and safeguarding insurance and benefit programs:
--Improving and modernizing Federal disability programs;
--Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation insurance programs;
--Medicare program;
--Medicaid program; and
--National flood insurance program.
gao deg.APPENDIX II.--SELECTED TESTIMONY TOPICS: FISCAL YEAR
2010
Goal 1.--Address current and emerging challenges to the well-being
and financial security of the American people.
--Unemployment insurance trust funds;
--Social Security disability;
--Underfunded pension plans;
--Proprietary schools;
--Medicare high-cost drugs;
--Toxic substance abuses disease registry;
--Concussions in high school athletes;
--Children's access to Medicaid dental services;
--Corporate crime;
--the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division enforcement
efforts;
--Community emergency preparedness;
--Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac;
--Department of the Interior's oversight of oil and gas;
--Clean Water Act enforcement efforts;
--U.S. Postal Service financial viability;
--Federal facilities security;
--High-speed rail projects; and
--Commercial aviation consumer fees.
Goal 2.--Respond to changing security interdependence threats and
the challenges of global independence.
--Financial markets regulation;
--National flood insurance program;
--Climate change;
--Alien smuggling along Southwest Border;
--Aviation security advanced imaging technology;
--Terrorist watchlist screening;
--Combating nuclear smuggling;
--Iran sanctions;
--Counternarcotics and anticrime efforts in Mexico;
--Global food security;
--Intellectual property enforcement efforts;
--Afghanistan security force capacity;
--DOD military and civilian employee compensation;
--Warfighter contract support; and
--Joint Strike Fighter challenges.
Goal 3.--Help transform the Federal Government to address national
challenges.
--Defense space acquisitions;
--Military language skills;
--Interagency collaboration for national security interagency
contracting strategies;
--NASA management and program challenges;
--Balancing the Government-to-contractor workforce;
--Iraq and Afghanistan contract and grant management;
--American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) oversight;
--First-time homebuyer tax credit;
--Equal employment opportunity at DHS;
--2010 Census management challenges;
--U.S. Government financial statements;
--DHS financial management systems consolidation;
--Protecting Federal information systems;
--Environmental satellites;
--Debt settlement risks to consumers;
--Service-disabled, veteran-owned small business program fraud
prevention;
--HEAD START Program fraud; and
--Defense contract audit agency vulnerabilities.
gao deg.APPENDIX III.--HOW THE GAO ASSISTED THE NATION: FISCAL
YEAR 2010
Goal 1.--Address current and emerging challenges to the well-being
and financial security of the American people.
--Identified ways for the Department of Health and Human Services to
strengthen inspections of ambulatory surgical centers leading
to a fourfold increase in the proportion of centers found to
have deficient practices;
--Appointed 49 experts and stakeholders to three organizations
created in new healthcare legislation;
--Recommended food safety improvements that the Congress included in
legislation for the Department of Agriculture's school lunch
program;
--Facilitated expedited claims process for the Department of Labor's
black lung benefits program;
--Increased the EPA focus on environmental threats to children's
health;
--Identified factors to consider in restructuring Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac;
--Proposed changes to improve control of toxic chemicals in consumer
products; and
--Identified hidden fees for air travel that should be disclosed to
consumers.
Goal 2.--Respond to changing security threats and the challenges of
global interdependence.
--Led the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to begin
developing a strategic plan to improve the national public
alert and warning system;
--Exposed weaknesses in the Transportation Security Administration's
behavior-based identification of high-risk air passengers;
--Recommended changes that FEMA implemented to better plan for
national emergency response capabilities;
--Informed the DHS's top-level review of weaknesses and risks in the
multibillion dollar Secure Border Initiative;
--Contributed to a more robust missile defense acquisition policy;
--Encouraged reforms in the United Nations' procurement, internal
oversight, and employment processes;
--Provided insight to the Congress that led to expanding United
States sanctions against Iran; and
--Informed development of a framework to reform the U.S. export
control system.
Goal 3.--Help transform the Federal Government to address national
challenges.
--Informed the IRS' decision to extend regulation of paid tax
preparers, including requiring them to obtain an identifying
number and be tested for competency;
--Exposed ENERGY STAR as a self-certification program by obtaining
certification for bogus products which led the DOE and EPA to
adopt improvements in their approval process;
--Led General Services Administration to strengthen requirements due
to improper spending on premium-class Government travel;
--Surfaced weaknesses in the Department of Veterans Affairs
outpatient scheduling IT systems;
--Developed a methodology adopted by the Congress to efficiently
target billions of dollars in Medicaid assistance through the
ARRA;
--Assessed IT risks for the 2010 Census to ensure successful
execution; and
--Profiled selected DHS investments in a 2-page format to provide the
Congress with a new, easy reference on acquisition oversight,
planning, and execution.
Goal 4.--Maximize the value of the GAO by enabling quality, timely
service to the Congress and being a leading practices Federal agency.
--Implemented leading practices to attract a more diverse workforce
and foster an inclusive work environment;
--Leveraged technology to facilitate business process improvements in
financial and administrative IT systems;
--Improved access to our products with a new mobile Web site for
users of small screen devices and a new electronic product
format;
--Collaborated with international accountability organizations to
enhance their audit guidelines by incorporating private sector
international auditing standards; and
--Led development of a strategic plan for the international
accountability community.
gao deg.APPENDIX IV.--SERVING THE CONGRESS AND THE NATION: THE
GAO'S STRATEGIC PLAN FRAMEWORK
Mission.--The GAO exists to support the Congress in meeting its
constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and
ensure the accountability of the Federal Government for the benefit of
the American people.
Trends.--National security threats; fiscal sustainability
challenges; economic recovery and growth; global interdependence;
science and technology; networks and virtualization; shifting roles of
Government; and demographic and societal change.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Goals Objectives
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Provide timely, quality service to the
Congress and the Federal Government:
To address current and emerging Healthcare needs; lifelong
challenges to the well-being and learning; benefits and
financial security of the American protections for workers,
people related to families, and children;
financial security;
effective system of
justice; viable
communities; stable
financial system and
consumer protection;
stewardship of natural
resources and the
environment; and
infrastructure.
Respond to changing security threats Homeland security; military
and the challenges of global capabilities and readiness;
interdependence involving advancement of U.S.
interests; and global
market forces.
Help transform the Federal Government to Government's fiscal position
address national challenges by assessing. and options for closing
gap; Fraud, waste, and
abuse; and major management
challenges and program
risks.
Maximize the value of the GAO by enabling Efficiency, effectiveness,
quality, timely service to the Congress and quality; diverse and
and being a leading practices Federal inclusive work environment;
agency in the areas of. professional networks and
collaboration; and
institutional stewardship
and resource management.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Core Values.--Accountability, integrity, and reliability.
gao deg.THE GAO'S MISSION
The GAO--the audit, evaluation, and investigative arm of the
Congress--exists to support the Congress in meeting its constitutional
responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability
of the Federal Government for the American people. The GAO examines the
use of public funds; evaluates Federal programs and policies; and
provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help the
Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. The
GAO's commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of
accountability, integrity, and reliability.
Senator Nelson. I appreciate your opening statement, and
your point is well-made.
So, Mr. Boarman, we would appreciate your thoughts, too.
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM J. BOARMAN, PUBLIC PRINTER
Mr. Boarman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And it is an honor for me to be here today in my first time
testifying before your subcommittee, and I will keep my
statement brief. But there are some important points that I
would like to make about the GPO and its accountability and
what it does for the Congress.
The GPO, of course, is responsible for the production and
distribution of information products for all three branches of
the Government. These include passports for the State
Department and the official publications of the Congress,
Federal agencies, and the courts. We provide products in both
print and a variety of digital formats.
We support open and transparent Government by providing
online access to authenticated information at no charge through
our Federal Digital System (FDSys). FDSys has more than 250,000
Federal titles and more than 25 million documents downloaded
every month.
We also partner with more than 1,200 libraries nationwide,
participating in the Federal Depository Library Program. The
libraries work with us to provide free public access to
Government information in print and in digital form.
Following my appointment by the President in late December,
I returned to the GPO, where I had worked as a practical
printer more than 35 years ago. The GPO today is a much
different agency than the one that I left.
At that time, there were more than 8,000 employees. Now
there are barely more than a quarter of that number, but we are
responsible for a broad range of products and activities that
could only have been dreamed of back then--online databases of
official Federal documents, passports, and smart cards and
electronic chips carrying biometric data, print products on
sustainable recycled paper using vegetable oil inks, and a
robust information technology (IT) enterprise architecture, and
more.
These operations are managed by a uniquely skilled, small,
and dedicated staff. Their support for the Congress is
exemplary. They work through the night--sometimes under
extremely difficult workloads and conditions such as snowstorms
that close the rest of the Government--to assemble the
databases and publications you need to carry out your
critically important work.
Our present and future are being defined by digital
technology. The Congressional Record, bills, reports, and
hearings, and other documents are generated from digital
databases the GPO creates in response to the information needs
of the Congress. No other agency is equipped to carry out that
mission.
Let me repeat that. No other agency is equipped to carry
out this mission.
Our use of databases has cut the cost of congressional
information products over the past generation by more than two-
thirds measured in constant dollars. Our databases are the
foundation of our online dissemination capability, which has
been in operation since 1994. The capability has expanded
public access to Government information exponentially while
reducing the cost of distributing print products.
Our databases are also the platform for several key
information systems serving the Congress today. They are used
by the Library of Congress (LOC) to support the THOMAS system,
as well as the legislative information systems the LOC makes
available to the Senate and House offices.
Creating these databases is the majority of the work funded
by the congressional printing and binding appropriation. Even
though the name on this account may be old-fashioned, it is the
source of the financing for the digital information platform we
have built and manage for the Congress. Because of the way it
is structured, this appropriation can only be accessed when we
actually print for the Congress.
GPO deg.GPO'S SUPPORT FOR THE CONGRESS
The GPO's support for the Congress is extensive. My guess
is that our work is more closely integrated with your daily
operations than any other congressional support agency, as
important and as valuable as their work is. But it is provided
quietly in the background, and it is often not immediately
clear what we do, but we are working to educate Members of
Congress and their staff of our essential services.
Since taking office, I have met with Members, officials,
and staff of the Senate and House to discuss how the GPO can
best service their needs. We have also been working
cooperatively with the Appropriations Committees. We have
reduced spending within the GPO by cutting travel, outside
hiring, and by other costs. We have cut $5.2 million from the
2012 appropriations request originally submitted to Office of
Management and Budget by my predecessor late last year.
PREPARED STATEMENT
For the record, our request includes two one-time
components--$1.4 million for printing-related items for the
2013 Presidential Inauguration and another $1.4 million to fund
a shortfall in congressional printing carried forward from
fiscal year 2009. Without these, our request would be $1.8
million under the level of funding provided to the GPO by the
continuing resolution.
Also, we have $2.5 million left over from fiscal year 2006
that could be transferred to the revolving fund under current
law. With the transfer, our overall request for new funding
would be reduced by this amount, which would also bring us
under the level provided by the continuing resolution.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of William J. Boarman
Mr. Chairman, Senator Hoeven, and members of the Subcommittee on
the Legislative Branch: It is an honor to be here today to present the
appropriations request of the U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO) for
fiscal year 2012. Our request is for the congressional printing and
binding appropriation and the salaries and expenses appropriation of
the Superintendent of Documents, both of which are included in the
annual legislative branch appropriations bill. These two accounts cover
the GPO's provision of congressional information products and services
as authorized by law and our provision of public access to
congressional and other Government information products through
statutorily established information dissemination programs under the
Superintendent of Documents.
All other the GPO functions and activities--including the
production of U.S. passports for the State Department as well as secure
credentials for congressional and agency use, the procurement of
information products and services in partnership with the private
sector, the sales of Government information products and services to
the public, and related operations--are financed on a reimbursable
basis through the GPO's business-like revolving fund, which is
authorized through the annual legislative branch appropriations bill.
gpo deg.GPO
Background
With just 2,200 employees, the GPO is the Federal Government's
primary centralized resource for producing, procuring, cataloging,
indexing, authenticating, disseminating, and preserving the official
information products of the U.S. Government in digital and tangible
forms. The agency is responsible for the production and distribution of
information products for all three branches of the Federal Government,
including U.S. passports for the Department of State as well as the
official publications of the Congress, the White House and other
Federal agencies, and the courts.
Along with sales of publications in digital and tangible formats to
the public, the GPO supports openness and transparency in Government by
providing permanent public access to Federal Government information at
no charge through its Federal Digital System (www.fdsys.gov), which has
more than 250,000 Federal titles online and sees more than 25 million
documents downloaded every month, and through partnerships with
approximately 1,220 libraries nationwide participating in the Federal
Depository Library Program. In addition to the GPO's Web site,
www.gpo.gov, we communicate with the public routinely via Twitter
twitter.com/USGPO, YouTube www.youtube.com/user/gpoprinter, and
Facebook www.facebook.com/USGPO.
We first opened our doors for business 150 years ago this month, on
March 4, 1861, the same day Abraham Lincoln was inaugurated as our 16th
President. Our mission can be traced to the requirement in Article I of
the Constitution that each House shall keep a journal of its
proceedings and from time to time publish the same. Senator Schumer put
as statement in the Congressional Record recognizing the GPO's
anniversary, which I'm pleased to attach to this statement.
In our history we have produced every great American state paper--
and an uncounted number of other Government publications--since
President Lincoln's time, including the Emancipation Proclamation.
Social Security cards, Medicare and Medicaid information, Census forms,
tax forms, citizenship forms, military histories ranging from the
Official Records of the War of the Rebellion to the latest accounts of
our forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, emergency documents like the ration
cards and the ``Buy Bonds'' posters used during World War II, the
Warren Commission Report on President Kennedy's assassination, the
Watergate transcripts, the 9/11 Commission Report, Presidential
Inaugural Addresses, Supreme Court opinions, and the great acts of the
Congress that have shaped our society--all these as well as millions of
other documents from the historic to the humble have been produced by
the GPO on their way to use by the Congress, Federal agencies, and the
American public.
For the Secretary of the Senate, the Clerk of the House, and the
committees of the Senate and House, we produce the documents and
publications required by the legislative and oversight processes of the
Congress, including the daily Congressional Record, bills, reports,
legislative calendars, hearings, committee prints, and other documents,
as well as stationery, franked envelopes, and other materials such as
memorials and condolence books, programs and invitations, phone books,
and the other products needed to conduct business of the Congress. We
also detail expert staff to support the information product
requirements of Senate and House committees and congressional offices
such as the Senate Office of Legislative Counsel.
The production of the Congressional Record alone is a remarkable
job, averaging about 170 pages per issue, but ranging in size from a
few pages to hundreds of pages per night depending on the amount of
business transacted, all formatted, paginated, proofed, corrected,
uploaded for online access, printed, and delivered overnight, every
night the Congress is in session. The history of our Nation as revealed
in the proceedings of the Congress is preserved for generations to come
in the permanent edition of the Congressional Record and in the
Congressional Serial Set, containing all the numbered reports and
documents of each Congress and published continuously since 1817, both
produced by the GPO.
Since taking office in early January, I've met with the Secretary
of the Senate and the Clerk of the House and various Members and staff,
and have heard repeatedly about the utility of the products we provide
for Members and staff in performing the work of their offices and their
committees. Ensuring that utility--supporting the Congress in carrying
out its constitutional legislative function--is our most important job.
In addition, with the Library of Congress (LOC) and the National
Archives, the work we perform is a basic part of governmental openness
and transparency, and an integral part of the creation and preservation
of the record of our Government for the American people.
The GPO and Digital Information Technologies
As Archivist of the United States David Ferriero recently said, the
GPO has not rested with drums of printer's ink and rolls of paper
measured by the ton. Our present and future are clearly being defined
by digital technology, and digital technology itself has radically
changed the way printing is performed today. This is especially true
where the information products used by the Senate and House of
Representatives are concerned. The GPO's conversion to digital
databases for the composition of congressional publications occurred
more than a generation ago. Today the activities associated with
creating congressional information databases comprise the majority of
the work funded by our annual congressional printing and binding
appropriation.
In addition to using these databases to produce printed products as
required by the Congress, we upload them to the Internet via our online
information systems, known previously as GPO Access and today as the
GPO's FDSys. Since we first went online with congressional information
in 1994, these systems have provided the Congress and the public with
the definitive source not only of legislative but executive and
judicial information online.
Our creation of digital databases of congressional information from
which we can print and provide online public access has dramatically
increasing productivity and dramatically reduced costs to the taxpayer.
As our budget submission shows, our digital production systems have
reduced the level of the congressional printing and binding
appropriation by more than two-thirds in constant-dollar terms since
1975 while expanding our information capabilities exponentially.
The GPO's congressional database systems also form the basic
building blocks of other information systems supporting the Congress.
Our congressional information databases are provided directly to the
LOC to support its THOMAS system as well as the legislative information
systems the LOC makes available to Senate and House offices. The GPO
and the LOC are also collaborating today on the digitization of
previously printed documents, such as the Congressional Record and the
Statutes at Large, to make them more broadly available to the Congress
and the public, and we are jointly developing a new process for
updating the digital edition of the Constitution Annotated.
The GPO's digital systems also support other key Federal
publications, including the U.S. budget and, most importantly, the
Federal Register and associated products, which we also produce.
Through the GPO's efforts, the online Federal Register is being made
available in extensible markup language (XML) to support bulk data
downloads via www.data.gov, and with the Office of the Federal Register
we developed the online Federal Register 2.0, an innovative approach to
making information on Federal regulations and related documents
available to the public. Our advanced authentication systems, supported
by public key infrastructure (PKI), are an essential component for
assuring the digital security of congressional and agency documents.
The other major products that the GPO produces are U.S. passports
for the Department of State, the premier component of our secure and
intelligent documents business unit. At one time no more than a
conventionally printed document, passports today incorporate a chip and
antenna array capable of carrying biometric identification data, which
with other security features has transformed this document into the
most secure identification credential obtainable. We have also
developed a line of secure identification ``smart cards'' to support
the credential requirements of the Department of Homeland Security for
certain border crossing documents, and our secure credential unit has
been certified as the only Government-to-Government provider of
credentials meeting the requirements of Homeland Security Presidential
Directive 12.
The GPO in Partnership With Industry
Other than congressional and inherently governmental work such as
the Federal Register, the budget, and secure and intelligent documents,
we produce virtually all other information product requirements via
contract through a longstanding partnership with the private sector
printing industry. In fact, our procurement operation handles
approximately 75 percent of all work sent to the GPO for production,
amounting to $450-$500 million annually. This system is one of the
Government's longest running and most successful programs of utilizing
the private sector, which is represented by more than 16,600 individual
firms registered to do business with us, the vast majority of whom are
small businesses averaging 20 employees per firm. Contracts are awarded
on a purely competitive basis; there are no set-asides or preferences
in contracting other than what is specified in law and regulation,
including a requirement for the Buy American Act. This partnership
provides great economic opportunity for the private sector.
The GPO and Open, Transparent Government
Producing and distributing the official publications of our
Government fulfills an informing role originally envisioned by the
Founders, when James Madison said:
``A popular Government without popular information, or the means of
acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy, or perhaps
both. Knowledge will forever govern ignorance, and a people who mean to
be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power which
knowledge gives.''
A key mechanism for this purpose is the Federal Depository Library
Program, which today serves millions of Americans through a network of
some 1,220 public, academic, law, and other libraries located in
virtually every Congressional District across the Nation. These
libraries are critical links between ``We the People'' and the
information provided by the Federal Government. The GPO provides the
libraries with information products in online or tangible formats, and
the libraries in turn make these available to the public at no charge
and provide additional help and assistance to depository library users.
One of the other programs we operate is in fulfillment of an
international treaty. Under it, we distribute certain Federal
publications to other governments abroad as designated by the LOC. In
return, they send the LOC their official publications, which the LOC
then makes available for the use of the Congress and the public. This
helps maintain the universal nature of the LOC's collections, as
Librarian of Congress James Billington recently pointed out.
Along with these programs, we also provide public access to the
wealth of official Federal information through public sales featuring
secure ordering through an online bookstore for the GPO sales
publications and a partnership with the private sector to offer Federal
publications as e-Books, and we operate effective and efficient
information distribution programs for other Federal agencies on a
reimbursable basis, including the General Services Administration's
Consumer Information Center publications.
Recent Actions
Since taking office on January 3 this year, my management team and
I have worked to reduce spending and ensure that the GPO's finances
remain sound in the face of ongoing constraints on the Federal budget.
We have reduced our appropriations request for fiscal year 2012 by more
than $5 million from what was originally submitted to Office of
Management and Budget (OMB). We cut the GPO's annual spending plan as
previously submitted to the Joint Committee on Printing by $15 million
and implemented controls on hiring, travel, certain contractual
services, and related discretionary accounts. We realigned the GPO's
organization so the Chief Financial Officer reports directly to me
rather than through subordinate officers, and implemented a task force
on recovery of outstanding payments from Federal agencies. Otherwise,
there is continuity of ongoing initiatives such as the development of
FDSys, support for our Oracle suite of business enterprise services,
and planning for continuity of operations (COOP). We are also pursuing
additional revenue opportunities, particularly in the field of secure
credentialing, as well as increased utilization of our printing
procurement capability by Federal agencies.
My meetings with the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the
House were to discuss how the GPO can best assist them in supporting
the needs of the Congress. We have been meeting with both staff and
Members of the appropriations committees and cooperating with them in
their effort to provide for appropriations beyond the current
continuing resolution. We fully understand the intention of the
Congress to control its spending and you will have our cooperation in
meeting this goal.
gpo deg.FISCAL YEAR 2012 APPROPRIATIONS REQUEST
For fiscal year 2012, we are requesting a total of $148,474,000, a
reduction of $5.2 million, or 3.4 percent, from the amount submitted to
the Office of Management and Budget late last year, and an increase of
just $1,013,000 more than the continuing resolution (Public Law 111-
242, as amended).
Our request includes two one-time components: $1.4 million for work
supporting the 2013 Presidential Inauguration and $1.4 million to fund
a shortfall in the congressional printing and binding appropriation
carried forward from fiscal year 2009. Excluding these one-time
requests, our overall request would be $145,674,000, a decrease of
$1,787,000 from the current continuing resolution.
There is an unexpended balance of $2.5 million in the salaries and
expenses appropriation from fiscal year 2006 that could be transferred
to the revolving fund under current law. If the transfer is approved by
the Appropriations Committees, it would reduce our overall request for
new funding to $145,974,000.
Our funding request for fiscal year 2012 is designed to:
--meet projected requirements for congressional information products
and services as authorized by law, provide the necessary funds
for materials required for the 2013 Presidential Inauguration,
and recover the shortfall in this account carried forward from
fiscal year 2009;
--fund the operation of the GPO's statutory programs that provide
public access to congressional and other Government information
products nationwide; and
--continue the development of the GPO's FDSys, which provides the
Congress, Federal agencies, and the public with no-fee digital
access to a vast range of congressional and other Federal
information products, and support our Oracle-based enterprise
infrastructure.
Congressional Printing and Binding Appropriation
We are requesting $100,001,000 for this account to cover the
estimated cost of congressional information products and services as
authorized by law. This represents an increase of $6,233,000 more than
the level provided by the current continuing resolution.
Of the increase, $1.4 million is estimated to be required for work
to support the 2013 Presidential Inaugural and $1,390,000 is required
to fund the shortfall in this appropriation carried forward from fiscal
year 2009. The balance of the increase, or $3,443,000, includes
$2,909,000 for estimated volume increases in certain work categories--
principally the Congressional Record, business calendars, and
hearings--offset by estimated volume decreases in other categories,
primarily miscellaneous publications and bills. It also includes
$534,000 for price level changes averaging 0.6 percent that are
attributable to existing wage contracts and projected cost increases
for materials and supplies.
Salaries and Expenses Appropriation of the Superintendent of Documents
We are requesting $42,173,000 for this account to support public
access to congressional and other Government information products
through the GPO's statutory information dissemination programs,
primarily the Federal Depository Library Program. Our request
represents an increase of $1,262,000 more than the level approved in
the current continuing resolution.
Included in the increase is $196,000 for mandatory pay costs
(pertaining only to within-grade increases) and price level changes,
$262,000 for the level of the GPO overhead required to be distributed
to salaries and expenses programs, and $304,000 for FDSys annual
operating costs attributable to Superintendent of Documents programs.
In addition, we are requesting $500,000 to continue legacy systems
migration and modernization costs, as well as historical digitization
projects approved by the Joint Committee on Printing and involving
collaboration with the LOC.
As noted above, there is an unexpended balance of $2.5 million in
the salaries and expenses appropriation from fiscal year 2006 that
could be transferred to the revolving fund under current law. If the
transfer is approved by the Appropriations Committees, it would reduce
our request for new funding to the salaries and expenses appropriation
by that amount.
Revolving Fund
We are requesting $6.3 million for this account, to remain
available until expended, to fund essential investments in information
technology development. These include $5 million to continue developing
FDSys and $1.3 million for support for our Oracle-based enterprise
infrastructure. The GPO has requested these funds as additions to the
revolving fund's working capital to enable the fund to continue
financing other investments in upgrades of technology, equipment, and
plant modernization.
Mr. Chairman, Senator Hoeven, and members of the subcommittee, this
concludes my prepared statement. We look forward to working with you
and the subcommittee in your consideration of our appropriations
request for fiscal year 2012.
______
[From the Congressional Record, March 4, 2011]
150th Anniversary of the Government Printing Office
(By Senator Charles E. Schumer)
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I rise today as the chairman of the
Joint Committee on Printing to recognize the Government Printing
Office, GPO, on the occasion of its 150th anniversary. GPO opened its
doors on March 4, 1861, the same day that President Abraham Lincoln
took the oath of office for his first term. Since that time, the agency
has used constantly changing technologies to meet the needs of the
Congress, Federal agencies, and the public. During GPO's early days,
employees relied on ink and paper to publish the text of President
Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation. Today, as another President from
Illinois leads the Nation, GPO employees are using the latest digital
technology to document the activities and decisions of our Government
and to fulfill GPO's founding mission, which is ``Keeping America
Informed.''
While GPO's past has been about printing, its present and future
are being defined by electronic publishing. GPO has been investing for
more than a generation in digital production and dissemination
technology, an investment that has yielded significant improvements in
productivity, capability, and savings for the taxpayers. The GPO
estimates that converting to electronic, digital technology has
resulted in a savings of 66 percent on the cost of congressional
printing alone. Deploying such technology has also reduced the number
of employees to fewer than at any time in the past century. And it has
reduced dramatically the number of copies of official documents that
are printed.
GPO's partnership with the printing industry supports tens of
thousands of jobs. At the same time, by using GPO as a central
procurement agency, the Federal Government reduces substantially the
cost of these contracts to the taxpayers.
GPO now has a range of products and services that could only have
been dreamed of 30 years ago: Online databases of Federal documents
with state- of-the-art search and retrieval capabilities available to
the public without charge, Government publications available as e-
Books, and a public presence not only on the Web but also on Twitter,
Facebook, and You Tube. No longer is GPO primarily a publisher of
printed government documents, but a fully integrated electronic
publisher and clearinghouse whose products are available in many
Internet-based locations. In addition, the State Department relies on
GPO to provide highly secure U.S. passports containing sophisticated
smart chips. GPO does this in conjunction with the private sector,
which supplies certain critical components.
Another key function of GPO is its partnership with more than 1,200
Federal depository libraries across the country. These libraries,
established by statute in all 50 States, make Federal documents
available to millions of students, researchers, businesses, and others
every year in both digital and print formats.
In short, GPO is responsible for the production and distribution of
information products and services for all three branches of the Federal
Government, including U.S. passports for the Department of State as
well as the official publications of the Congress, the White House, and
other Federal agencies. In addition to publication sales, GPO offers
permanent public access to Federal Government information at no charge
through GPO's Federal Digital System--www.fdsys.gov--and through
partnerships with approximately 1,200 libraries nationwide that are
part of the Federal Depository Library Program.
I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating the GPO on its
150th anniversary and on its contributions to keeping the public
informed.
Mr. Boarman. Mr. Chairman, thank you very, very much, and I
will be happy to answer any questions that you have.
Senator Nelson. Thank you.
Dr. Elmendorf.
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE
STATEMENT OF DOUGLAS W. ELMENDORF, Ph.D., DIRECTOR
Dr. Elmendorf. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I appreciate the opportunity to present the CBO's budget
request for fiscal year 2012.
As you know, the CBO's mission is to provide the Congress
with objective, impartial analyses of budget and economic
issues, including the information and cost estimates needed for
the congressional budget process.
There are about 250 people currently working at the CBO. In
the coming year, we anticipate a workload of roughly 650 formal
cost estimates. It is worth emphasizing that the formal
estimates are just the tip of the iceberg because more and
more, we are being asked for informal estimates or proposals at
early stages of the legislative process. We will do, literally,
thousands of those in the coming year.
We also expect to release approximately 100 analytic
reports and other publications, covering our budget and
economic outlook, analysis of the President's budget, long-term
budget projections, monthly budget reviews, and in-depth
analyses of a broad range of policy issues, including
healthcare delivery and financing, policies for increasing
economic growth and employment, tax reform, and proposals to
address the country's long-term budgetary imbalance.
In fulfilling our mission, the CBO relies on a highly
skilled workforce. Most of our analysts have advanced degrees
and are in high demand outside the Government and in agencies
in the executive branch. So we need to recruit them and retain
them in a highly competitive job market.
CBO deg.CBO BUDGET
As a result, about 90 percent of our budget represents
compensation for the agency staff. About 5 percent is for IT
equipment and services, and the remainder is for training,
office supplies, and other items.
Therefore, the contour of the CBO's budget is closely
linked to the agency's staffing level. The staffing level is,
in turn, closely linked to the output we can provide to the
Congress.
Of course, we do not expect and are not requesting to be
spared from the budget stringency facing the rest of the
Federal Government. Our proposed budget for fiscal year 2012,
prepared a few months ago, is equal to the total resources that
were provided to the agency 2 years earlier, in 2010. That
represents a scaling back of the multiyear staffing plan that
was the basis for our budget request last year.
As you noted, Mr. Chairman, comparing our 2012 budget
request with our 2010 resources is complicated by the fact that
the agency received a 2009 supplemental appropriation, which
was available for use in 2010 as well. And the figure I think
you may have in front of you and is in the written testimony
tries to summarize that situation.
CBO deg.SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDS
A small amount of supplemental funds was used in 2009. Most
was used in 2010. Indeed, the CBO's regular 2010 appropriation
was reduced to take account of the availability of those
supplemental funds.
As a result, the CBO's overall resources received little
net boost from the supplemental, and the 2010 regular
appropriation was artificially low. The CBO's request for 2012,
the far right bar in the picture, of $46.9 million equals our
2010 appropriation of $45.2 million, plus the $1.7 million from
the 2009 supplemental that was used in 2010.
CBO deg.CURRENT FISCAL YEAR FUNDING
But let me say just a few words about our funding in the
current fiscal year. Like the rest of the Government, we have
been operating under a continuing resolution so far. The
funding for the CBO has been equal to the agency's regular 2010
appropriation, as shown in the figure. But that represents an
effective cut in resources relative to last year because only
$45.2 million of last year's funding came from the regular
appropriation, with the rest coming from the supplemental.
As a result, if the CBO's funding for this fiscal year
remained at the continuing resolution level, we would face a
reduction of about 4 percent in our funds relative to last
year. If our funding for this year is cut below the continuing
resolution level, we would face, of course, a larger reduction
relative to last year's resources. For example, if the CBO's
funding was cut 5 percent below the continuing resolution
level, we would face roughly a 9 percent cut from the funding
provided for 2010.
In recognition of the possibility of a cut relative to the
continuing resolution level, we have stopped hiring, except for
a small number of key management positions that have come open.
We have delayed purchases of IT equipment and other things,
purchases of data for our analysis, canceled our summer
internship program on its paid basis, and cut back sharply on
travel and training.
Without new hiring, attrition will lead to a reduction in
the size of the CBO staff. Still, because the continuing
resolution level is already below last year's funding, a
further significant cut relative to the continuing resolution
level would probably require a more rapid decline in staffing
than can be achieved through attrition alone.
PREPARED STATEMENT
In closing, I want to thank the subcommittee for the
support you provide to the CBO, enabling us to carry out our
responsibilities to provide budgetary and economic information
to the Congress.
Thank you.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Douglas W. Elmendorf
Mr. Chairman, Senator Hoeven, and members of the subcommittee,
thank you for the opportunity to present the Congressional Budget
Office's (CBO) budget request for fiscal year 2012.
The CBO's mission is to provide the Congress with objective,
impartial analyses of budget and economic issues, including the
information and cost estimates needed for the Congressional budget
process. In fulfilling that mission, the CBO depends on a highly
skilled workforce. Roughly 90 percent of the CBO's budget represents
compensation for the agency's staff, about 5 percent is for information
technology (IT) equipment and services, and the remainder is for
training, office supplies, and related items. Therefore, the contours
of the CBO's budget and the agency's staffing level are closely linked.
The CBO's proposed budget for fiscal year 2012--$46.9 million--is
equal to the total resources that were available to the agency 2 years
earlier, in 2010. This proposal incorporates a scaling back of the
multiyear staffing plan that was the basis for the agency's 2011 budget
request. Even with a reduction in proposed staffing, supporting the
work of the agency in 2012 with the same resources provided in 2010
would be possible only by significantly restraining salaries and
spending on IT. Neither of those two actions can be sustained
indefinitely without diminishing the support that the CBO provides to
the Congress.
Comparing the CBO's 2012 budget request with its 2010 resources is
complicated by the fact that the agency received a 2009 supplemental
appropriation, which was available for fiscal year 2010 as well. In
fact, most of it was used in 2010, and the 2010 appropriation was
reduced to take account of the availability of those supplemental
funds. As a result, the CBO's overall resources received little net
boost from the supplemental appropriation, and the 2010 appropriation
was artificially low. The CBO's request for 2012 equals the agency's
2010 appropriation of $45.2 million plus the $1.7 million from the 2009
supplemental appropriation that was used in 2010.
cbo deg.RECENT FUNDING HISTORY
Between fiscal year 2001 and fiscal year 2008, the number of full-
time-equivalent positions (FTEs) at the CBO averaged 230, and the
number varied little from year to year. In 2008, however, the CBO
became concerned that it did not have sufficient resources to analyze
policy changes regarding the delivery and financing of healthcare that
were emerging as a critical issue in the Congress. In addition, the
agency was delivering an increasing number of testimonies and formal
cost estimates and engaging in a growing amount of informal
communications with congressional staff on a wide range of topics, so
shifting a significant number of positions from other areas in order to
analyze healthcare proposals did not seem feasible.
Accordingly, the CBO proposed to the Congress a multiyear plan to
boost the size of the agency to 259 FTEs, an increase of a little more
than 10 percent. The Congress approved the first leg of the proposed
increase in the CBO's fiscal year 2009 budget, and the agency averaged
242 FTEs that year. As expected, analyzing competing healthcare
proposals absorbed a huge share of the CBO's resources. At the same
time, the financial crisis led to a jump in the Federal Government's
involvement in the financial sector (including the creation of the
Troubled Asset Relief Program, the conservatorship of Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac, and expanded activities of the Federal Reserve and the
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation), which increased congressional
demand for analyses, budget projections, and cost estimates in that
area. Consequently, during the course of fiscal year 2009, the Congress
approved a 2-year supplemental appropriation of $2 million, aimed
particularly at enhancing the CBO's ability to analyze complex health
proposals. Of that amount, the CBO used about $0.3 million during
fiscal year 2009 and remaining $1.7 million in 2010.
For fiscal year 2010, the Congress approved an appropriation of
$45.2 million for the CBO. That amount was $1.2 million less than the
agency's request for that year, reflecting the availability of funds
from the 2009 supplemental appropriation. The total funding of $46.9
million--$45.2 million from the regular appropriation and $1.7 million
from the earlier supplemental appropriation--was intended to support an
additional 12 FTEs ``to increase CBO's capacity to analyze healthcare
policy, financial and housing markets, and other areas of high
Congressional interest.'' Accordingly, the CBO averaged about 250 FTEs
during fiscal year 2010.
For fiscal year 2011, the CBO requested $47.3 million in funding to
support 258 FTEs, which would have essentially completed the multiyear
increase that the agency proposed 3 years ago. The enactment last year
of significant healthcare legislation has made the CBO's regular budget
projections and analyses of most healthcare proposals much more complex
and labor-intensive than had previously been the case. Moreover, the
demand for analysis of major new healthcare proposals has abated only a
little. In addition, the depth and duration of the economic downturn,
as well as the surge in Federal debt and projected deficits, have led
the Congress to ask the CBO for more analyses on a range of economic
and budgetary issues.
Like the rest of the Federal Government, the CBO has been
functioning under continuing resolutions so far in fiscal year 2011.
The funding for the CBO has been equal to the agency's regular 2010
appropriation--but that represents an effective cut in resources,
because only $45.2 million of the CBO's $46.9 million in 2010 funding
came from the regular appropriation. If the CBO's funding for 2011
remained at that continuing resolution level, the agency would have
about $1.7 million less to work with this year than in 2010--a
reduction of about 4 percent.
If the CBO's funding for 2011 was cut below the continuing
resolution level, the agency would face a larger reduction relative to
its 2010 resources. For example, if the CBO's funding was cut 5 percent
below the continuing resolution level, the agency would face roughly a
9 percent total cut from the funding provided for 2010. In recognition
of the possibility of a cut relative to the continuing resolution
level, the CBO has stopped hiring (except for a small number of key
management positions that have come open), is delaying purchases of IT
equipment and other things, has canceled its paid summer internship
program, and has cut back sharply on travel and training. Without new
hiring, attrition will lead to a reduction in the size of the CBO
staff. Still, because the continuing resolution level is already below
last year's funding, a further significant cut relative to the
continuing resolution level would probably require a more rapid decline
in staffing than could be achieved through attrition alone and
therefore would probably require a reduction in force.
cbo deg.SOME DETAILS OF THE CBO'S FISCAL YEAR 2012 BUDGET
REQUEST
In fiscal year 2012, the CBO will continue to focus on its core
functions of providing nonpartisan budgetary and economic information
and analyses to the Congress, including budget and economic outlook
reports, an analysis of the President's budget, long-term budgetary
projections, cost estimates, mandate statements, and scorekeeping
reports. In addition, the CBO will continue to prepare in-depth
analyses of a broad range of program and policy issues, as requested by
committees or Members. The specific issues that the Congress will be
addressing in 2012 will, of course, depend on circumstances at the
time, but the CBO's analyses are likely to include work on healthcare,
policies for increasing economic growth and employment, energy policy,
tax reform, immigration issues, infrastructure, defense policy, the
Government's role in financial markets, and proposals to address the
long-term budgetary imbalance. The agency will devote effort to further
improving its long-term analyses of legislative proposals for
healthcare, Social Security, and broad fiscal policy changes by
continuing to develop its budgetary and economic models.
The CBO anticipates a workload of roughly 650 formal cost estimates
(most of which include both estimates of Federal costs of legislation
and assessments of the cost of mandates in the legislation that would
affect State, local, and tribal governments or the private sector) and
thousands of informal estimates; approximately 100 analytical reports
along with other publications; and a substantial schedule of
congressional testimonies. The formal estimates are just the tip of the
iceberg because, more and more, the CBO is being asked for informal
estimates of the budgetary impact of proposals at early stages in the
legislative process and of potential floor amendments.
Recognizing the stringency of the Government's budget situation,
the CBO proposes to cut short the planned multiyear increase in the CBO
staff and to continue with the currently budgeted number of 254 FTEs
for fiscal year 2012. In addition, consistent with the rest of the
Federal Government, the CBO is not providing any across-the-board
increase in salaries for employees in calendar years 2011 or 2012 and
has reduced the size of performance-based pay raises.
Specifically, the CBO's request supports the following:
--$32.2 million for personnel compensation;
--$10.4 million for personnel benefits; and
--$4.3 million for services, equipment, training, and supplies.
Funding at this level would enable the CBO to continue to provide
the kinds and quantity of estimates and analyses that the agency has
been producing for the Congress during the past 2 years.
In closing, I would like to thank the subcommittee for the support
it has provided the CBO, enabling the agency to carry out its
responsibilities to provide budgetary and economic information to the
Congress.
Senator Nelson. Thank you.
The votes were supposed to begin at 3 p.m. They have moved
it up.
But let me ask a couple of questions first before I go. Mr.
Boarman, I heard from a colleague that we are now into
paperless production of information. Therefore, we don't need a
``printing office.'' Perhaps we ought to consider changing the
name of your office to something ``communications'' or whatever
it is to avoid having that happen because, obviously, it is not
simply about printing. Certainly not just printing on paper,
although obviously that is one of the major things that we
have.
Not everybody is IT trained or able to pull everything up.
So we are still going to be stuck with paper in some areas. Can
you tell me what percentage of your budget might be used in
paper communication? Is that possible?
Mr. Boarman. Well----
Senator Nelson. Just a rough estimate.
GPO deg.PRINTING COSTS
Mr. Boarman [continuing]. Yes. Using the Congressional
Record as an example, about 70 percent of it is the IT side, or
the pre-press. Getting it prepared, to putting it up online
every night so that----
Senator Nelson. You would have that expense anyway?
Mr. Boarman. Exactly. And so, the 30 percent left for
printing is the smallest piece of it because once the press
starts to run, I mean, the first impression might cost you $250
a page. After that, it is about a penny.
I have met with a number of Members of Congress who have
raised the very issue you did. Actually, I had a chairman of a
committee say, you know, I have got a bunch of new Members who
don't like Government, and they don't understand why we have
printing. And when I explained to him, well, do they know that
we have the digital platform, that we produce all of the
information electronically every night, he said, ``No, they
don't know that.''
So we are going to try to educate Members so that they
understand that the GPO is the only agency that provides the
information so that you can go paperless. Now, if you decide to
do that, I am sure there are going to be people printing copies
out in their office. That is the thinking that is going on.
And when you do that, it is nearly 7 cents a page to do it
on your office printer. We can do it for 5.5 cents a page. And
when a document gets above 64 pages, the cost per page drops to
4 cents a page. And we print on both sides of the page. We
print on recycled paper. We use vegetable oil-based ink, which
is good for the environment and saves a lot of money.
This is last night's Congressional Record. It is about a
half an inch thick, printed on both sides. If you printed this
out on an office printer, it would probably be this thick at 7
cents a copy. And so, when I talk to Members and staffs, both
in the House and Senate, they say we don't know how we could
function without our Congressional Record.
Let me just give you a couple of statistics. In 1994, we
printed 20,000 copies of the Congressional Record every day.
Today, we only print a little more than 3,700 a day. And of
that, the House gets 950 copies, and the Senate gets 1,100, and
the rest are distributed to depository libraries, the White
House, and others. We get about 30 copies in our office for
indexing.
So we have dropped from 20,000 to 3,700 daily copies. And
once the press starts to run, after we have done all of the
infrastructure of building the platform to run it, it is very
inexpensive to continue to print small quantities. I hope that
answers your question.
Senator Nelson. That does. And I think we need to get that
information out.
I will go vote and be right back.
Thank you.
We will continue.
Your fiscal year 2012 budget request totals $148.5 million.
It is $1 million above the 2010 enacted level, and is
relatively flat. But you have a $1.4 million for the
Presidential Inaugural. What is your timeframe for producing
printed materials and credentials for the 2013 Presidential
Inauguration?
I know you can't start up the day of the Inauguration. But
what kind of a timeframe are we looking at here? Is it within
the parameter that some of this could be held off until the
following year, or is it necessary to print documents well in
advance, which would mean that it would be included in this
budget?
GPO deg.INAUGURAL PRINTING
Mr. Boarman. Well, historically, Mr. Chairman, I think that
for each Inauguration, the money is asked for and appropriated
in this particular cycle. And so, I am told that it needs to be
in this budget.
A lot of people don't understand that the Inauguration is a
congressional event. They think of the parade and balls. But
the Congress pays for the actual swearing-in ceremony, and I
think this is a small portion of what you are actually going to
lay out. But we do credentials. We do all the invitations and
programs. We do all the tickets and signs for entry to the area
for the Inauguration.
And I think at some point, the Joint Congressional
Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies will be coming together in
fiscal year 2012, and they will be spending money. And so, my
understanding is, that is why it is there.
Senator Nelson. And I hope that in putting the preparations
together, I know it is not all your responsibility to direct.
You have got security issues. You have got other things.
Mr. Boarman. Right.
Senator Nelson. This is essentially the documentation or
anything that is related to that?
Mr. Boarman. Right. And of course, we did do credentials
last time. We had probably the most secure credentials in the
history of the Inauguration, the GPO did. But my understanding
is the Capitol Police did pay for that, and so it came out of
the legislative branch, but it was not out of the GPO's budget.
Senator Nelson. When it comes to Capitol improvement costs
that are being appropriated through the revolving fund, you
request $6.3 million for two Capitol improvement projects: one,
FDSys at $5 million and, two, the GPO Business Information
System at $1.3 million.
Why are these costs separated out for a specific
appropriation rather than being factored into and charged to
all agencies as part of the cost of doing business?
GPO deg.INVESTMENT FUNDS
Mr. Boarman. Well, these are essentially additions to
working capital for our revolving fund, which is where our
monies for investment come from. And we do have money in that
fund from other agencies. For instance, the State Department
allocates money to our capital improvement fund, but it can
only be used, obviously, for capital improvements for passport
issues and State Department issues.
This digital technology is so expensive. I had a meeting
with Congresswoman Jo Ann Emerson from Missouri yesterday, and
she is a member of the Legislative Branch Appropriations
Subcommittee on the House side, and she also serves as chair of
their Financial Services Subcommittee.
And she was saying to me that the cost of this IT is just
out of hand, and you have got to try to get a handle on it. The
Congress has made a tremendous investment in the FDSys program.
Probably from 1994 on, when GPO first went online, maybe $100
million. In the last 5 years, maybe $40 million to get us to
where we are.
Now we have to maintain this platform as well as our Oracle
system. We can't allow them to collapse. I am not an IT expert,
but I have people that are, and they tell me in order for us to
make sure that we can authenticate and do the other things that
are necessary, this is what it is going to cost.
Additionally, we are working in cooperation with the LOC,
and they are helping us digitize a lot of the older documents.
Everything from 1994 on, we have been able to digitize. But
before that, it all has to be digitized.
So these things are what the money is for, and in view of
their importance to the Congress, I think it is appropriate
that they are funded by appropriations to the revolving fund.
Senator Nelson. Thank you.
GAO deg.GAO RESOURCES USED TO OVERSEE THE TROUBLED ASSET
RELIEF PROGRAM (TARP)
Mr. Dodaro, your fiscal year 2012 budget request totals
$556.8 million in appropriated funding, which is the same as
the fiscal year 2010 level and totals the same level of
staffing at 3,220 FTEs. Now, in your budget submission, we
noted that you have an additional 25 FTEs that are reimbursed
by the Department of the Treasury for TARP-related work.
If you know, how much does the Department of the Treasury
pay in reimbursement for those 25 FTEs? And perhaps, as well,
how long will these 25 FTEs be dedicated to the TARP-related
activities?
Mr. Dodaro. As you will recall, when the TARP program was
created in October 2008, it was outside of the normal
appropriations cycle. So we never built funding for it into our
appropriation.
I am told here that it would be approximately $7.1 million
in fiscal year 2011 for 30 FTEs and $5.2 million in fiscal year
2012 for 25 FTEs that is reimbursed. Now the law requires that
we provide reports every 60 days on the TARP program. Given the
status of the program now, I am planning to seek legislative
relief to provide less frequent reporting, which I think is
appropriate given the status of the program.
The Economic Stabilization Act requires us to audit TARP
money until the last dollar is repaid. So we are in it for the
long haul, until AIG and the automakers repay their loans. The
home mortgage modification program is set to expire at the end
of 2012, but for other entities that have to repay the money,
it could take a significant amount of time.
But we are hoping our costs go down, and we are also
required to do an annual financial audit of the TARP funds,
which we do.
Senator Nelson. One would hope that when we are down to the
last dollar, we wouldn't still have the need for 25 FTEs. So I
am assuming there will be some point in time when the numbers
become less significant and we might be able to find another
way to do this, which wouldn't add to the total cost with a
significant number of FTEs?
Mr. Dodaro. I expect that figure to go down gradually as
the money is repaid. And if I can get legislative relief from
the 60-day reporting requirement, that would further reduce the
costs.
Senator Nelson. Well, keep us posted on how you are doing
in terms of getting legislative relief because we certainly
would be supportive of every effort to do that, recognizing
that you are still going to have a need for a certain number.
But hopefully, that would reduce the requirement.
Mr. Dodaro. Yes, it would. I would note also in the Wall
Street Reform Act that was passed last July, there were 44 new
mandates for GAO work, and very few of those involved
reimbursement.
Senator Nelson. Expect that to happen in your spare time.
Mr. Dodaro. Yes.
Senator Nelson. Thank you.
GAO deg.METHODOLOGY BEHIND GAO'S REPORT ON PROGRAM
DUPLICATION--GAO-11-318SP
We are looking at your March 1 report on redundancy in
Government. I am going to pay close attention to it because I
think it is important that if we are going to be cutting our
budget we need to be aware of where there is redundancy and how
we can root it out and save the taxpayers money. Because that
is, at the end of the day, what we want.
So you highlight this report. Can you tell us a little bit
about your methodology and how you came about to actually
producing this report? Did you consult with the CBO or the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB)? At the end of the day we
are all interested in the same thing, but maybe you can help me
understand how the GAO went about doing this?
Mr. Dodaro. We first did research on existing GAO studies
where we had tackled this issue across the Federal Government.
In fact, many of the items covered in the report we had already
looked at as a result of requests from more than 60 percent of
the committees in the Senate and in the House.
We also looked at other reports--the CBO, the OMB, what was
in the President's budget submission--as opportunities to
reduce overlap and duplication. We did literature reviews on
studies by think tanks and others to gather an inventory. We
tapped into our institutional knowledge of the Government to do
initial work going forward.
The original concept was to cover the entire Federal
Government over a 3-year period. This was our first
installment. We are doing our planning activities right now for
year 2 and year 3, and we are going to create a methodology to
make sure that we cover all areas where there are potential for
overlap and duplication.
We also had extensive consultations with the Congress.
While the legislation did not require us to report to specific
committees, we focused on the Appropriation Committees, the
Budget Committees, and our oversight committees in the
Congress. We had extensive consultations with them to get their
ideas and to discuss our work plans with them. I felt that we
did a very thorough job.
Now we also added to the report, beyond overlap,
duplication, and fragmentation, other ideas we had about cost-
savings opportunities and revenue enhancements to help provide
a fuller menu for the Congress to look at, because they all
have the same objective--how to reduce cost, and enhance
Government revenues. And so our recommendations were based upon
previous GAO work that we updated for the report.
And we are also planning in future reports, Mr. Chairman,
to include a listing of what actions were taken as a result of
the prior year's report so there is a clear scorecard going
forward.
Senator Nelson. You were anticipating where I was going
perhaps because that was my next point. It would be helpful to
develop a scorecard because I suspect that as you went back and
looked at other reports, some of the things that were suggested
in the past were still not done and questions still not
answered.
So it would be helpful to know, as things are considered
and as we move forward, whether or not your recommendations are
being considered. And I am sure some of them will be
objectionable to some folks, but not all of them. So,
hopefully, that scorecard would help us see how we are doing in
rooting out the redundancies.
Mr. Dodaro. Yes, we will definitely do that.
Senator Nelson. Dr. Elmendorf, I know you are concerned
about making certain that we get it right with respect to your
budget. And so, we are focused on that. I think we internally
understand the discrepancies between numbers and years.
So I suspect that if we don't get it quite right, we would
ask for a CBO study to help us get that in order.
Dr. Elmendorf. We trust you entirely, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Nelson. In 2012, we notice that you have increased
funding for your staff levels by 6.6 percent above fiscal year
2010 enacted level, and you proposed to reduce funding for IT
infrastructure by $1.2 million, or 51 percent below fiscal year
2010 enacted.
CBO deg.IT RESOURCES
While other agencies are using technology to improve their
efficiency, you are actually cutting your IT. And I am not
opposed to cutting. My question is what IT projects are you
cutting, and how are you finding some efficiencies there to be
able to do that perhaps could be shared with others as well?
Dr. Elmendorf. I think what you are seeing there, Mr.
Chairman, is principally a cycle in the replacement of aging
equipment. For a number of years coming up to now, we did not
have sufficient funds to keep up with the pace of advancing
technology. We were able to direct a piece of our appropriated
funds in the past few years, though, to catching up in a way.
That is very important. One of the simple uses that we put
that supplemental appropriation to was buying faster computers
that could--which we could use to run our complicated models of
the health insurance system more rapidly. So we are very
attentive to the need to maintain high-level technology to keep
our productivity high.
But having made that investment now in the past few years,
we see less need for that in the coming year or two, and we
don't want to just buy new computers because they are new and
out there. So we have deliberately scaled back on that. As we
say in the budget, that is not sustainable for the long run.
There will come a need to do that replacement later.
CBO deg.STAFFING LEVEL
But in order to maintain the staffing level, which we think
we need to provide the service we provide to the Congress, in
the face of a competitive labor market for the people that we
are trying to attract and retain while keeping the overall
funding level for the agency in 2012, as we proposed it the
same as it was in 2010, requires us to spend somewhat more on
those people. And we have been able to do that in our proposal
by squeezing down on the money we spend in other areas.
CBO deg.COST ESTIMATES
Senator Nelson. Now you are anticipating a request for
roughly, 650 formal cost estimates in fiscal year 2010, in
addition to the thousands of informal estimates, and
approximately, 100 analytical reports. If you could, help me
understand what does it cost for a typical CBO analysis?
Let us first take the formal request and then perhaps the
informal. Of the formal requests, do you have sort of a
ballpark number of what the cost is internally?
Dr. Elmendorf. No I don't. Partly because there is a
tremendous variation in the complexity in the cost estimates.
Senator Nelson. And there probably is no average, right?
Dr. Elmendorf. I think that is right. I mean, we do a lot
of estimates that are a page or two pages. A single analyst
might spend a few days talking to the various Government
agencies or people in the private sector or whatever is
necessary to learn enough to do the estimate well. So that
would be just one analyst for a few days.
Then we do other estimates, for example, of healthcare
reform, where we had dozens of people working for months. So it
is just tremendous variation. We haven't tried to calculate an
average. I am not sure it would be very helpful.
Senator Nelson. And in addition to having your own internal
costs, don't you engage specialists outside to come and help
where perhaps you don't have that level of expertise or you are
looking for a second approach?
Dr. Elmendorf. Yes, we do exactly that. We reach out to a
lot of people on the outside who will help us for free. We talk
to analysts and universities and analysts in the private
sector, many of whom will just talk with us because they
recognize that it is an opportunity for them to be helpful in
important work.
But on the other hand, there are some services we do need
to pay for. We have a contract with actuaries. And when we do
our work on health insurance, when we first started doing work
on financial issues, the CBO did not have a very deep bench in
that area. And as the Government plunged in to more and more
large financial transactions, we initially hired some of those
services from the outside.
As we gained the capacity and built the capacity internally
to deal with that, we stopped those contracts. We think, in
many cases, over time we can acquire the knowledge ourselves,
and that is a little cheaper. But when it is necessary for us
to learn from outside people, we don't want to pretend we have
all the knowledge in-house because we don't.
CBO deg.REQUEST FOR STUDIES
Senator Nelson. When you are requested for a study, I know
you have to prioritize what you currently have versus what you
are being asked to do. Can you give me some idea of how, I am
not asking who you put highest in priority, but how you
prioritize, in general, other than by who is asking?
Dr. Elmendorf. Well, so the who is asking is part of it.
The Congressional Budget Act that established the CBO set our
priorities as working first for the Budget Committees, then for
the Ways and Means and Finance and Appropriations Committees,
then for other committees and Members, to the extent time
allows. So that does matter.
We also try to focus on the proposals that are receiving
the most attention in the Congress. In order to be the most
helpful to the most Members that we can, we direct more energy
to proposals that are moving through the legislative process
that seem to be headed for action by committees, votes on the
floor of the Senate or the House.
And we consult with the Budget Committees, with the other
main committees I mentioned, with the leadership in the Senate
and the House on a regular basis to try to be sure that we are
working on the projects that are most helpful. It is often hard
to be sure what will be helpful.
One recent example, when the House was debating on the
floor H.R. 1, the continuing resolution, they had an open
amendment process. I think there were more than 600 amendments
that were filed. We produced cost estimates of more than 300 of
them in the space of a frantic week.
We tried to do the ones that seemed to be attracting the
most attention among House Members. I am sure we didn't get
that exactly right. We did the very best that we could, but the
limitation on resources, of course, affects the amount of the
product that we can provide to the Congress.
CBO deg.ENTITLEMENT ANALYSES
Senator Nelson. Well, assuming that the Congress gets
totally serious about dealing with entitlements and chooses to
do all the entitlements at the same time, will your staff, at
the current level, be able to deal with the requests that are
going to be very obvious, such as, the analyses that are going
to be requested for Social Security, Medicare, and perhaps on
some other areas as well, Medicaid?
Dr. Elmendorf. We will do our absolute best to keep up with
the Congress. It is challenging. In the space of the last month
or two, as we have worked on our updated baseline estimates and
analysis of the President's budget that we will be releasing
tomorrow, actually, we have had to put aside work on a variety
of proposals that various committees in the Senate and the
House wanted very much for us to move ahead on, and we told
them that we can't do that now.
So we are always setting priorities. We have lost a number
of health staffers who I think basically were worn out by the
events of the past 2 years. We have been able to hire some
replacements. But we have stopped hiring now, given the budget
situation. So we are leaner than I would like us to be, and I
am more worried about that.
But you and your colleagues should have confidence that we
will work desperately hard to provide you what we can, given
the resources that remain available to us.
CBO deg.STAFFING AND HIRING
Senator Nelson. And that you will be totally candid about
what your needs are at that time. Either you are adequately
staffed for the requests, or if you are not, what the delay
would be or what the cost to meet those requirements might be.
Dr. Elmendorf. We try to be straightforward about that. As
you understand, part of the problem is that one can't create
the capacity overnight. So, for example, in the economist job
market, much of the hiring happens in the winter. We had lined
up a number of promising candidates to work in key areas that
we expect the Congress to be pressing us for analysis in.
We did not make job offers to those people. We cut that
process off in midstream because of the uncertainty about this
year's budget and next year's budget. It is not easy to hire
those people now, in a sense. We have, for a number of those
people, we basically passed on this entire annual cycle, and
our next chance to hire many of those people will be next
winter.
It is just a peculiarity of the way this particular job
market works. Other areas, we can hire more readily throughout
the year. But even then, people don't come in with all the
expertise usually that we need. We hire people who are
terrifically well-trained and have various different
experiences, but not necessarily doing the precise sort of work
that we do.
So we can't really ramp up overnight. And that is part of
what concerns me is, given the freeze that we have on hiring
now, that we will end up with attrition in areas that may not
be--well, there is no good place, but maybe in the areas that
would be of particular interest to the Congress. And if we
don't have the funds to replace those people, then I am worried
that we will not be able to do as much as we otherwise would be
able to do.
Senator Nelson. Thank you.
GAO deg.GAO BALANCES RESOURCES WITH PRIORITIES
Mr. Dodaro, would that be true in your case as well with
the accountability requirements that are constantly being asked
from you?
Mr. Dodaro. Definitely. Our highest priorities are
statutory requirements, either in law, conference reports, or
committee reports because they are an expression of a broader
congressional interest. By law, we also have to respond to
requests from chairs of committees where we have the competency
to do so. We treat ranking members the same to maintain our
nonpartisan status, and then requests from Members of Congress.
We haven't been able to respond to a request from an
individual Member of Congress for many years because of the
workload demands. But when unusual circumstances come up, as in
the case of the TARP program, I thought it was reasonable to
ask the Congress to have that reimbursed since it was outside
of the appropriations cycle.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act was a similar
situation. The Congress gave us one-time funds of $25 million
to help as we deployed people across the country to track the
money.
So when unusual requirements arise, I am not bashful in
asking the Congress for help. Our base appropriation, if our
request is granted, would be enough, I believe, to work with
the committees on their highest-priority needs as we know them
now.
Senator Nelson. Mr. Boarman, what about yours? Obviously,
you are affected by things that go on in the Congress. If
priorities change or suddenly there is a workload increase, you
are affected by that as well. How does that impact you, your
budget, and your thinking about the future?
GPO deg.GPO STAFFING
Mr. Boarman. Well, when I came onboard, Mr. Chairman, we
had around 2,300 FTEs, and we are down to nearly 2,200. And so,
in anticipation of a flat budget or less, we haven't hired
anybody.
But I am concerned on the operations side of the house
where all the work is done and where the chargeable hours are,
we are very, very slim in staffing. And these are the people
that mostly work on the nightshift that come in and respond to
the overnight needs of the Congress, and we are down to almost
800 people in that area.
I mentioned earlier in my testimony, we had 8,000 people
working there when I worked there back 35 years ago. And just
in the division that I worked in, we had 1,600. Today, we have
800 in all of these different divisions--bindery, press,
prepress, IT. So, obviously, I am concerned.
But we get it. We know there is an issue, there is a
problem here, and we are going to try to do the best we can
with less. I have cut out all travel except what is necessary,
and any hires have to come to me and be approved because we
have no idea what the Congress is going to do with the budget.
But we hope they will recognize that we are a valuable,
valuable partner, and we provide, like Dr. Elmendorf and Mr.
Dodaro, we provide services that I don't think anybody else
could do for the Congress.
I don't think you could operate, open your doors every day
without the services we do. And I just hope that the
Appropriations Committee will keep that in mind because we do
work hard for you.
Senator Nelson. Well, I will ask all three of you, is there
something I should have asked that I haven't.
Dr. Elmendorf. Well, Mr. Chairman, as usual, your questions
were right on point.
Senator Nelson. Well, thank you.
Dr. Elmendorf. I think, I guess, the final thing I would
say is that I think we are already doing as much as we can with
the resources that we are provided. We strive every day to work
hard and give the Congress the best value that we can for the
resources we were provided with.
And if the Congress decides that it wants a smaller CBO,
that is, of course, the prerogative of you and your colleagues.
But I think that should be done with an understanding that it
will reduce the output that we can give you. There will be
fewer cost estimates. The analyses will be less fully worked
out. It will take longer to get things done. And obviously,
that is what happens when one has to make hard choices about
where to use resources.
But I think cutbacks should not be made with a sense that
somehow we will do more with less.
Senator Nelson. Yes.
Dr. Elmendorf. We are doing all we can. And I think if we
get less, then we will, unfortunately, do less.
Senator Nelson. Mr. Boarman.
GPO deg.GPO ESTIMATES OF WORK
Mr. Boarman. Mr. Chairman, I think your first question was
certainly the most important, and I was happy to have a chance
to get that on the record because I think it is important.
But beyond that, I think that what would concern me is that
if our appropriation was so low and the Congress continued to
order printing beyond what we were appropriated, we would still
have to do the work. And then we would be in what is called
deficit spending, and that is something that the Congress is
trying to get out of.
In our appropriations, we are asking for some additional
money because of our estimates. We estimate what we think you
are going to do. And it is based on historical data. If it is a
Presidential election year, usually the Congress is in less
than they are in a non-Presidential election year. And so, we
make our best guess, but we are not always right. And so, when
we come up short, we ask that we be paid for the work that we
did.
And so, if we estimate that you are going to print 700
reports, and then you print 850, which I think was the case in
the previous year, we have to print it. The law requires us to
do that, and you require us to do that.
So that would be the one thing if you would ask me that,
that I would say we will do it. But at some point, it would put
GPO in a position where the comptroller or the chief financial
officer, who is sitting behind me, would be tapping me on the
shoulder, saying, ``You know, we have no money to pay anybody.
So we have to shut down.''
And that would be a terrible thing. So I just ask you to
keep that in mind.
Senator Nelson. Well, thank you. You gave me an idea.
Mr. Boarman. I didn't intend to do that.
Senator Nelson. No, no. It just struck me that if we are in
session less, there would be less paper, less printing, less
work.
Mr. Boarman. Well----
Senator Nelson. You have to share that with the majority
leader. As a matter of fact, if people have wanted us to give
them less Government, this would certainly be one way to do it.
Mr. Boarman [continuing]. For years, I think Public
Printers have told the Congress if you want to reduce your
printing budget, you have to talk a little bit less.
Senator Nelson. Never happened.
Mr. Boarman. But that has never happened. So I mean, it is
not up to me to decide how late the Congress stays in session
at night. We stay there. When we see the light on in the Dome,
we know we have got to be there all night and late into the
morning, and we do whatever we have to do to get the
Congressional Record and the bills and the hearings and the
calendars and the reports.
I get a report on my BlackBerry every morning from Lyle
Green, who is sitting behind me, who is our Congressional
Publishing Director, telling me we are going to be on time with
this and we are going to be on time with that. And I go,
``Whew.'' Because it is so important that we do these.
The Congress pays for it, and we want to be on time. And
most of the times we are.
GAO deg.GAO ASSISTANCE HELPS THE CONGRESS MAKE INFORMED
DECISIONS
Senator Nelson. And we appreciate that.
Mr. Dodaro, anything that I haven't asked that I should
have?
Mr. Dodaro. At the risk of giving you another idea, I would
venture two points. One, I certainly understand the desire of
the Congress to lead by example in cutting their own
operations. But I think that the magnitude of our problems and
challenges on the fiscal front are so significant that the
Congress also ought to be asking whether it has the proper
information and resources to make informed, difficult choices
in the years ahead?
And certainly, cutting both congressional staff and the
support office staffs is something that bears a lot of careful
deliberation and that consequences because I think the country
want the Congress to lead by example, but also to make really
well-informed decisions in what is going to be a difficult
period for everybody in the country until we can get on a more
sustainable path.
The second point that I would make would be that the extent
to which we can have some sort of stability over a multiple-
year period would really help us properly plan ahead. It is
something I really never wanted to become an expert at, but
managing under continuing resolutions is not an easy process.
While I recognize that this is a difficult issue to deal with,
I think that sort of stability would be the other idea I would
try to leave you with.
Senator Nelson. Well, your point is well made. In the
absence of predictability and stability, no one could run a
business. And the absence of that in our case makes it very
difficult to continue to function at the level we need to. My
hope is that we just voted for the last short-term continuing
resolution and that the next effort at the end of this 3-week
period we will finish out the rest of the year and the 2012
budget we are working on right now will be treated in the
ordinary course of business by regular order.
And I hope that it is where we will be able to function. It
certainly is a time when we want business to invest here at
home. A stable Government, predictable policy, and predictable
regulatory responses are all essential to the decisions to
invest here. And where investment occurs is where jobs will be
created.
So this is why it is essential that we get out of this rut
that we are in and just kicking the can down the road, for
whatever purpose.
GAO deg.GPO deg.CBO deg.ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE
QUESTIONS
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
were submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the
hearing:]
Questions Submitted to Gene L. Dodaro
Questions Submitted by Senator John Hoeven
gao deg.GENERAL BUDGET
Question. Considering that the Government Accountability Office
(GAO) budget request of $556.8 million is equivalent to the fiscal year
2010 enacted level and the current fiscal year 2011 continuing
resolution, under which the agency has been operating for the last 5
months, would you please tell the subcommittee what steps has GAO has
already taken to reduce costs?
Answer. GAO is committed to implementing cost savings and
efficiencies without diminishing our traditionally high-quality work
that lays the foundation for critical decisionmaking and oversight by
the Congress. This will entail difficult tradeoffs as we face
increasing workload demands while trying to support the staff capacity
of 3,220 full-time equivalents we need to maintain our level of service
to the Congress without additional resources.
In fiscal year 2010, we reduced hiring in anticipation of limited
funding in fiscal year 2011. In fiscal year 2011, we further reduced
hiring and have begun implementing significant reductions across a
broad range of programs to streamline our operations, reduce
discretionary spending, reduce and defer investments, and leverage
technology to help us achieve our mission more effectively and
efficiently. These areas include:
--limiting hiring to only replace critical staff losses;
--reducing staff travel while leveraging other means of
communication, including teleconference and video-conference
capabilities, whenever practical;
--limiting contracts related to congressional engagements to those
that obtain critical subject or technical expertise;
--limiting external training opportunities to staff who represent the
GAO at professional forums or necessary to meet certain
professional certification requirements, such as State bar
requirements;
--deferring some security clearance upgrades for employees and
contract staff;
--reducing the cost of operating our facility, including energy
consumption;
--reducing contract support in information technology and other
sensitive areas;
--deferring technology enhancements which would improve staff
efficiency; and
deferring investments in critical infrastructure programs to
improve aging building systems.
Question. What percentage of GAO's budget covers staffing? How will
reduced funding in fiscal year 2011 and 2012 impact support of
congressional requests?
Answer. As a knowledge-based organization, about 80 percent of
GAO's budget funds staff compensation and benefits with the balance of
our budget funding mandatory operating expenses, such as operating
costs for our headquarters and field facilities, security services, and
other critical infrastructure services required for ongoing operations.
While difficult, reducing our costs is necessary to fulfill our
goal to balance efficiency and productivity in a tight budget
environment. Despite the added challenges, at a fiscal year 2010
funding level GAO will still be able to meet the highest-priority
congressional needs in a timely manner. We will outreach to the
Congress to understand and set priorities to ensure that we focus on
the most important issues for congressional oversight. However, if GAO
is funded below the requested fiscal year 2010 funding level, it would
negatively impact our ability to provide timely GAO to the range of
congressional requests and mandates, increase the length of time it
takes us to staff requested assignments, diminish our capacity to
conduct engagements, increase the number of pending requests, and
adversely impact our ability to effectively assist the Congress in
addressing the broad array of challenges facing the Nation.
Question. How many legislative mandates requiring GAO to do work
have been written into law in the past year and how many individual
legislative requests have been sent directly to GAO? Is this an
increase or decrease over the previous year?
Answer. Over the last 4 years, the number of congressional requests
and legislative mandates averages almost 1,100 annually. In fiscal year
2010, GAO received 979 congressional requests, including 173
legislative mandates and 806 requests from committees, subcommittees,
and Members requesting GAO to do work. In fiscal year 2010, the number
of new legislatively mandated studies increased by more than 30 percent
more than the prior fiscal year.
We have identified a number of legislative mandates that we believe
need to be modified or repealed. For example, many of the mandates
impose recurring reporting requirements on GAO. We are outreaching to
the appropriate committees to discuss the potential for legislative
relief from these mandates. Eliminating these mandates would conserve
resources while preserving the option for congressional committees to
request GAO work in areas covered by the specific mandates.
gao deg.DUPLICATION REPORT
Question. How does the first annual GAO report on ``Opportunities
to Reduce Potential Duplication in Government Programs, Save Tax
Dollars, and Enhance Revenue''--the ``duplication report''--differ from
the High-Risk Series that the GAO has issued on a biennial basis since
1990? Is the new report a duplication of effort on the part of GAO?
Answer. The two reports have very different purposes. The primary
purpose of the ``duplication report'' is to identify Federal programs
or functional areas where unnecessary duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation exists, the actions needed to address such conditions,
and the potential financial and other benefits of doing so. From our
prior work, we also highlighted other areas of potential cost savings
or enhanced revenues. In contrast, the biennial high-risk report
identifies Government operations that are at high risk due to their
greater vulnerabilities to fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement or
the need for transformation to address economy, efficiency, or
effectiveness challenges. There are a limited number of areas
identified in both reports as an opportunity to reduce potential
duplication and as a high risk based upon one body of work. An example
is food safety oversight which is highly fragmented. In addition, the
current system has caused inconsistent oversight, ineffective
coordination, and inefficient use of resources.
We prepared GAO's first annual report to the Congress in answer to
a statutory requirement included in the public debt limit increase that
GAO identify Federal programs, agencies, offices, and initiatives,
either within Departments or Government-wide, which have duplicative
goals or activities. The Congress asked GAO to conduct this work and to
report annually on our findings. This work will inform Government
policymakers as they address the rapidly building fiscal pressures
facing our national government. GAO's most recent update of its annual
simulations of the Federal Government's fiscal outlook underscores the
need to address the long-term sustainability of the Federal
Government's fiscal policies.
In the report, we included 81 areas for consideration based on the
GAO's prior and ongoing work. We presented 34 areas where agencies,
offices, or initiatives have similar or overlapping objectives or
provide similar services to the same populations; or where Government
missions are fragmented across multiple agencies or programs. These
areas span a range of Government missions:
--agriculture;
--defense;
--economic development;
--energy;
--general government;
--health;
--homeland security;
--international affairs; and
--social services.
Within and across these missions, this report touches on hundreds
of Federal programs, affecting virtually all major Federal departments
and agencies. Overlap and fragmentation among Government programs or
activities can be harbingers of unnecessary duplication. Reducing or
eliminating duplication, overlap, or fragmentation could potentially
save billions of tax dollars annually and help agencies provide more
efficient and effective services. The areas identified in the report
are not intended to represent the full universe of duplication,
overlap, or fragmentation within the Federal Government. We will
continue to identify additional issues in future reports.
Given today's fiscal environment, we also presented 47 additional
areas--beyond those directly related to duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation--describing other opportunities for agencies or the
Congress to consider taking action that could either reduce the cost of
Government operations or enhance revenue collections for the Treasury.
These cost savings and revenue opportunities also span a wide range of
Federal Government agencies and mission areas.
In 1990, we began our high-risk program to highlight long-standing
challenges facing the Federal Government. Historically, we designated
high-risk areas based on their increased susceptibility to fraud,
waste, abuse, and mismanagement. As the program has evolved, we have
increasingly used the high-risk designation to draw attention to the
need for broad-based transformation to achieve greater efficiency,
effectiveness, accountability, and sustainability of key Government
programs and operations. This effort, supported by the Senate Committee
on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and the House Committee
on Oversight and Government Reform, has brought much-needed focus to
problems impeding effective Government and costing billions of dollars
each year. To help improve these high-risk operations, GAO has made
hundreds of recommendations and the administration and agencies have
addressed, or are addressing, many of them and the Congress continues
to take actions that are important to helping resolve high-risk issues.
In the past two decades, attention to high-risk areas has brought
results. More than one-third of the areas previously designated as high
risk have been removed from the list because sufficient progress was
made to address problems. Further, progress had been made in nearly all
of the areas that remain on GAO's list as a result of congressional
oversight and action, high-level administration attention, efforts of
the responsible agencies, and support from GAO through our many
recommendations and consistent follow-up on the implementation of
recommended actions. In three areas--strategic human capital
management, managing Federal real property, and Department of Defense
support infrastructure management--progress has been sufficient for GAO
to narrow the scope of the high-risk issue. However, additional
progress is both possible and needed in all 30 high-risk areas to save
billions of dollars more and further improve the performance of Federal
programs and operations.
Question. If the Congress and the executive branch have not had
ample time to address the issues detailed in the first report, and
policy and funding changes have not been fully implemented, is it
reasonable to assume that GAO will be able to produce a valuable
duplication report on an annual basis?
Answer. Yes. The original concept was to cover the entire Federal
Government over a 3-year period. We are currently planning activities
for year 2 and year 3. We plan to create a methodology to ensure that
we cover all areas where there is a potential for overlap and
duplication. Also, future reports will include a listing of the actions
taken as a result of the prior year's report and actions that remain
open.
Question. What are the costs to GAO for compiling each of these
reports? If committees and Members of Congress are going to continue to
ask GAO to produce these reports, and at the same time provide reduced
funding for the agency, it would be helpful to know the general cost
associated with producing a report so that we might re-evaluate and
streamline our own requests.
Answer. As a knowledge-based organization, GAO's most significant
resource is its staff. As a result, GAO manages engagements based on
the staffing resources needed to conduct the engagement rather than
applying a dollar or budget figure to represent the engagement's cost.
In addition, we allocate staff resources and measure our performance by
strategic goal rather than by engagement, as described in our annual
``Performance and Accountability Report''. It should be noted that the
data GAO collects and analyzes when conducting its work is often used
on multiple engagements and because there are so many engagements that
share data, it would not be cost-effective--or perhaps even possible--
to accurately isolate the cost of any particular engagement.
To produce these reports we draw upon an extensive body of work
across GAO, including ongoing and previously completed work. The body
of work used in this effort was performed for a wide variety of
committees and subcommittees in both chambers, including more than 60
percent of the committees in the House and more than 60 percent of the
committees in the Senate. Our first report on overlap and duplication
also included updates to prior GAO work and recommendations, and in
some cases, required that we complete ongoing work or conduct new work
to identify what additional actions agencies may need to take and the
Congress may wish to consider, and considered the work of other
agencies such as the Office of Management and Budget and the
Congressional Budget Office.
Question. What are the benefits to GAO of compiling these reports?
What sort of return does GAO's work generate for the taxpayer?
Answer. As a result of the information contained in the GAO's first
annual report on duplication and overlap, the Federal Government has
the opportunity to save tens of billions of tax dollars annually by
reducing or eliminating unnecessary duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation and by addressing the other cost-saving and revenue-
enhancing opportunities contained in the report.
Solutions to high-risk problems offer the potential to save
billions of dollars, dramatically improve service to the public, and
strengthen confidence and trust in the performance and accountability
of the U.S. Government. In fiscal year 2010, we issued 151 reports,
delivered 67 testimonies to the Congress, and prepared several other
products, such as briefings and presentations, related to our high-risk
work. In addition, we documented nearly $27 billion in financial
benefits and 522 nonfinancial benefits related to high-risk areas.
These results are based on reviews spanning a wide range of issues such
as implementing and transforming the Department of Homeland Security,
revamping Federal oversight of food safety, executing the 2010 Census,
and managing Federal real property.
gao deg.GAO FIELD OFFICES
Question. When GAO's field offices were established in the 1950s,
there may have been a real need for setting these up around the country
because of the limited ability to travel, the costs associated with
travel, and the inability to gather and share information as easily and
quickly as we can now in this instant communication age. Is it still
necessary for GAO to maintain 11 field offices?
Answer. As telecommunications, transportation, and access to
information has improved, GAO has reduced the number of field locations
from 43 to 11. We believe 11 offices are needed at this time. We
periodically assess our field structure and believe it is appropriate
to maintain field office locations to do original data collection and
provide first-hand information on Federal activities and expenditures
around the country. This information is obtained through direct
observation, interviews, inspections, and examination of activities
where the action takes place and Federal funds are spent.
GAO's strategic plan for 2010 to 2015 discusses challenges facing
the Nation and issues we plan to address over the next 5 years.
Together with its headquarters' office, the GAO's field structure
provides excellent coverage of Federal expenditures on such areas as
national defense operations; protecting the homeland by securing ports,
borders, and critical assets; management of the Nation's natural
resources; and hundreds of billions of dollars in Federal aid to States
and localities through programs that provide medical assistance,
education, child nutrition, income support, and highway investment.
Illustrative examples follow:
--Much of GAO's national security work is conducted at military
facilities, such as the Aeronautical Systems Center (Air Force
Materiel Command) at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Dayton,
Ohio, which manages most major Air Force aircraft programs. Our
Norfolk staff recently completed work at naval commands in
Virginia such as the Aegis Training Center in Dahlgren,
Virginia and the U.S. Fleet Forces Command in Norfolk,
Virginia. In addition, Redstone Arsenal in Huntsville, Alabama
is home to the Army Aviation and Missile Command, the Army
Aviation Research, Development, and Engineering Center, the
Missile Defense Agency, and NASA's Marshall Space Flight
Center, and minutes away from our Huntsville field office.
--A majority of our Customs and Border Protection work is performed
in the field. For example, our Los Angeles office offers easy
access to the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, the Nations'
top two ports. It also is proximate to the Mexican border,
where much enforcement and interdiction activity is focused.
--A large portion of GAO's healthcare work is done in our field
office locations. For example, our Atlanta staff is currently
performing work at the Centers for Disease Control,
headquartered in Atlanta.
--GAO field staff conduct critical work in our western field offices
that are proximate to numerous facilities where nuclear weapons
development, nuclear cleanup, and other activities are subject
to GAO reviews occur. Maintaining a core group of GAO staff at
these field offices that has the necessary security clearances
to access sites and that has knowledge of associated programs,
allows the agency to accomplish its work more efficiently and
help inform multiple engagements simultaneously.
--Most of GAO's oil and gas development and other work on Federal
lands occurs in the Western States; having staff positioned in
Denver, San Francisco, and Seattle has allowed us easy access
to these areas and to Federal and State offices and officials
who manage these programs. Ongoing work on oil and gas
development in the Gulf of Mexico has also benefited from the
participation of GAO staff in Dallas.
Moreover, the ability to draw and retain top talent in locations
with less competition for that talent than in Washington, DC allows the
GAO to maintain a highly skilled, diverse workforce that lives and
works where the Congress' constituents live and work. This provides the
GAO the opportunity to recruit from a large pool of academic
institutions, bringing diverse perspectives to our work from many
regions of the country.
In addition, GAO field staff partner with their accountability
professional colleagues through the intergovernmental audit forums
across the country with State and local auditors. This allows GAO to
develop local, State, and Federal geographically dispersed networks to
share information and best practices from all levels of government.
These relationships were extremely beneficial when conducting our
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act work as we quickly deployed
field staff to cover 16 States for a 2-year period. These already
established networks provided quick access to the organizational
entities we needed to engage and allowed strong collaboration across
the multiple layers of government.
Question. Would there be any savings realized by GAO if any, or
all, of the field offices were eliminated? Or would eliminating the
field offices increase the travel costs for employees?
Answer. GAO has not done a recent analysis to determine what if any
savings could be realized through closure of some or all of the field
offices. In order to continue to provide the same level of service to
the Congress in future years, GAO would need to maintain our staff
capacity, which includes subject matter expertise housed in our field
locations. Theoretically, we would continue to incur the same types of
costs whether staff are located in the field or in headquarters and
could potentially increase travel costs as a result of closing offices
in close proximity to many sites that we visit to conduct our work.
GAO periodically revisits our field structure, resulting in
multiple realignments over the years, specifically undertaking a number
of initiatives to realign our field structure in response to changing
conditions and workloads. The overriding goal of these initiatives has
been to realize long-term efficiencies in the way we do our work. Most
recently, we have taken actions to maximize efficiencies and reduce the
costs of travel to maintain our current field structure (e.g.,
increased videoconferencing capability, virtual meetings, Internet
Protocol television (IPTV), document sharing through technology,
centralized training hubs, and e-learning.) With these cost-saving
initiatives, coupled with the mission-related benefits, we believe that
the decision to maintain our field structure is well supported.
Question. I understand that GAO has established a field presence in
Iraq and is working with the State Department on similar activities in
support of its work in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Why is it necessary
for GAO to have a permanent presence in these countries? How many staff
will be stationed in these locations? Does GAO receive any
reimbursement from the State Department for these activities?
Answer. We currently have three long-term temporary duty staff
stationed in the International Zone in Baghdad, Iraq. We plan to
continue this level of presence into fiscal year 2012. The staff work
on multiple GAO engagements related to U.S. military and civilian
activities and afford us a firm oversight presence in the country that
has been supported by numerous Members of Congress. We believe it is
critical to have a limited number of GAO staff on the ground in Iraq to
effectively carry out GAO's mission and to serve the broad interests of
the Congress. The State Department and the Chiefs of Mission have
afforded GAO excellent support and cooperation in our efforts to access
the necessary data, facilities, and representatives of the Government
of Iraq and other program implementers in Iraq. Our presence in Iraq is
further necessary to address recent congressional mandates to assess
the campaign plan for Iraq, review the effect of drawing down resources
in Iraq, and evaluate contracting activities there.
We are currently planning on establishing a presence in Afghanistan
to meet congressional mandates and interests in the region. As is the
case in Iraq, we believe having staff on the ground will allow us to
establish the relationships and have ready access to information and
people to be more responsive to concerns raised by the Congress. As in
Iraq, we have congressional mandates to assess United States progress
toward achieving goals in the integrated civilian-military plan and to
evaluate contracting activities in Afghanistan. Having a presence in
Afghanistan will enable us to leverage multiple GAO engagements related
to United States military operational activities, civilian agency
programs, and contract oversight of billions of dollars invested in
Afghanistan.
In late 2009, we requested State Department support in establishing
a five-person temporary duty presence in Kabul, Afghanistan. We are
currently awaiting State Department's approval of our request.
We continue to conduct engagements in Pakistan, but we have no
plans to establish a long-term presence at this time.
The GAO does not receive any reimbursement from the State
Department for these activities.
______
Questions Submitted to William J. Boarman
Questions Submitted by Senator John Hoeven
gpo deg.CONGRESSIONAL PRINTING AND BINDING
Question. Of the requested increase for congressional printing and
binding, $1.39 million is required to reimburse the Government Printing
Office (GPO) for services it provided to the Congress in fiscal year
2009 beyond the funding that was appropriated for this account. Why was
the estimated cost to cover congressional printing not sufficient to
cover expenses in fiscal year 2009? Does a shortfall of this nature
happen often?
Answer. The estimated cost was not sufficient because the volume of
printing required was underestimated. Based on past trends, GPO
estimated that in fiscal year 2009, the volume of hearings would be
about 263,000 pages and the volume of bills, resolutions, and
amendments would be about 131,000 pages. The actual volumes were
substantially higher, a total of 311,350 pages of hearings and 183,000
pages of bills, resolutions, and amendments were required. There are
often estimating variances in this account because GPO does not control
the actual volume of work required to be performed. If a shortfall
occurs, GPO is obligated to perform the work and temporarily finance
the shortfall through its revolving fund. GPO will then seek to have
the shortfall funded in a subsequent appropriation.
Question. Almost $3 million of the requested increase for
congressional printing and binding is attributed to estimated volume
increases in some work categories, offset by decreases in other
categories. How does GPO calculate the estimation for congressional
printing and binding when formulating its budget request?
Answer. The estimation is based on actual historical data for the
specific categories of congressional work in past congressional session
years and any known special printing requirements for the budget year.
For example, in fiscal year 2012, obligations for the 2013 Presidential
Inaugural will be incurred.
gpo deg.SALARIES AND EXPENSES OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF
DOCUMENTS
Question. I understand that $500,000 of the requested increase for
salaries and expenses of the Superintendent of Documents is needed for
legacy systems migration and modernization, and historical digitization
projects that have been approved by the Joint Committee on Printing in
collaboration with the Library of Congress (LOC). Please describe for
the subcommittee the legacy systems and historical digitization
projects that would benefit from this funding. What is the plan for
digitizing legacy collections of Federal publications? If the
subcommittee is not able to provide the requested funding in fiscal
year 2012, what is the impact to these projects?
Answer. The GPO is migrating five critical legacy systems that are
not currently supportable to a modern sustainable architecture (the
Depository Distribution Information; Acquisitions, Classification, and
Shipment Information; Automated Depository Distribution; Item Lister;
and Amendment to Item Selection systems). This is called the Library
Information System Transformation (LIST) Project, and it is part of an
ongoing effort for system modernization that has been funded in the
past. Approximately $400,000 is needed to complete the migration. An
additional $100,000 is required to support an ongoing collaboration
with the LOC to digitize historic printed issues of the Congressional
Record dating to 1873. Lack of funding will result in project delays,
and where legacy systems are concerned, will prolong the vulnerability
of these dated systems to malfunction or breakdown.
Question. Of the requested increase, $304,000 is for the annual
operating costs of the Federal Digital System (FDSys). Is this an
increase from previous annual operating costs? If so, why has this cost
increased?
Answer. The increase is attributable to necessary support tasks
that were not initiated in fiscal year 2011, including support for
parsers, applications, and developmental tools that has not been
contracted for in fiscal year 2011. The GPO anticipates that an
additional $304,000 will be required to support FDSys to enhance
permanent public access and ensure system availability.
gpo deg.REVOLVING FUND
Question. I understand that $5 million is included in the fiscal
year 2012 budget request to continue the development of the FDSys. How
much has been spent to date on getting this new system up and running?
How much additional funding is necessary to complete the installation
of this system? When it is completed, what is the anticipated annual
cost of maintaining FDSys?
Answer. FDSys is the successor system to GPO Access, our original
Web site, which began operations in 1994 and provided free online
access to information from the Congress, Federal agencies, and the
courts. FDSys provides free public access to the same range of
information and features state-of-the-art content management and
information search and retrieval systems that meet the needs of today
Government information users. Through February 2011, total spending on
FDSys has been approximately $43.6 million, and the GPO has completed
release 1 of the system, which fully replaces GPO Access, including a
failover continuity of operations capability. Release 2, which is the
submission functionality of the system, is currently being developed.
The costs of this work are expected to increase total system
development costs to between $45 million and $50 million. In addition,
annual operating costs are anticipated to be $3.25 million, including
licensing, staffing, and system refresh costs (these costs are
anticipated to decrease to the extent we can transfer contractor
functions to the GPO staff). Future developmental costs, which are
optional, could potentially reach $4.75 million annually. The funding
requested for fiscal year 2012 is to complete development of release 2
and help support annual operating cost requirements.
______
Questions Submitted to Douglas W. Elmendorf
Questions Submitted by Senator John Hoeven
cbo deg.DECREASE FUNDING
Question. While I appreciate the fact that the Congressional Budget
Office (CBO) has presented a budget request for fiscal year 2012 that
represents no change from the funding level provided in fiscal year
2010, if the subcommittee is not able to provide the full funding
request for fiscal year 2012, what would be the impact to the CBO?
Answer. The impact of a budget reduction in 2012 would depend on
the magnitude of the reduction. If it were modest, CBO would try to
accommodate that reduction in ways that did not significantly affect
the amount of information and analysis we provide to the Congress. As a
first step, CBO would reduce its nonpay spending--primarily for
information technology--as much as possible without degrading necessary
support requirements. But more than 90 percent of CBO's budget
represents compensation for the agency's staff. (About 5 percent is for
IT equipment and services, and the remainder is for training, printing,
furniture, office supplies, and related items.) Therefore, a
significant reduction in the agency's budget would necessitate a
downsizing of CBO staff--preferably by attrition--but under some
scenarios, layoffs might be necessary.
Because the demand for CBO's analysis by the Congress already far
exceeds the agency's current ability to provide it, reducing staffing
could slow the production of cost estimates and mandate statements for
pending legislation, delay analyses of large-scale budget proposals,
limit the types and complexity of analyses the agency could undertake,
reduce the number and scope of alternative legislative provisions the
agency could examine, and decrease the number of amendments to bills on
the floor of the House and Senate for which estimates can be generated.
CBO would prioritize requirements to meet the most critical efforts
required for the Congress to accomplish its mission. However,
downsizing accomplished through little or no new hiring to replace
departing staff would probably result in an allocation of staff that
was not well-matched to Congress's needs.
cbo deg.IMPACT ON ANALYSES
Question. What can the Congress do to change its requirements and
expectations of the analyses that CBO provides, given the fact that we
may have to decrease funding for the agency?
Answer. Both the timeliness and the quantity of CBO's products
could be affected. The agency would work closely with the budget
committees to identify the ways to adjust CBO's output so as to
maintain the most support possible for the congressional budget
process.
As specified by the Congressional Budget Act, much of CBO's work is
for committees. They might need to allow more time between when bills
are marked up and when they are reported in order to obtain CBO cost
estimates and mandate statements for reported bills. (Those are
required by the Congressional Budget Act.) Committees might seek less
analytical support in drafting legislation in the form of fewer
requests for cost estimates for alternative policy proposals and for
broad policy studies--and they might need to allow for greater
turnaround time on such work. The preparation of testimony is very time
consuming; the CBO might need to limit testimony to the highest-
priority requests.
When feasible, the CBO also tries to respond to requests for
information from individual Members. If the CBO were smaller, Members
would need to anticipate that fewer of those requests could be
addressed. The CBO also has been doing more and more estimates for
floor amendments; the leadership and the Budget Committees might need
to allow more time for such estimates or allow for the fact that the
CBO might be able to prepare fewer such estimates in the short time
that is usually available.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
Senator Nelson. So I appreciate very much your answers and
your proposals. Obviously, we are going to continue to try to
work together to get this done in a fair and appropriate way.
So thank you all.
With that, we are recessed. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 3:58 p.m., Thursday, March 17, the hearing
was concluded, and the subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene
subject to the call of the Chair.]
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012
----------
THURSDAY, MARCH 31, 2011
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 2:31 p.m., in room SD-138, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Ben Nelson (chairman) presiding.
Present: Senator Nelson.
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES H. BILLINGTON, LIBRARIAN OF
CONGRESS
ACCOMPANIED BY:
ROBERT DIZARD JR., CHIEF OF STAFF
DANIEL P. MULHOLLAN, DIRECTOR, CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE
MARIA PALLANTE, ACTING REGISTER OF COPYRIGHTS, COPYRIGHT OFFICE
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR BEN NELSON
Senator Nelson. The subcommittee will come to order.
Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome.
We meet this afternoon to take the testimony on the fiscal
year 2012 budget request for the Library of Congress (LOC) and
the Open World Leadership Center (OWLC).
Senator Hoeven may be able to join us later, but he asked
that we go ahead and proceed. And I hope to be joined by maybe
one or the other of the other members of the subcommittee this
afternoon as well.
I want to welcome our witnesses today--Dr. James
Billington, the Librarian of Congress and Ambassador John
O'Keefe, Executive Director of the OWLC. It's always good to
have you gentlemen here, and we look forward to hearing from
you. It would be helpful if you could keep your statements
brief, about 5 minutes, and we'll accept the rest of your
testimony for the record.
One thing we established at our first two hearings, and I
think it bears repeating, is that we're in no position to
entertain increases to the legislative branch budget this year.
As you know, the fiscal year 2011 appropriations process has
proven to be quite a challenge, as we find ourselves more than
half the way through the fiscal year without a bill. And I
don't imagine fiscal year 2012 is going to be an easy task for
us, or an easy year for us, either. We're looking for your
guidance in helping us to address your agencies' needs in 2012,
but this is not the year for the ``nice to haves''. Senator
Hoeven and I have looked forward to working with you in this
regard, and we hope that we can create a partnership.
Dr. Billington, I want to welcome you and your Chief of
Staff, Robert Dizard Jr. On behalf of the subcommittee I want
to thank you for your service as the Librarian of Congress for
the last 23 years. Your service in this capacity is highly
commendable, and is greatly appreciated.
LOC deg.ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF DAN MULHOLLAN
I also want to take a moment to acknowledge Dan Mulhollan,
Director of the Congressional Research Service (CRS), who's
retiring this week--or next--after 42 years of service to the
Congress. Dan joined the LOC in 1969 and has served as the
Director of CRS since 1994. Prior to that he led CRS' efforts
on issues such as the Watergate hearings, and a number of
congressional reform efforts before becoming chief of CRS'
Government Division in 1991.
On behalf of this subcommittee I want to thank Dan for his
invaluable service to the Congress, and to wish him all the
best in his future endeavors.
And I know that Dr. Billington is going to get that very
last minute out of you before you leave. Please stand.
Let's recognize Dan. Thank you.
The LOC's fiscal year 2012 request totals $660.7 million,
an increase of $23.3 million, or 3.6 percent more than the
fiscal year 2010 enacted level. I understand that part of this
increase is for information technology (IT) security
enhancements totaling $2.75 million, and five additional full-
time equivalents (FTEs) for LOC.
You're also requesting an increase of $4.6 million and 17
additional FTEs for CRS.
I also want to welcome Ambassador O'Keefe of the OWLC. Your
budget request totals $12.6 million, an increase of $600,000,
or 5 percent more than the current year. I strongly support the
work of OWLC, and look forward to hearing your testimony, as
well.
Now we'll turn to Dr. Billington for his opening statement,
followed by Ambassador O'Keefe.
SUMMARY STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES H. BILLINGTON
Dr. Billington. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And
thank you for recognizing Dan Mulhollan's extraordinary record
of leadership.
I should also point to one other person who hasn't appeared
before--the Acting Register of Copyrights, Maria Pallante, who
is here and is doing a wonderful job, as we look for new
permanent leadership in both CRS and the Copyright Office.
Mr. Chairman, the Congress of the United States has been
the greatest patron of a library in the history of the world.
All of us at LOC are deeply grateful that for the last 211
years the Congress has created, sustained, and instructed its
library through good times and bad. Thanks to the Congress,
this institution has become, first of all, the world's largest
collection of knowledge in almost all languages and formats;
second, the closest thing we have to a mint record of American
private sector creativity; and, third, the leading American
public institution in both preserving information on the
Internet and sharing collections online.
LOC embodies key ideals on which this Nation was founded--
the rights of a free people to have unfettered access to the
world's knowledge, to the record of our citizens' creativity,
as well as material incentives for innovation. In this
information age, what LOC is doing and can do for the United
States of America is more important than ever. Our budget
request for fiscal year 2012, Mr. Chairman, is designed to
maximize our contribution to America and minimize the cost.
Serving the Congress is LOC's top priority. And of course,
CRS has--for almost a century--embodied the distinctive
American ideal of a knowledge-based democracy. CRS serves the
Congress exclusively, providing objective nonpartisan
information and analysis for the first branch of Government,
which also makes extensive use of our law library.
In this time of rapid global change, both America's
international economic competitiveness and our national
security depend increasingly on knowledge and information drawn
from every part of the globe. And that's precisely what you
have in LOC--it's the mother lode of the Nation's strategic
information reserve, increasingly essential for the successful
work of the Congress and other Government agencies. Even as we
speak, our Cairo office is systematically sending us the
pictures, pamphlets, and social messaging of the current
uprisings in the Middle East.
LOC is making a unique contribution to education throughout
America, and currently delivering--free of charge on the
Internet--24.5 million items, mostly primary documents of
American history and culture. We have also now begun to include
in our widely used Web services similarly unique documents with
expert comment from other world cultures, with authoritative
commentary in seven languages, working with many of our 120
partner institutions from all over the United States and the
world. We're also working with more than 185 other U.S.
partners from 44 States and 37 other national libraries in our
congressionally mandated program for digital preservation.
Almost all LOC programs provide one-of-a-kind national
resources and services, services that no one else in either our
public or private sectors arguably can reasonably be expected
to replicate if we were to stop doing them.
LOC deg.ADDRESSING FISCAL CHALLENGES
Mr. Chairman, we want to address responsibly, at the same
time, the massive fiscal challenges posed by the Federal
deficit. For a number of years now, we've been submitting
constrained budgets for which the committees have commended us.
And, if we set aside the normal inflationary pay and price
level increases that all Government agencies request, our 2012
budget request would include less than 1 percent for our only
two program increases in CRS and cybersecurity.
Even under a best-case budget outlook, funding at the
fiscal year 2010 level for both fiscal years 2011 and 2012
would result in an effective budget cut of more than $31
million, or 4.8 percent against the fiscal year 2010 base. This
alone would require substantial program and staff sacrifices.
And some of the reduction scenarios currently being proposed
could cut to the bone and require us to take steps that not
even past wars and depressions have forced the LOC to consider
in its 211-year history.
If faced with major cuts, we would have to ask ourselves
where we should cut the core programs. In our de-acidification
of brittle books and manuscripts that will then become
unusable? In our cataloging and standards services for the
Nation, that will increase the burden on already strained local
and State libraries? In providing fewer books and magazine
titles free to 800,000 blind and physically handicapped
Americans, who generally read much more than sighted people?
If we cut back our public services significantly, Mr.
Chairman, we would reluctantly also have to consider
furloughing or cutting back on personnel. Our dedicated,
experienced, and multitalented staff account for 63 percent of
LOC's overall budget, and 89 percent of CRS'. LOC is now doing
far more work than in 1992, but with 1,076 fewer people on our
staff, and half of those reductions have occurred just in the
last 5 years.
PREPARED STATEMENTS
In conclusion, I should say we are also critically
dependent on sustaining the successful collections storage
program at Fort Meade and ask for your approval of funds for
construction of Module 5, which is included in the Architect of
the Capitol's budget.
America's oldest Federal cultural institution, Mr.
Chairman, has become part of the infrastructure for innovative
American leadership in the information age.
I thank you again for your historic support of the LOC, and
for your consideration of our fiscal year 2012 request.
[The statements follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dr. James H. Billington
Mr. Chairman, Senator Hoeven, and members of the subcommittee: I am
pleased to present the Library of Congress' (LOC) fiscal 2012 budget
request.
The Congress of the United States has been the greatest patron of a
library in the history of the world. Mr. Chairman, all of us at LOC are
deeply grateful for the Congress's support over the last 211 years.
What the Congress created, sustained, and instructed its library to
undertake through good times and bad has made this institution into--
--the world's largest collection of knowledge in almost all languages
and formats;
--the closest thing to a mint record of American private sector
creativity and innovation; and
--the leading American public institution in both capturing transient
information on the Internet and sharing our collections online.
In presenting our budget request for fiscal 2012, Mr. Chairman, I
propose to answer three big questions that we have asked of ourselves--
and that you might well wish to ask of us at this time of so many
pressing national concerns: What does LOC do that is important for the
United States of America?
LOC embodies key ideals on which this Nation was founded:
--the right of a free people to have unfettered access to knowledge;
--the necessity for a productive people to have material incentives
for innovation; and
--the need to preserve the record of our citizens' creativity.
Serving the Congress is LOC's top priority. LOC's Congressional
Research Service (CRS) has--for almost a century--embodied the
distinctive American ideal of a knowledge-based democracy. CRS serves
the Congress exclusively. And LOC's law library also provides objective
nonpartisan information and analysis to the first branch of Government.
Never have the core activities of LOC been more important to
America than now in the information age. Both our international
economic competitiveness and our national security depend increasingly
on knowledge and information drawn from every part of the globe. LOC is
the mother lode of the Nation's strategic information reserve for the
work of the Congress and other Government agencies. Even as we speak,
our Cairo office is systematically sending us the pictures, pamphlets,
and social messaging of the current uprisings in the Middle East.
LOC is making a unique and original contribution to the all-
important crisis in K-12 education throughout America with its
authoritative Internet outreach. We are delivering more than 20 million
items free of charge, most of which are primary documents of American
history and culture. We have also now begun to include in our widely
used Web services similarly unique documents from other world
cultures--drawing from our own collections and from many of our 135
partner institutions from all over the United States and the world. We
are also working with 167 other U.S. partners on our congressionally
mandated program for digital preservation.
A second--and crucial--question at this time is: Have we
responsibly addressed the massive fiscal challenges posed by the
Federal deficit, about which the Congress is understandably concerned?
For a number of years now, we have been submitting constrained
budgets. If we set aside the normal inflationary pay and price level
increases that all agencies request, LOC in the last 4 years has asked
for program increases averaging only 2.3 percent of the base budget.
The committees have commended these modest requests.
In fiscal 2012, LOC requests funding to meet a critical need to
expand incident handling and response capacity to keep pace with the
evolving IT security threat landscape. The enhancements include
expanding the incident handling and response function to 24 hours a
day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year. The enhancements also include
advanced security incident and event monitoring, net flow analysis, and
other systems and processes commonly used across other Government
agencies.
LOC also requests funding and 17 full-time equivalents for CRS,
first requested in fiscal 2011, to broaden its expertise and strengthen
analytical capacity in the areas of science and technology, healthcare,
financial economics and accounting, and social policy related to
employment, immigration, and the workforce. This funding will enable
CRS to provide enhanced multidisciplinary analysis on complex and
emerging policy issues before the Congress. Additional analytical
capacity will also give CRS the long-term flexibility to adapt to
rapidly changing issues and debates in these critical areas.
These two program requests represent less than 1 percent of the
fiscal 2011 continuing resolution base. The great bulk (77 percent) of
our overall 3.45 percent requested increase is for the mandatory pay
and price level increases of $18 million.
LOC programs are not ``nice to have''. Almost all provide one-of-a-
kind national resources and services that no one else in either our
public or private sectors can reasonably be expected to replicate.
Even under a best-case budget outlook, funding at the fiscal 2010
level for both fiscal 2011 and 2012 would result in an effective budget
cut of more than $31 million, or 4.8 percent, against the fiscal 2010
base. This alone would require substantial program and staff
sacrifices. And some of the reduction scenarios currently being
proposed could cut to the bone and require us to take steps that not
even past wars and depressions have forced us to consider in LOC's 211-
year history. This possibility leads to a final question.
How would we handle major budget cuts?
We would have to ask ourselves where among the many services that
we uniquely perform we should reduce funding: In our deacidification of
brittle books and manuscripts that will then become unusable? In our
cataloging and standards service that will increase the burden on
already strained local and State libraries? In providing fewer books
and magazine titles free to 800,000 blind and physically handicapped
Americans who generally read much more than sighted people?
Even if we cut back our public services significantly, we would
reluctantly also have to consider furloughing or cutting back on
personnel. Our dedicated, experienced, and multi-talented staff
accounts for 63 percent of LOC's overall budget, and 89 percent of
CRS'. LOC is now doing far more work than in 1992, but with 1,076 fewer
people on the staff. Half of those reductions have occurred just in the
last 5 years.
We are also critically dependent on sustaining the successful
collections storage program at Fort Meade and ask for your approval of
funds for construction of Module 5--included in the Architect of the
Capitol budget.
Mr. Chairman, Senator Hoeven, and members of the subcommittee,
America's oldest Federal cultural institution has become part of the
innovative infrastructure of America in the information age. I thank
you again for your support of LOC and for your consideration of our
fiscal 2012 request.
______
Prepared Statement of Daniel P. Mulhollan, Director, Congressional
Research Service
Mr. Chairman, Senator Hoeven, and members of the subcommittee:
Thank you for the opportunity to present the fiscal year 2012 budget
request for the Congressional Research Service (CRS). In addition to
presenting our budget request and describing some of the support we
have provided the Congress over the past year, I would also like to
describe how CRS' mission of being a pooled resource shared by the
entire Congress enables it to provide the information and analysis
necessary for the Congress to perform its legislative and oversight
functions in an efficient and economical manner.
loc deg.CRS: POOLED STAFF FOR THE CONGRESS
CRS has always viewed itself as an extension of congressional
staff, a pooled resource that is available to all of the Congress. The
range of its expertise and the disciplines that make up the
informational and analytical capacity of CRS were intended to relieve
Member and committee offices of the need to hire their own specialized
experts to cover the many issues they confront on a daily basis. This
was a primary rationale for the enhancement of CRS in the Legislative
Reorganization Act of 1970.
In that act, among other institutional changes, the Congress
increased our permanent staff and the CRS was reconstituted from the
Legislative Reference Service and established as a cost-effective
shared resource available to every Member regardless of seniority,
party or position, and to every committee. The House Committee on Rules
Report on the 1970 act emphasized the importance of having such a
nonpartisan resource accessible to all when it wrote that a shared
staff would:
``Insure the equal availability of information to both Houses of
Congress; insulate the analytical phase of program review and policy
analysis from political biases and therefore produce a more credible
and objective product and more easily develop common frames of
reference and analytical techniques that would make such analyses more
useful and meaningful to all committees.''
The Rules Committee went on to stress the efficiency of such a
shared research staff:
``Finally, the pooling principle underlying supplementary staffs
makes them inherently more economical and efficient than dispersed
staffs, for they can more easily reallocate resources as changing
conditions and congressional needs warrant.''
CRS was referred to as a ``research pool'' by the Senate Committee
on Government Operations in describing a predecessor version of the
1970 Legislative Reorganization Act.
The House Committee's reference to CRS' ability to ``develop common
frames of reference and analytical techniques that would make such
analyses more useful and meaningful to all committees'' points to
important hallmarks of CRS' work, namely its experts' familiarity with
how issues are positioned in the legislative context, their knowledge
of how the Congress and the law work and their insights into the
decisionmaking processes of the executive agencies that implement the
law. This, combined with institutional memory developed over years of
working with Members and committees, make for a potent resource
available nowhere else.
We, of course, are prepared to do our part to achieve savings and
contribute to the goal of efficient legislative branch operations. I
feel that our request for additional staff in certain specialized areas
is consistent with the vision of a CRS that efficiently serves all of
the Congress. It is staff that can be shared with all Members and
committees.
We also plan to leverage web tools and client and management
information systems to enable more focused and responsive support. In
difficult budget times, CRS offers a model that achieves economies and
savings and at the same time provides the expertise and resources the
Congress needs to legislate in an informed manner and to effectively
oversee the operations of Government.
loc deg.SUPPORT FOR THE CONGRESS
Highlights of the last session of the 111th Congress and CRS'
preparations for the 112th Congress illustrate how CRS can bring to
bear the breadth and depth of its expertise to provide continuing
legislative assistance to Members and committees.
Before the postelection session of the 111th Congress ended, CRS
was planning for the 112th by identifying the issues that were likely
to be on the legislative agenda, forming multidisciplinary teams around
these current legislative issues, preparing and updating reports and
positioning itself to help Members and committees more clearly
understand the problems facing them and the country and identify and
analyze options for dealing with them. We cluster this work around a
current legislative issues framework which is an organizing principle
for our collaborative work across the CRS and a primary means by which
we present this work on our Web site.
More than 160 issues were identified and, shortly after the 112th
Congress convened, we had populated our Web site with relevant products
and prepared overview issue statements for each of the issues. That
array of analysis and information provides all Members access to the
best thinking of CRS analysts and information professionals on the
issues that are currently or likely to appear on the legislative
agenda. The analysis and information are available to all. But just as
important, if not more so, this body of work enables direct access to
our experts, whose names, phone numbers and e-mail addresses appear on
all of our reports. These experts stand ready to consult with Members
and congressional staff, prepare tailored analyses of specific
questions, and to regularly update their reports to reflect where
issues are currently positioned in the legislative process.
This anticipatory legislative planning work spanned several months
and resulted in CRS being well placed to provide products and services
to the incoming 112th Congress. However, as we all know, even the best
planning cannot anticipate all issues that may suddenly confront the
Congress. CRS has the analytical flexibility to address quickly
emerging issues. For example, when the earthquake and tsunami struck
Japan, CRS had reports on earthquakes, tsunamis, and relief efforts on
its Web site within 24 hours. When security of nuclear plants quickly
became an issue, CRS' body of work on nuclear energy and security was
available and new reports, building on these previous reports, were
added to provide the Congress with a full perspective on the crisis in
Japan.
In another example, the ousting of the President of Tunisia quickly
fanned unrest in Egypt and other countries in the Middle East. As
pressure mounted on President Mubarak to leave office, we quickly
updated our reports on Egypt and other countries such as Bahrain,
Yemen, and Libya that were experiencing popular uprisings and
highlighted that body of work on the home page of our Web site. We also
reorganized our current legislative issues framework for the Middle
East to focus on the unrest that was engulfing the region. In addition
to products focused on specific countries, analyses also treated the
impact of the unrest on oil supplies, the security posture of the
United States and the legal, military, and economic impacts of a no-fly
zone over Libya. And, of course, our Middle East experts conducted
numerous briefings and prepared tailored analyses of questions raised
by the turmoil.
The explosion of the Deepwater Horizon oil rig and its sinking in
the Gulf of Mexico in April 2010 was another event that required CRS to
mobilize its resources quickly. We prepared analyses of the
implications of the spill and also posted new research resources on our
Web site with links to news, relevant legislation, hearings in both
chambers, and an oil spill events time line. CRS developed timely
research and analytical support at every stage of the ensuing
legislative process, including numerous hearings and development of
legislative proposals. CRS specialists--with economic, scientific, and
legal expertise--provided expert witnesses at hearings and collaborated
with lawmakers on many aspects of Federal jurisdiction over Outer
Continental Shelf resources, fisheries, worker safety, emergency
response, insurance, and--after the well was capped--the use of moneys
from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund for the Federal spill response
and implications of the deepwater drilling moratorium.
This confluence of our regular legislative planning work and the
mobilization of our expertise in response to breaking events
demonstrates how CRS can pool its resources and stand ready to serve
the long- and short-term needs of the Congress. These first few months
of the 112th Congress have underscored the contributions CRS can make
to the policy debates in the Congress. CRS places the array of issues
that the Congress is likely to face in a framework that is accessible
and that discusses those issues in the legislative context in which
they will be debated. And the CRS can respond quickly to events that
can overtake the legislative agenda and demand the attention of the
Congress and the country with focused analyses and ready availability
of experts from all disciplines.
I must also note another important aspect of our support of the
Congress--our congressional operations work. We maintain a large body
of reports and information on the procedures and operations of the
Congress and these will soon be better integrated into our Web site
offerings to make them more accessible. Our expertise on congressional
procedure is unparalleled and we make that expertise available not only
through reports and tailored work by legislative procedure analysts but
also through an extensive education program of seminars on all aspects
of the legislative process. We were able to bring this expertise to
bear to assist the Senate in the confirmation process for Associate
Justice Kagan and the impeachment proceedings against Federal District
Judge Porteous, which resulted in his conviction and removal from
office in December 2010.
A number of high-profile events in the last session of the 111th
Congress also demonstrate the breadth and depth of the support CRS
provides to the Congress. 2010 saw enactment of major financial
regulatory and healthcare legislation. With respect to the latter, CRS
supported the Congress throughout the legislative process, including
detailed analyses of proposals and numerous briefings and programs. CRS
experts addressed such complex issues as the implications of changes in
dependency coverage, establishment of State high-risk pools for
individuals with pre-existing health conditions, the creation of small
business health insurance tax credits, and also explored legal and
policy issues associated with mandating that individuals purchase
health insurance. After passage of the law, CRS prepared analyses of
the numerous new entities created by the law as well as the steps
needed to be taken in the rule-making process. Our attorneys have also
tracked the continuing litigation over the validity of the law and
analyzed the court decisions as they have been issued.
With respect to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act, lawmakers relied on CRS testimony, numerous reports and
memoranda, personal consultations, programs and authoritative
comparisons of legislative provisions contained in the House and Senate
versions of the legislation. Our experts also supported congressional
committees in overseeing the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program
(TARP) and examined other Federal assistance given to large financial
institutions by the Federal Reserve.
CRS analysis also addressed efforts in the last Congress to promote
job creation and increase employment in the wake of the economic crisis
and recession. Because of the severity of the recession and the
subsequent slow pace of economic recovery, the Congress sought analysis
and information on the relative depth of the recent recession compared
to past recessions and on programs and policies that have the potential
of helping unemployed workers secure work. CRS analyzed employment
trends before and after the end of previous recessions, long-term
unemployment and recessions, countercyclical job creation programs, the
employment effects of infrastructure spending, and training programs
available for unemployed workers.
CRS provided support regarding numerous foreign policy issues in
2010, including the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, United States-
Pakistan relations, the Greek and European debt crises, trade issues
with China, and Iran and North Korean sanctions. CRS experts also
provided insight to the Congress as it began to explore the emerging
areas of cyber security and other cyber operations, including the
relationship between information operations and cyber warfare.
Immigration reform re-emerged in 2010 and CRS was asked to assess
various reform proposals as well as to analyze the actions that States
were taking with respect to immigrants and border security. Tax experts
analyzed the impact of various tax proposals including extending prior
years' tax cuts. Military detainees, campaign finance, and gun control
continued to be of congressional interest, the debates being influenced
by recent court decisions. CRS attorneys and policy experts
collaborated on analyses of these issues.
The foregoing are examples of the degree of involvement of CRS in
the legislative and oversight work of the last Congress as well as
during the initial months of this Congress. The collaboration among
multidisciplinary experts, the breadth of issue coverage, the ability
to respond in the face of breaking events and the close proximity of
CRS to the Congress all combine to enable CRS to serve efficiently as
shared staff and a pooled resource to be drawn upon by all offices and
committees of the Congress.
loc deg.CUSTOMER SATISFACTION
I noted in my testimony last year, that the CRS, at the direction
of the conference on the legislative branch appropriations bill,
contracted with LMI, a not-for-profit strategic consulting firm, to
independently evaluate CRS' current staffing models and procedures to
determine how effectively we are meeting our statutory mandate. LMI
conducted Member and staff surveys and interviews, reported on best
practices for research organizations geared to ensuring responsiveness
to client needs, and assessed communication channels that would ensure
that CRS remains aligned with the work of the Congress and the needs of
its clients.
LMI found a high degree of satisfaction with CRS products and
services and found us to be a reliable, timely and authoritative source
of expertise for the entire range of congressional clients. We are
addressing areas in which LMI recommended improvements based on the
feedback it obtained, including examining our product line, improving
our Web site and options to ensure that CRS availability is aligned
with the operations of congressional staff. It was gratifying to
receive the confirmation that we are doing a good job of serving the
Congress. However, there is always room for improvement and it is all
the more imperative in these challenging budget times that we remain
the most efficient and cost-effective resource for the Congress that we
can be.
loc deg.FISCAL YEAR 2012 BUDGET REQUEST
The CRS budget request for fiscal year 2012 is $117.1 million, with
almost 90 percent devoted to pay and benefits for our staff. CRS
continues to operate at its lowest staff level in more than three
decades, and the small percentage of nonpay expenditures is limited to
basic operational needs. The requested program increase will obtain
additional specialized technical skills and policy expertise to expand
the capabilities of CRS and meet the growing policy demands placed upon
the Congress.
An internal review of our capabilities to analyze the rapidly
evolving and increasingly complex challenges facing the Congress
identified gaps in the specialized skills needed for comprehensive
multidisciplinary analyses and assessments. This budget request
includes $2.7 million for 17 full-time equivalents (FTEs) needed to
address these concerns. This will strengthen research capabilities in
science, engineering and technology and the broader expertise in these
areas will enable CRS to respond more readily to rapidly changing
science and technology policy debates. The economic crisis and the
major financial regulatory legislation enacted in its aftermath require
additional CRS expertise in financial accounting, consumer protection
and financial sector regulation in order to effectively support the
Congress' legislative and oversight work in these areas. Additional
expertise is also needed to support multidisciplinary research on
policy options in the wake of the enactment of healthcare reform
legislation as well as analysis of the potential effects of proposed
changes in the organization, financing and delivery of healthcare
services. Finally, CRS is asking for additional positions to address
the many complex issues pertaining to employment, immigration, the
workforce and the economic well-being of U.S. residents.
CONCLUSION
This budget request identifies resources that I feel are needed for
CRS to provide the full scope of information and analysis that is
relevant to the work of the Congress. CRS developed this spending plan
to ensure that returns justified the investment while cognizant of the
difficult budget climate. My colleagues and I are committed to
continually examine every activity and program for efficiencies and
reduce or eliminate costs where possible while fulfilling our mission.
We are proud of our unique role as a pooled staff resource for
nonpartisan, confidential, authoritative, and objective analysis for
the Congress.
I want to thank you for your support and the support the CRS has
received over the years that has made it into the institution it is
today. This will be the final time I will submit testimony before the
subcommittee. After 17 years as Director and 42 years with the
Congressional Research Service, I am retiring from congressional
service in April. It has been an honor and privilege to have served in
a variety of capacities in CRS, an organization that I believe is
critical to maintaining an informed national legislature.
Thank you.
______
Prepared Statement of Maria A. Pallante, Acting Register of Copyrights
Mr. Chairman Nelson, Senator Hoeven, and members of the
subcommittee: Thank you for the opportunity to present the fiscal 2012
budget request of the U.S. Copyright Office.
We deeply respect the commitment of the Congress to address the
Federal deficit and Government spending, and we appreciate your
consideration of our budgetary needs. Indeed, our talented and
hardworking employees have always carried out the work of the Copyright
Office with a sense of purpose and are fully prepared to share in the
burden of these austere times. We are not seeking additional full-time
equivalents (FTEs) or funding for new projects at this time. However,
we do wish to ensure that our existing staff is compensated
competitively so that we may maintain a highly skilled and motivated
workforce at a time when copyright law is increasingly complex and the
Office's services are increasingly technical and in demand.
Specifically, our requests are as follows:
--A 1.7 percent increase ($0.843 million) more than fiscal year 2011
to support mandatory pay-related and price-level increases
affecting administration of the Office's core business systems
and public services; and
--A 1.7 percent increase ($0.095 million) more than fiscal year 2011
in offsetting collection authority of the Copyright Licensing
Division to support mandatory pay-related and price-level
increases affecting the administration of the Office's
licensing functions.
loc deg.PROGRAM OVERVIEW
The U.S. Copyright Office has been part of the Library of Congress
(LOC) since 1870. The Office administers the copyright law of the
United States, which traces its roots to the Constitution. Principal
functions of the Office include administration of the national
copyright registration and recordation systems and the mandatory
deposit provisions for published works. Each year, the Office acquires
hundreds of thousands of books, films, sound recordings, and other
creative works of authorship to LOC's national collection. In fiscal
2010, the Office transferred 814,243 copies to LOC at a value of
approximately $33 million.
The Office also administers the compulsory and statutory license
provisions of the Copyright Act, including licenses for satellite and
cable transmissions. The Licensing Division is responsible for
collecting and investing royalty fees for later distribution to
copyright owners, examining related documentation, and recording
certain licensing documents.
In terms of the larger U.S. economy, many authors, composers, book
and software publishers, film and television producers, and creators of
musical works depend on the registration system to help them enforce
against copyright infringement. Based on a study released in 2009,\1\
these core sectors--whose primary purpose is to produce and distribute
creative works--account for more than 6 percent of the U.S. domestic
gross product, or $889 billion (reflecting 2007 data, the most recent
year for which data are available). The core copyright industries also
employed 5.6 million workers (4.05 percent of U.S. workers), and that
number doubles to more than 11.7 million people (8.5 percent of the
U.S. workforce) when the workers that help and support the distribution
of these works are added into the equation. The Office facilitates
transactions in the marketplace by assisting users of content to track
the ownership of copyrighted content and the transfers and licenses of
the exclusive rights afforded by law.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Stephen E. Siwek, Copyright Industries in the U.S. Economy: The
2003-2007 Report, prepared by Economists, Inc. for the International
Intellectual Property Alliance (2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Office has a dedicated team of legal and policy experts who
advise the Congress on domestic and international policy activities
(for example, on legislation) and who also provide assistance and
information to the judiciary and executive branch agencies (for
example, on litigation of interest to the United States or on matters
of bilateral or plurilateral trade). These duties are prescribed in
chapter seven of the copyright law (17 U.S.C. Sec. 701).
The Copyright Office is currently in a period of transition,
following the retirement of Marybeth Peters on December 31, 2010, who
directed the staff and functions for 16 years. As the Acting Register,
I, along with LOC's Chief of Staff, have spent many weeks speaking with
a broad spectrum of stakeholders in the copyright community, from book
publishers to the technology sector, discussing with them the issues
that are or should be priorities of the Office in the coming years.
I have also been meeting with the managers and staff of the
Copyright Office, individually or in small groups, to assess the views
of those who work here and administer our public services, and to help
set a path for our future business and the workplace environment of our
employees. This assessment is still under way, but has already proved
to be quite helpful to the Librarian and to me and should prove
invaluable to the next Register, once appointed.
loc deg.PROGRAM FUNDING
Funding for the Office derives from two sources--user fees and
appropriations. More than 60 percent of the Office's budget is
collected from fees paid for copyright registration, document
recordation, and related services. The remaining operating budget
covers the policy, legal, adjudicatory, and support operations. To
ensure that fees represent current costs and market conditions, the
Office undertakes a triennial fee study, the most recent of which was
published in fiscal 2009 with another planned for fiscal 2012. The
Office's fiscal 2011 budget request was approximately $55.5 million,
approximately $34 million of which was funded by Office revenues.
loc deg.REGISTRATION OF COPYRIGHT CLAIMS
The Copyright Office has made tremendous progress in the past year
in reducing the backlog of claims that occurred with the transition to
an electronic registration system. In fiscal 2012, we will continue our
efforts to improve operational efficiencies in the electronic
registration system, including our continued efforts to decrease
processing times for registration and recordation filings. Today, the
system allows claimants to file registration applications online and,
in many cases, to upload a digital copy of the work to fulfill the
deposit requirement.
Since they were made available in July 2008, electronic filings
quickly displaced the use of paper applications. To date in fiscal
2011, electronic filings constitute more than 80 percent of all claims
received. The Copyright Office typically handles more than 500,000
copyright claims each year, representing well more than 1 million
works. In fiscal 2010, the Office received 522,796 claims to copyright,
and closed 682,148, of which it registered 636,527 claims. The Office
answered almost 316,000 nonfee information and reference inquiries and
served a substantial number of visitors to the Public Information
Office and the Copyright Public Records Reading Room.
In building the electronic system, the Office experienced a backlog
of claims that was not unexpected given the major work process changes,
temporary staff relocations, system testing and servicing, and
widespread workforce training. The backlog peaked in 2009, but with
support from LOC, the Office has reduced the backlog by hundreds of
thousands of claims to around 167,000 as of this writing, while at the
same time processing new claims at an average rate of 10,000 a week. We
expect that our work on hand will fall to 150,000 claims within the
next several weeks--an achievement that speaks to the dedication of our
employees.
One issue we will continue to explore going forward is what might
constitute a reasonable amount of work on hand for purposes of
assessing operational success. Because the electronic filing system
allows for hybrid submissions (where the application and fee, submitted
online, are followed up by a hardcopy deposit mailed separately), and
because some claims require the Office to further correspond with the
applicant, the Office will always have categories of work that cannot
be immediately processed. These claims (presently about 95,000) do not
contribute to a backlog but are in fact an anticipated and routine part
of the Office's business operations.
The Office is also cognizant of the need for quality assurance.
While we are constantly exploring ways to improve our speed and
efficiency, we remain mindful of our obligation to ensure the integrity
of the registration records that we create and maintain. Fast
processing times, although virtuous, cannot come at the expense of the
accuracy and completeness of our public records.
loc deg.COPYRIGHT RECORDS DIGITIZATION PROJECT
We continue to make progress in our multi-year project to digitize
the millions of disparate pre-1977 copyright records, many of which
represent works still protected by copyright law. (Records for post-
1977 registrations are already available online.) This project is of
utmost historic importance, as there is no complete back up of such
records for preservation or security purposes. It is also of critical
importance to our mission as an office of public record, making it
easier for persons to locate copyright owners, analyze copyright term,
and facilitate licensing. The records include registration information,
assignments of copyrights, and licensing documentation going back to
the beginning of the Copyright Office and may well implicate works
published before the Civil War.
In terms of legal relevance, the Office is prioritizing records for
works published between 1923 and 1977, as in many instances, the
copyright in such works has not yet expired. We plan to complete up to
50 percent of the card catalog records from this era by the end of
fiscal 2012. In so doing, we will continue to test imaging quality,
clarity, create searchable metadata, and plan for cross-referencing of
the imaged records.
loc deg.LICENSING DIVISION RE-ENGINEERING
Business re-engineering efforts for the Licensing Division began in
fiscal 2011. Thus far, the Office has completed an operational
baseline, consulted with external stakeholders, and begun benchmarking
exercises against entities with similar functions. The goals of this
re-engineering effort are to:
--decrease processing times for statements of account by 30 percent
or more;
--implement an online filing process; and
--improve public access to Office records.
In fiscal year 2010, the Licensing Division collected more than
$274 million in royalties from cable and satellite companies subject to
statutory licenses, accrued more than $4.3 million in interest on
royalties for the copyright owners, and distributed more than $249
million to copyright owners. As part of our fiscal 2011 budget request,
we sought an additional one-time authorization of $500,000 to cover any
unforeseen re-engineering expenses. As always, any funds not expended
will be returned to the royalty pools.
In fiscal year 2012, the Licensing Division will continue to
collect and distribute royalty fees and examine licensing
documentation. It also will implement and refine its new processes and
technology systems. It will test systems for online cable licensing and
expects to implement an electronic version of its more complex
statements of account, which currently take up to 14 months to process
and which are typically of most interest to users. The Licensing
Division will soon solicit proposals to develop the technical
infrastructure required by re-engineering.
As mentioned below, we are preparing, and will deliver to the
Congress, a report on market alternatives to statutory licensing, due
in August 2011. The Office stands ready to assist and advise the
Congress with consideration of that report and to modify its operations
should the Congress enact any changes to current law.
loc deg.ELECTRONIC SERIALS PROJECT
As more and more journals, magazines, and newspapers are ``born
digital'', the Copyright Office is leading a LOC-wide effort to study,
identify, obtain, and manage serials that publishers supply to us in
electronic formats (eSerials). Although the project currently focuses
on the mandatory deposit provisions under the law (i.e., the provisions
requiring publishers to deposit copies of certain works with the LOC
within 3 months of publication), it serves as a test bed for the intake
of works by LOC through other mechanisms, including the registration
system. The Copyright Office administers the mandatory deposit
provisions of the law and is currently working with other LOC service
units to develop an agencywide accommodation for eSerials. We expect
the initial phase of that project to be completed in September 2011.
loc deg.legal and policy activities
The Office is never without complex work on the domestic and
international policy fronts.
Online Piracy
Throughout the past several weeks, the Office has been conducting
meetings with a wide spectrum of stakeholders in order to explore the
current state of online infringement of copyright law and sale of
counterfeit goods via so-called ``rogue websites'' and possible
mechanisms by which to combat such piracy and widespread
counterfeiting. The Judiciary Committees of both the House and Senate
of the 112th Congress are focused on this issue. On March 14, I
testified on the issue before the House Subcommittee on Intellectual
Property, Competition, and the Internet (testimony may be accessed at
http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/hear_03142011.html). We will be
working very closely in support of the both the Senate and House as the
Committees deliberate further and prepare legislative text.
Technical Clarifications
At the end of fiscal 2010, the Office advised the Judiciary
Committees of the need for legislation amending certain provisions of
the Copyright Act to clarify the law, permit the Office to perform
certain functions more efficiently by relying on electronic resources,
and make technical corrections. The Copyright Cleanup, Clarifications,
and Correction Act of 2010, based upon the Office's recommendations,
was signed into law on December 9, 2010.
Termination of Transfers and Licenses by Authors
During fiscal 2011, the Office provided the Congress with an
analysis of the situation with respect to so-called ``gap grants''
under the termination provisions of title 17; specifically, the
analysis concerned grants entered into before January 1, 1978 for works
that were not created until January 1, 1978 or later and discussed
certain possible clarifications. The Office led an extensive public
consultation process that included holding a public comment process on
its preliminary proposals related to the outcome of the report, as well
as a related regulatory process for which it expects to issue a final
rule in fiscal 2012. The law requires that authors record the notices
they serve on licensees with the Copyright Office (pursuant to certain
deadlines) as a condition of termination.
Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA)
In fiscal 2010, the Office concluded its fourth rulemaking on
exemptions from the prohibition on circumvention of technological
measures that control access to copyrighted works, as provided in 17
U.S.C. Sec. 1201. The law requires that every 3 years the Copyright
Office make recommendations to the Librarian of Congress regarding
works that should be exempt from the statutory prohibition on the
circumvention of access control mechanisms, provided the circumvention
takes place in order to engage in noninfringing uses of copyrighted
works.
In the most recent iteration issued in July 2010, the Librarian
announced six classes of works that are entitled to exemption. Notable
exemptions include motion pictures on DVD, if the circumvention takes
place for purposes of using short portions for the purpose of criticism
or comment; software on mobile phones if circumvention is performed for
the purpose of making the phone interoperable with other applications;
and literary works distributed in eBook format for the benefit of the
blind and visually impaired, provided that existing eBook versions of
the title prevent access to the ``read-aloud'' function or to screen
readers.
Other recent regulatory actions would allow the LOC to demand the
electronic deposit of published works available only online and allow
the Copyright Office to accommodate on online submission of
applications for group registrations involving photographs.
Report on Statutory Licenses
The Copyright Office worked closely with the staff of the House and
Senate Judiciary Committees as well as the Congressional Budget Office
in addressing issues relating to passage of the Satellite Television
Extension and Localism Act, which reauthorized the statutory license
for satellite carriers to carry certain over-the-air broadcast signals.
In that legislation, the Congress assigned the Copyright Office the
task of preparing a comprehensive report to identify and explore
marketplace alternatives to the statutory licenses in the law that
allow for retransmission of over-the-air broadcast signals. To date, we
have held a number of meetings with stakeholders and published a notice
of inquiry seeking public comments. We expect to submit our report by
the August 29, 2011 deadline. This is a significant study because,
although the Congress has asked us on several occasions to study the
cable and satellite statutory licenses for television programming, and
we have on several occasions recommended the eventual phasing out of
the those studies, this marks the first time the Congress has expressly
asked us to make recommendations on how to phase out those licenses
Report on Pre-1972 Sound Recordings
The Office is also in the midst of its study on the copyright
treatment of pre-1972 sound recordings, which was mandated in the
Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009. Specifically, the Office has been
directed to study the desirability of, and means for, bringing sound
recordings fixed before February 15, 1972, into the Federal statutory
copyright regime. Currently, State law governs such pre-1972 sound
recordings, which in many cases is not well defined. Federal copyright
law allows States to protect these pre-1972 sound recordings until
February 15, 2067. Although behind schedule for this report, the Office
began its preparatory work last year, including publishing a notice of
inquiry for which we have received more than 50 comments thus far. We
will follow up in the spring of 2011 with hearings or roundtables, and
expects to prepare its analysis and recommendations in the summer and
fall. We are grateful for the subcommittee's agreement to extend the
deadline for our report from March 11, 2011 to December 31, 2011.
Litigation
As in previous years, the Office assisted the Justice Department in
a number of court cases involving copyright issues, including the
preparation of an amicus brief filed with the Supreme Court in Costco
Wholesale Corp. v. Omega S.A., a case concerning the first sale
doctrine and the exclusive importation right that was affirmed by an
equally divided court; and Golan v. Holder, a defense against a
constitutional challenge to the ``copyright restoration'' provision of
the Uruguay Round Agreements Act.
The Office continued to spend significant time evaluating the legal
and business implications of the ongoing Google book search litigation
and proposed settlement agreement, including the broader implications
of the proposed settlement on the mass digitization of books and the
treatment of ``orphan'' works--works for which rights holders are
unknown or cannot be located. The Department of Justice filed two
statements of interest with the court on which the Copyright Office
provided significant advice.\2\ The former Register of Copyrights,
Marybeth Peters, also testified before House Judiciary Committee on the
matter in 2009 about copyright concerns. On March 22, 2011, Judge Chin
denied the parties' motion for approval of the proposed settlement,
consistent with the recommendation of the U.S. Government. The Office
is pleased with the court's opinion and will continue to monitor the
progress of the case in anticipation of likely appeals. It will also
continue to work with congressional committees, the parties and other
stakeholders on policy issues raised by the case that are better suited
to the Congress than the courts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See Statement of Interest of the United States of America
Regarding Proposed Class Settlement (September 18, 2009) and the
Statement of Interest of the United States of America Regarding
Proposed Amended Settlement Agreement (February 4, 2010), both
available at http://www.justice.gov/atr/cases/authorsguild.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accessible Works for the Blind and Individuals With Print Disabilities
Copyright Office attorneys continued to spend considerable time in
fiscal 2011 examining the ways in which the United States provides
copyrighted works in accessible formats to the blind, visually impaired
and print-disabled, as well as similar issues involving cross-border
access to copyrighted works in the context of national exceptions for
the blind, visually impaired, and print-disabled and international
copyright treaty obligations. The Office has worked diligently with
other U.S. Government agencies in preparing for and attending meetings
of the World Intellectual Property Organization's (WIPO) Standing
Committee on Copyright and Related Rights, which has this issue on its
agenda.
In fiscal year 2010, in partnership with WIPO, we organized and
hosted a week-long training for developing countries and countries in
transition, the focus of which was accessibility and standard for
protection under copyright laws worldwide. The Office is currently
working with LOC's National Library Service for the Blind, as well as
with advocates for the blind and other stakeholders, to explore ways to
improve standards, resources and responsible cross border movement of
works in accessible formats, including through participation in a
voluntary WIPO Stakeholders' Platform pilot project for the cross-
border transfer of accessible works.
Both LOC and the Office are working with the Department of
Education and other Federal Government agencies as part of a
statutorily mandated commission on issues involving access to copyright
works for the visually impaired in the context of higher education. I
am the chairperson of the legal subcommittee of the Commission, which
will deliver a report to the Congress before the end of fiscal 2012.
Anti-Piracy and Other International Developments
Finally, the Copyright Office continues to play an important role
in intergovernmental negotiations and international discussions of
copyright law and policy, including the importance of antipiracy
efforts and the proper framework for exceptions and limitations. We
continue our long-standing tradition of participating in important WIPO
meetings that addressed copyright issues (including the Standing
Committee on Copyright and Related Rights), working with other
Government leaders and copyright offices from around the world.
The Office also continues its significant role in assisting Federal
Government agencies with many multilateral, regional, and bilateral
negotiations and served on many U.S. delegations, including
negotiations regarding the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, the
proposed Trans Pacific Partnership, and the Joint Commission on
Commerce and Trade with China in addition to negotiations and meetings
relating to the implementation of intellectual property provisions of
existing Free Trade Agreements and Trade Promotion Agreements. We
participated on the interagency committee charged with preparing the
annual special 301 report issued by the United States Trade
Representative.
Our day-to-day international work involved reviewing and commenting
on the national copyright laws and proposed amendments from numerous
countries, either as part of the World Trade Organization accession or
trade policy review proceedings or based on requests by other U.S. or
foreign entities. One goal of these reviews was to ensure that
copyright laws around the world meet binding treaty obligations and
provide effective copyright enforcement mechanisms. Over the past year,
we reviewed the copyright laws or proposed revisions in at least 23
countries, and participated in bilateral negotiations and consultations
that covered these themes and more with at least 18 countries.
The Office requested funds in fiscal 2011 to organize and host
another international copyright training for developing countries, the
intended focus of which is collective licensing and other innovative
means of making copyrighted works available in the marketplace.
CONCLUSION
Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for your consideration of our
budget request today and for the subcommittee's past support of the
U.S. Copyright Office. Thank you in particular for considering the
funding we require to sustain a first-rate staff and meet necessary
expenses, enabling us to perform our core duties under the law.
Senator Nelson. Thank you.
Ambassador O'Keefe.
STATEMENT OF AMBASSADOR JOHN O'KEEFE, EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR, OPEN WORLD LEADERSHIP CENTER
Ambassador O'Keefe. Thank you Senator.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to testify on
the OWLC's fiscal year 2012 budget request.
As a unique congressional center and resource, the OWLC
strengthens ties with a region of the world that contains not
only the world's largest gas reserves, but also one of the
largest stockpiles of nuclear weapons. Our program enlists
civic-minded people in communities throughout the United States
who show our delegates how democracy really works. We recognize
their devotion and commitment.
I would like to pause at this moment to honor Judge John M.
Roll of Tucson, who had hosted 38 judges and other legal
professionals from Russia and Ukraine for us since 2002, and
Gabe Zimmerman of Representative Giffords' staff, who was so
welcoming to so many of our participants. We mourn their
passing.
OWLC deg.EFFECTIVENESS OF OWLC
Entering a new decade of programs, the OWLC continues to
identify leaders of tomorrow from Eurasia, introduce them to
U.S. democratic values, connect them to counterparts throughout
America, and provide resources for partnerships. Four new
members of the Senate met with OWLC delegates prior to entering
the 112th Congress, including Senator Hoeven when he was
Governor.
As an example of the power of those meetings, a Kyrgyz
parliamentarian, hosted by Montana State senators in 2007, said
after last year's revolution, ``I can say that I am the father
of the judiciary bloc in the new constitution. My experience
from the Open World program helped in revising the
constitution, using the basic principles and concepts that work
in the U.S.''
OWLC deg.INVESTMENT FOR THE CONGRESS AND ASSET FOR
CONSTITUENTS
Looking forward, the new strategic plan builds on the
quality of programs and our influential alumni network to reach
out to a greater number of young leaders. We now see the
Russian Government starting to build unprecedented reverse
programs, bringing university student body presidents of
America to Russia, inspired by and modeled after the OWLC
program.
We keep costs low and quality high. Every grant contains
cost-shared elements, and more than 75 percent of our
appropriation is spent in the American economy every year. At
the requested level of $12.6 million, we can fulfill the board-
mandated goals.
PREPARED STATEMENT
The OWLC offers an extraordinary investment in the future
of U.S. relations with the program countries. Thousands of
American host volunteers are making the world safer, more
prosperous, and more open by demonstrating our own democracy in
action, and by developing community partnerships. Their
devotion and energy, combined with the renown of the
legislative branch, makes this program a nationwide asset for
Members of Congress and their constituents.
Thank you, Sir.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Ambassador John O'Keefe
Mr. Chairman, Senator Hoeven, and members of the subcommittee, I am
pleased to submit testimony on the Open World Leadership Center's
(OWLC) budget request for fiscal year 2012. The OWLC, of which I am the
Executive Director, is a unique resource that links the Congress and
its constituents to the strategically important regions of Eurasia that
contain not only the world's largest gas reserves, but also one of the
largest stockpiles of nuclear weapons. In this capacity, the OWLC
administers the OWLC program that allows community leaders throughout
America to discuss issues ranging from nonproliferation to rule of law
in face-to-face settings with emerging young, professional counterparts
from Eurasia to develop projects and partnerships. In the past 11
years, OWLC grants have enabled some 6,500 American families in almost
2,000 communities around the country to host program participants.
Since its inception, the OWLC has awarded grants for overseeing our
U.S. exchanges to 61 organizations headquartered in 25 different States
and the District of Columbia. These grantee organizations host
delegations themselves or award subgrants to local host organizations.
By 2011, well more than 700 local host organizations--including Rotary
clubs and other service organizations, sister-city associations,
international visitor councils, universities and community colleges,
and other nonprofits in all 50 States and the District of Columbia--had
conducted OWLC exchanges.
More than 75 percent of OWLC's fiscal year 2010 appropriated funds
were expended on U.S. goods and services through contracts and grants--
much of it at the local community level. American volunteers in 49
States and the District of Columbia home hosted OWLC participants in
calendar year 2010, contributing a large portion of the estimated $1.9
million given to the program through cost shares.
Nearly 17,000 emerging leaders from Russia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan,
Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan,
Lithuania, and Uzbekistan have participated in OWLC. Earlier this
month, our inaugural delegation of women-as-leaders from Armenia will
travel to Des Moines, Iowa. While all the countries where OWLC is
active are strategically important to the interests of the U.S.
Government, they are also areas of growing economies where
opportunities for foreign investment and trade increase yearly.
With the requested funding level of $12.6 million, the OWLC will be
able to continue its support of the Congress in inter-parliamentary and
other legislative activities and bring 1,300 or more participants to
communities throughout the United States in 2012. Actual allocations of
participant slots to individual countries will be based on the board of
trustees recommendations and consultations with the subcommittee and
the U.S. Embassies in these countries. The requested funding will allow
us to fulfill the board-mandated strategic plan to expand into
Uzbekistan and Belarus, to meet our continuing plan to intensify
legislator to legislator programs, and to reach the rising new
generation in Russia and elsewhere who remember the Cold War as a
fading memory, if at all.
OWLC will facilitate existing projects and partnerships among
hundreds of American civic organizations, numerous communities, and
thousands of participating constituents and the regional
parliamentarians and other leaders from OWLC countries hosted here. We
ask for an increase of $600,000 to begin our Board of Trustees-approved
expansion into Belarus, and to resume our Uzbek program suspended in
2005.
Major categories of requested funding for a total of $12.6 million
are:
--Program expenses ($0.5 million); and
--Operating expenses ($0.9 million)
--Contract ($7.2 million--awarded to U.S.-based entities) that
include:
--Coordinating the delegate nomination and vetting process;
--Obtaining visas and other travel documents;
--Arranging and paying for air travel; and
--Coordinating with grantees and placing delegates.
--Grants ($4 million--awarded to U.S. host organizations) that
include:
--Professional programming for delegates;
--Meals outside of those provided by home hosts;
--Community activities;
--Professional interpretation; and
--Administrative support.
owlc deg.OWLC AND THE CONGRESS
As a U.S. legislative branch entity, the OWLC actively supports the
foreign relations efforts of the Congress by linking our delegates to
members and to experienced and enthusiastic constituents throughout the
United States who are engaged in projects and programs in OWLC
countries. The OWLC program routinely involves members in its hosting
activities with more than 50 percent of delegates meeting with Members
of Congress or their staff representatives last year.
The OWLC also regularly consults with the Commission on Security
and Cooperation in Europe; the Congressional Georgia Caucus; the
Congressional Ukrainian Caucus; the Russia Caucus; the Congressional
Azerbaijan Caucus; the Congressional Caucus on Central Asia; the
Friends of Kazakhstan Caucus; other congressional entities; and
individual Members with specific interests in OWLC countries or
thematic areas.
``In December 2010, Senator Olympia Snowe of Maine gave a
delegation of legislators from the Chechen Republic a joint resolution
encouraging the peace process, a return to civil society and
international cooperation, and signed by 200 representatives in the
legislature of the State of Maine. The resolution reflects the State of
Maine's support for stability and engagement in the region. The Senator
had tried unsuccessfully to deliver the resolution via the Russian
Embassy in Washington several times since 2008, so was pleased to be
able to pass it on to the Chechen group.
Last March, Representative Peter Roskam greeted education officials
from the Republic of Georgia in the home of their host, George
Palamattam, on their first day in Chicago. Representative Roskam
surprised and delighted the delegates and host families present with
the news that as a student he had visited Georgia. The discussion that
followed covered a variety of topics that was very informational and
educational for the Congressman, the host families, and everyone else
who was present.
Last month, Senator Bernie Sanders, Representative Robert Aderholt,
Representative Dana Rohrabacher, Representative Robert J. Wittman, and
Representative Dennis Kucinich met with two members of the Russian
Federation lower house of parliament (Duma) on their first visit to the
United States. They discussed topics related to education, labor,
employment and parliamentary ties. The Russians also met with Maryland
State Assembly members, State Department officials, foreign policy
experts, and students and faculty of Georgetown University and the
University of Maryland.''
Members of Congress and their staffs also provide OWLC delegates
with invaluable firsthand information on the U.S. legislative process,
constituent relations, and other aspects of the U.S. Government in
face-to-face meetings that forcefully demonstrate how accessible the
offices of elected officials can and should be. It is a message not
lost on OWLC participants, who come from a part of the world where such
openness is still the exception rather than the rule and where
constituent services are nonexistent or diminishing.
OWLC's board-approved strategic plan for 2012-2015 emphasizes
increasing the OWLC's legislative activities and focus. One of the key
goals is to serve Members of Congress by becoming a recognized resource
that connects them to emerging leaders of participating countries.
Currently, we have scheduled five delegations of Parliamentarians from
Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan (2), Moldova, and Russia and are planning three
more from Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Ukraine. Furthermore, OWLC is able
to link Members traveling to OWLC countries with alumni who can offer
an unfiltered view of the issues of interest to United States. To this
end, OWLC will seek to increase the number of legislator participants
from program countries and meetings with U.S. legislators; broaden the
legislative component of local host programs; and partner more
effectively with U.S. organizations that will increase OWLC's
effectiveness in serving members.
owlc deg.RECENT PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS AND RESULTS
In 2010, OWLC continued to focus on hosting in themes of interest
to the Congress and of transnational impact, including human-
trafficking prevention, government and court transparency,
nonproliferation, and environmental protection. OWLC also sponsors
hosting that promote economic and civic partnerships between American
communities or States and their counterparts abroad.
Kyrgyzstan
Erkin Alymbekov participated in the OWLC program as a member of the
first delegation of parliamentarians from Kyrgyzstan in June 2007, when
he was Vice-Speaker of the Kyrgyz Parliament. He was hosted in Montana
on a program focusing on accountable governance, and the following year
he hosted Carol Williams, president of the Montana State Senate, when
she visited Kyrgyzstan. Following a revolution in Kyrgyzstan and the
ouster of President Bakiev in April 2010, he was tasked by interim
President Roza Otunbayeva to be one of the co-authors of the draft of
the new constitution. Mr. Alymbekov later stated that his OWLC
experience and a copy of the Montana constitution helped him in
revising his country's own using the basic principles and concepts that
work in the United States. Passed by a referendum held in June 2010,
the new constitution shifted many powers from the executive branch to
that of the legislature, enabling Kyrgyzstan to become the first
parliamentary democracy in Central Asia.
Georgia
Attorney John Hall, of Atlanta, Georgia, first hosted OWLC
delegates from the Republic of Georgia in 2007. After hosting several
such delegations, he developed an interest in the region as well as a
network that led to his becoming the Honorary Consul General of the
Republic of Georgia in 2009 and the opening of his firm's business in
Tbilisi last year. In regard to OWLC's role in this, he stated:
``As a direct result of this program and the continued
relationships (we have hosted eight additional OWLC delegations since
February 2007, we have become leaders of the Atlanta Tbilisi Sister
City Program, [have] partnered with U.S. Department of Commerce to put
on two economic forums, helped coordinate the visit of five Members of
Congress to Tbilisi, [and] arranged an American development company to
start a project in Georgia. This and many other activities are a direct
result of Open World's Congressional exchange program. I urge the
Congress to keep this valuable program together and would welcome the
opportunity to show Members the many different facets of, and
opportunities in, the Republic of Georgia.''
Moldova
Before March 2010, Moldovan mayors and local legislators belonged
to different regional associations in Moldova. After their visit on the
OWLC program, and with the support of an organization active in local
reforms, these alumni decided to form the Congress of Local Authorities
of Moldova (CALM), uniting all four regional associations. The Congress
plans to create a strategy for decentralization, provide counsel to
local governments, lobby on behalf of local governments, support local
social and economic development, and increase the effectiveness of
public procurement. Nine OWLC alumni are on the association's governing
board, including the association's president, Tatiana Badan. There are
currently 300 members in the Congress of Local Authorities of Moldova
and 63 of them are on the governing board representing 29 regions.
U.S. Ambassador to Moldova Asif Chaudhry highlighted this result in
a letter to OWLC Executive Director John O'Keefe, stating that ``Open
World directly supports key U.S. policy priorities in Moldova and the
region'' and that he applauds ``Open World's focus on building
partnerships between Moldovan and American people and institutions.''
(letter of February 17, 2011).
Russia
OWLC alumnus and former ship navigator Eduard Perepelkin became a
crusader for Russia's ``street'' children. Perepelkin's 2008 OWLC
visit, which included an inspiring session at the National Center for
Missing and Exploited Children, made him even more determined. On his
return home, he did what is still, in post-Soviet Russia, the
unthinkable--he strode uninvited into the mayor's office and persuaded
him to increase funding for youth services. In July 2010, Perepelkin
was back in Washington, the site of his 2008 OWLC visit, for a meeting
of the U.S.-Russia Bilateral Presidential Commission's Working Group on
Civil Society. And now that Perepelkin's efforts have caught the
attention of national officials, this former ship navigator hopes to
help his country steer many more children away from the streets.
One of the hallmarks of the OWLC program is the multiplier effect
and impact on both the hosting community in America and that of the
participants. From the get-go and throughout the program participants
understand that, in many ways, the program only really begins once they
return to their countries of origin to bring about partnerships and
joint projects. One such example is a $150,000 grant from the Bristol-
Myers Squibb Foundation to an OWLC partner that will allow nurses in La
Crosse, Wisconsin, and Balakovo, Russia, to work together on cancer
prevention and treatment. OWLC alumni will participate in education
programs with nursing faculty from Gundersen Lutheran Health System and
will apply their new knowledge and skills at the Balakovo Secondary
Medical School for nurses. At the end of the 2-year project, it is
anticipated that OWLC alumni will have trained approximately 500 nurses
in state-of-the-art cancer care.
Ukraine
Olena Sichkar, Deputy Head of State Social Services for Family,
Children and Youth, met with John Picarelli, Social Science Analyst,
Member of the U.S. Government Special Policy Operating Group on
Trafficking and Carson Osberg, Case Manager, Counter-Trafficking Unit
of the International Organization for Migration (IOM). On March 18,
2010, Mrs. Sichkar's agency and the IOM signed an indefinite-term
partnership agreement. This partnership is focused on joint project
work and organizing seminars, conferences, and study programs to
prevent international human trafficking and to inform the Ukrainian
population about this serious social issue.
owlc deg.owlc's 2011 activities and plans for 2012
For 2011, OWLC continues to host in thematic areas that advance
U.S. national interests in general, and congressional interests in
particular, and that generate concrete results while strengthening the
ties between American communities and their partners abroad.
In 2011, the OWLC will host additional members of the legislative
branches of current OWLC countries--especially legislators from Central
Asia and the caucasus, based on congressional interest. In February
2011, the OWLC hosted seven groups of Russian legislators and an
additional delegation of State Duma (House) members. The following
month, we brought five groups of Ukrainian regional legislators. And in
the fall, we are bringing a dynamic group of Ukrainian women leaders
through contacts developed by Representative Marcy Kaptur. By the end
of 2011, we will have brought more than 100 regional and Federal
legislators from Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Russia, and
Ukraine.
OWLC is becoming an increasingly recognized resource for American
citizens engaged in citizen diplomacy. Earlier this month, former
Congressman James Symington worked with OWLC alumni to organize an art
exhibit in Moscow focused on Abraham Lincoln and the Czar Liberator,
Alexander II. Congressman James Moran hosted an art exhibit in the
Rayburn House Office Building featuring artworks by Russian orphans in
collaboration with civil society leaders based in his Congressional
District who approached OWLC for guidance. Up to 60 United States
university student body presidents will have visited Russia by December
2011 in a Russian Government sponsored exchange program that is both
informed and inspired by the OWLC model. Senate Majority Leader Harry
Reid, Senator Roger Wicker, Senator Bill Nelson, and Senator Bernie
Sanders were some of the Members of Congress who nominated student body
presidents for this exchange.
OWLC, through private funding, will continue to develop its more
than 16,500-person alumni network by holding forums and workshops and
making use of contemporary technology provided by such services as
Skype and social networking sites in the official languages of OWLC
countries. This alumni network plays a major role in maintaining
program momentum and vibrancy by helping to identify new emerging
leaders who might participate in OWLC. Alumni are also central to
furthering projects and partnerships that demand regular and effective
communication. One very important group that exemplifies this trait is
the 100-strong participants of the OWLC nonproliferation program from
the last 2 years who will be convening in May. The communications
technology that OWLC has set up enables these relationships to thrive
in a cost-effective manner during these times of budgetary constraints.
CONCLUSION
OWLC offers an extraordinary ``bang for the buck'' in terms of
efficiency, cost-effectiveness, value, and an investment in the future
U.S. relations with the countries where the program operates. OWLC
boasts an overhead rate of about 7 percent, every grant contains cost-
shared elements, and more than 75 percent of our appropriation is
plowed back into the American economy every year.
In the future, there will be in-depth program changes that will
increase congressional involvement in OWLC and will increase support to
the constituent hosts who have established programs and partnerships in
OWLC countries. With funding at the requested level of $12.6 million,
Americans in hundreds of Congressional Districts throughout the United
States will engage up-and-coming Eurasian political and civic leaders--
such as parliamentarians, environmentalists, and anti-human trafficking
activists--in projects and ongoing partnerships. Americans will, once
again, open their doors and give generously to help sustain this
successful congressional program that focuses on a region of profound
interest to U.S. foreign policy. To that end, the subcommittee's
interest and support have been essential ingredients in OWLC's success.
LOC deg.IMPACT OF FISCAL YEAR 2011 CONTINUING RESOLUTION
Senator Nelson. Thank you.
The first question that I'd like to ask is regarding the
impact of funding the ongoing resolution at the fiscal year
2010 enacted level.
I think that it's important to point out that every agency
of Government is going to be faced with the problem of how to
continue to operate during the next 6 months. If we're able to
get a continuing resolution for even that period of time in the
next few days, what will the impact be for cuts along the way?
In your testimony, Dr. Billington, you alluded to the
implications. But could you give us a little bit more on the
specific impact of how mid-term cuts affect the operations of
LOC?
Of course, it's dependent of how much the cut is, but what
would the implication be?
Dr. Billington. For the remainder of this current year?
Senator Nelson. Yes, for the current year, and then we'll
talk about next year, fiscal year 2012.
Dr. Billington. Well, I'm not sure what the exact number
would be. We calculated what it would be if it were sustained
through the following year as well. But, the impact would be
substantial because, as I pointed out, we are doing much more
with much less.
There are really only two areas where we could, or we can
make significant cuts, in an institution where 70 percent of
all of our major areas of appropriation are in personnel. All
of the program areas--I could go over them with you--are unique
and it would not be likely, and probably almost impossible, for
anybody else to replicate these programs if we were to stop
doing them. So, we might have to make some cuts in programs.
I don't know if it would be in the remaining months of this
fiscal year, but it wouldn't be very far after that that we'd
have to consider scaling services back. You can't really cut
these programs very heavily, without experiencing some damage
since we've been basically operating with almost no increase
for the last 4 years, only a 2 percent programmatic increase.
So, we would have to start examining which of these programs we
would do away with or significantly reduce. I have examined
three of the larger appropriations and am aware of how
difficult this would be.
Maybe Mr. Dizard, who's been occupied with this in a little
more detail would like to comment.
Mr. Dizard. Sure, I can do that. I'd be happy to.
Mr. Chairman, for this fiscal year, if you get into a 3
percent range, then we're talking probably hiring freezes, as
well as reducing our contracts for equipment, custodial
service, some of our IT planned investments, and security
equipment. And we would probably be looking at 3 or 4 days of
furloughs across LOC. And as you get beyond that, if you wanted
to go into 5 percent cuts, as Dr. Billington mentioned, in 6
months, with very limited ability to deal with personnel, our
recourse would be just to increase the amount of furloughs as
we reach towards October 1--if we're just talking this fiscal
year.
LOC deg.PERMANENT DAMAGE OF REDUCING ACQUISITIONS
Senator Nelson. Dr. Billington, you mentioned that if you
have subscriptions and you stop them for 1 year, it's not as
though you lost 12 volumes, or, 12 issues, but it's an even
bigger impact than that.
Dr. Billington. Yes. The fundamental core things that LOC
has to do are to acquire, preserve, and make accessible the
world's knowledge and America's creativity.
The price of all of these things tend to go up and up. We
keep reviewing our policies in all of these areas. But if
you're going to have the kind of universal collection that we
have historically acquired, beginning with Jefferson's old
library, which was in 16 languages--and now we've collected in
470 languages; if you're going to continue that, you simply
can't miss a year, because then you have to acquire double the
amount the following year. And besides, what you miss will
probably not be attainable, except in the year in which it is
published.
We purchase about 1 million items a year, and more than
twice that amount comes to LOC through gift exchange, copyright
deposit, cataloging in publication, and other sources. We
receive about 22,000 items a day, of which we only keep 10,000.
But, if you stop a year's subscription of a crucial scientific
or important magazine--and, you know, it's hard to know what's
going to be the most important--if you stop it, you aren't
diminishing the value of it by just one hundredth. You're
diminishing it about in half--particularly in areas that serve
the fast-moving needs of the Congress and of the Government.
And so, you can't ever make up a lost period. You have to
either sustain the acquisition process, or change the nature of
your mission.
And preserving that mission is also affected in large part
by the personnel ceiling. Collecting requires this degree of
universality. The collections are an enormous asset. We call it
the strategic information reserve of the United States. And the
differential between what LOC collects and makes accessible,
and what other research libraries in America do, is increasing,
because the strain on public libraries and university-based
libraries is very great, even on other national libraries.
So, the uniqueness of LOC's collections and making them
more accessible, more useful to the Congress and our country
are of paramount importance in an age when balance of trade and
the economic productivity depends more and more on knowledge of
what's going on all over the world.
You can't let the collections go for a year without
producing an irreversible slippage and decline into becoming
more a museum of the book than a dynamic of a creative culture
that has invented most of our current information technology
and has the most envied higher research capabilities in the
world. Physical preservation is another thing. We're a throw-
away society. We don't realize that almost every medium on
which knowledge and creativity is recorded, is highly
perishable.
LOC deg.BROAD SCOPE OF THE LOC MISSION
So, all of that is the essential mission that we have to
perform, not for LOC, but for the United States of America. And
if it can't be sustained, that represents a fundamental mission
failure, and puts a greater limitation on the way America will
be able to answer--and the Congress in particular--with firm,
objective, factually based knowledge and information and
analysis of what is going on in the world, and even within our
own country.
So, I think it's expensive, but it is something that is
unique in human history. It's a great American accomplishment.
I think, Mr. Chairman, I'm the only person who, when he
signs for an acquisition for LOC, I don't sign for LOC. I sign
for the United States of America. And the idea that legislation
has to be based on knowledge that goes right back to the nature
of the Founding Fathers, and putting this whole experiment in
democracy and the creative society together.
LOC deg.IMPACT OF PERSONNEL CUTS
So, it's really kind of a noble mission. And then we get
into the question of cuts, major cuts, and then you're talking
personnel. And when we're talking personnel, you're dealing
with a wide variety of talents--a diversity of backgrounds,
talents. Very much of what LOC staff does is one-of-a-kind work
that really isn't being done anywhere else to the same degree.
So, it's a very difficult thing to avoid. But once you cut
back into the bone of the mission programs--that's what we're
talking about, that's where all the appropriated money,
practically all of it goes--then you're cutting back, on our
fundamental mission.
One of my instructions consistently has been--and I have
great consensus among all our top managers on this--that LOC
shouldn't do anything that anybody else is doing as well or
better. But we have to do things that represent the public good
and address the objective needs of the United States. So, if we
stop doing something or severely curtail it to make
significant, major reductions, we will jeopardize, really, our
fundamental mission. We're now integrating more of the digital
collections so that we're able to knowledge-navigate and
provide access to an expanded range of knowledge in the digital
world, as well as the analog.
If you get into the area of cutting personnel, we have very
little flexibility to deal with this. For instance, our average
term of service for personnel is 16 years. The average age of
personnel is 49. So, we have a lot of expert knowledge banked
at LOC. We're starting a mentoring program so that they can
pass their one-of-a-kind knowledge on to successors.
A lot of the people who are keeping us at the forefront of
the digital revolution are young and recent hires. So, the
point is, if you start cutting into the personnel, which is the
bulk of our budget, you are going to lose people prematurely,
on whom we're in many cases the most dependent.
LOC deg.LIMITED FLEXIBILITY TO ABSORB CUTS
I think if you put it to our staff, they understand the
budgetary pressures. But I cannot suggest to the staff that we
all take a salary cut, for instance, everybody take a little
percentage to absorb it equitably, because there are legal
requirements that prevent me from doing that. So, there's very
little managerial flexibility.
We would probably be talking, in terms of cuts, about
furloughs. But even that gets to be a serious and difficult
thing to manage. So, we don't really have the kind of
flexibility to absorb substantial reductions and sustain the
mission in a dynamic, changing world.
I don't think our mission calls for infinite, continued
expansion. We've only been asking for a little, about a 2
percent annual increase over the last 4 years for anything
other than inflation, in anticipation that there was going to
be a need for constrained budgets. We have a whole new
management agenda which is calling for greater synergies, much
more coming together, regulating IT investment--there's a
special committee for that, and there's another special
committee that Mr. Dizard is chairing, to bring the digital
people together with the analog people, with the traditional
books and materials.
This is a pioneering institution that has already
demonstrated that we can do more with less, that is getting
very deep into the muscle, and we risk getting down to the
bone.
Senator Nelson. Well, clearly, cutting mid-term has
ramifications that could be draconian.
LOC deg.MINIMAL INCREASE IN FISCAL 2012 REQUEST
Now, in looking at fiscal year 2012, which provides for
minimal growth. Is there a way that some of LOC's priorities
that are already being deferred, as a result of the need to
tighten our belts, can continue to be deferred in an effort to
help us reduce the budgetary request for that fiscal year?
Dr. Billington. Well, maybe.
Senator Nelson. I'm sorry, if I am not being clear in what
I'm trying to find?
Dr. Billington. Yes.
Senator Nelson. You must have deferred something to hold
the budget down to the level that you have.
Dr. Billington. Right.
Senator Nelson. Is it possible that there are some other
things that could be held back, pushed into the future, to
address a lower request for 2012?
Mr. Dizard. We went through the process for fiscal year
2012, and as you recognized, there were many things that were
deferred that we did not ask for. We did feel we needed to
highlight the need for additional expertise in CRS and our IT
security needs.
I think, as Dr. Billington mentioned, and I mentioned
before, our options really are going to be to limit hiring,
next year. That has to be our first option.
If we start to get into decreasing our acquisitions,
tightening our collections policies or restricting them, then
we are changing the fundamental nature of the institution.
The other area where, that's nonpersonnel, that's of
significance, is preservation. And, if you delay there, you're
having an impact way into the future as well.
So, I think we generally would restrict some of our
contracting. But the immediate recourse would probably have to
be shrinking staff, and not hiring, and reducing staff through
attrition, or even considering early outs or buy-outs, or the
like. I think that's where we would have to go initially.
LOC deg.OPPORTUNITIES TO DEFER REQUIREMENTS
Dr. Billington. We have, in fact, Mr. Chairman, for
instance, deferred one very significant need. We're 9 years
behind in the schedule for storage modules at Fort Meade for
this immense collection that we're custodians of. Items stored
at Fort Meade have a 100 percent retrieval rate. Retrieval from
the shelves is robotic, it's extremely efficient. But what we
agreed to do is to string it out so that the cost would go over
2 years, rather than the first one. And we can do some things
like that, but there are not that many, because we're operating
on four consecutive very stringent budgets, where we've
consistently been exercising this kind of restraint.
So, yes, we'll have to take a hard look at all options to
cut back in ways that don't affect programs. Both CRS and the
Copyright Office have defined missions and clientele that they
must serve. And they, like other parts of LOC, have suffered
considerable personnel losses over recent years.
LOC deg.CRS REQUEST
The one programmatic increase that we've requested for CRS
is not really an increase. It is to bring them up to where they
once were and it's to enable them to address a whole new set of
technical, scientific, and financial questions, accounting, all
manner of scientific and technical problems that are arising in
the world, to get CRS able to do what you need.
It is not really an increase in the sense that it is meant
to get to where CRS was. It's just to meet that distinct
requirement of our client, the Congress.
LOC deg.INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE INFORMATION AGE
Anyhow, we certainly want to be as cooperative as we can.
But the mission is providing essential infrastructure in the
information age to the company that generates the knowledge and
information but is not able to preserve it or make it as
accessible as it should be to as many people as it should be.
It's such an important mission for the United States, when you
consider the different audiences that depend on the services
that we provide--including the networks.
As you can see, the partnerships that we're establishing--
and we hope to establish more--depend on our leadership,
because ours is the responsibility to determine what's
important for the Nation, and then to work with others. And so,
much of what we do is shared, it is assembling and enabling
others to add to what we do, rather than try to start up and do
it all themselves.
Senator Nelson. Well, if we turn to CRS, your request for
an additional 17 FTEs, does it take 17 people to replace Dan?
Is it possible that some of that hiring could extend over a
longer period of time, or are you experiencing the same thing
that the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and Government
Accountability Office (GAO) are experiencing, and that is more
requests from the Congress for more reports? And that puts the
pressure on. We're our own worst enemy in that regard. We want
more information, but we want to pay less for it. So, I do
understand the squeeze that it creates. But is it possible to
extend that hiring over a longer period of time, or with
attrition?
What I'm looking for is some way, not with the current
resolution, but with fiscal year 2012, to reduce some of the
expenses that are projected and put them into next year's
budget. As you said, you've been through 4 very tight years
budget-wise, and so it's not as easy as it may seem, but we are
going to be under an awful lot of pressure to hold the line in
the legislative branch, and so I'm looking for help.
Dr. Billington. Well, I would stress that this was very
carefully reviewed by the entire executive committee. But I
think we ought to let----
Senator Nelson. Sure.
Dr. Billington [continuing].--Mr. Mulhollan speak to this.
But let me just stress that this was the only, real
programmatic increase.
Senator Nelson. I know.
Dr. Billington. The cybersecurity request was virtually a
mandate, to cover the communications and so forth. But this is
something that was very carefully weighed by the executive
committee. It's his baby, so let him speak.
Mr. Mulhollan. Yes. My baby.
LOC deg.SPECIFICS OF CRS REQUEST
Actually, this is a stretched out request. Because we asked
for 34 FTE over 2 years. The subcommittee said it was not able
to fund additional FTE in fiscal year 2011 due to budgetary
constraints. We asked for 17 last fiscal year, and 17 for this
fiscal year. The reason is, back in 2008 we were at 705 FTEs.
We're now at 675 and we're going down.
Both our sister agencies, the CBO and GAO, they're facing
the same problem, because you're facing the same problem. It's
probably trite to say, but after 40 years of looking at it, I
honestly believe the problems are inherently more complex. You
can't raise an issue without international, constitutional,
environmental, as well as economic impacts, so in this global
economy you're looking at the end of a period where issues
heretofore could have been more confined. Dodd-Frank is an
incredible example of how trying to get our financial house in
order has impacts in Europe, Canada, and elsewhere, as well as
Asia. That's why, for instance, in the financial accounting and
auditing capacity, we found ourselves wanting.
We do our best to present to you a faculty of expertise.
For instance, on carbon capture and sequestration, we have a
geological engineering capacity to take a look at that,
independent of any advocacy, so you can trust the assessment.
And our statute calls for anticipating the consequences of
alternative provisions. So, it is our best judgment in asking
for these positions--these are competencies we're not going to
just need now, but for the next decade. And this was a lot of
work.
Certainly, if we extend it for 2 years we can extend it for
4 years. My only cry of the heart, is that these problems don't
wait. In the last months we've had to call upon, again,
geologists for earthquake issues--what are the earthquake
predictions in the United States? We've had to look at the
question of nuclear safety. We just have a report out on
nuclear safety and the vulnerabilities across the United States
on earthquakes.
We have looked at the history of no-fly zones in Bosnia and
Iraq--what are the consequences internationally? What are the
costs? We have an excellent piece out on the Odyssey Dawn. We
are the only institution I think that has the institutional
memory of war power resolution and Presidential compliance.
That capacity that you have invested in at CRS, to be
perfectly frank, is even more important when you're reducing
Senate staff and appropriation staff, because since 1970 CRS
has been a shared pool of expertise. That was the notion. You
can be more cost effective having an expert available to one
side of the aisle and the other side of the aisle, and to both
Chambers. And I think that's proven to be the case. But we
could draw that out further, yes, Sir.
Senator Nelson. Thank you.
LOC deg.BROAD PERSPECTIVE OF MULTIPLE DISCIPLINES
Dr. Billington. I'd like to add one other thing that I
think that they've done that's quite extraordinary. Speaking
from a background as a one-time university professor and
veteran of a number of faculty discussions, it's very difficult
in highly compartmentalized, discipline-oriented universities
to get the perspectives of different disciplines focused on a
problem. And I think the organization of CRS, which gets teams
working in response to the problem, and getting different
perspectives is the only way to go, because we're learning more
and more, as you see, now events, for instance, in the Middle
East, where the events have all kinds of aspects that are very
different from just economics, or just politics, or just
military. There are tumultuous changes and things going on. And
you're better able to deal with them if you have people in
different disciplines working together to answer whatever the
question is that is on the Congress' mind.
So, I think that getting these specialized personnel is not
just so that you get a little more exotic detail. It's a
question of getting different--something which does not happen
enough in our society--getting different disciplines and
different approaches to talk to each other, to answer a
question that is right on your mind in the Congress.
Senator Nelson. Thank you.
OWLC deg.OPEN WORLD STRATEGIC PLAN OBJECTIVES AND COSTS
Ambassador O'Keefe, I noticed in seeking a $600,000
increase for fiscal year 2012, it would be to initiate an
expansion into Armenia, Belarus, and Uzbekistan. Can you give
us some idea of what, how that $600,000 would be used
specifically? Will there be any kind of actual exchanges with
these countries in fiscal year 2012, or will this be simply the
start-up cost to set up an exchange at some point in the
future?
Ambassador O'Keefe. Sir, this is all going into exchanges.
We already have the backbone and infrastructure, and I've
discussed this with the charge d'affaires in Uzbekistan, which
I think is the most important of the three countries, and also
with Ambassador Yovanovitch in Armenia.
So, if we were to begin the programs, the costs would be
about what we have per participant. There are no real start-up
costs.
Also, for a place like Armenia and Belarus, we might be
able to actually have a lower cost, since we would have Embassy
personnel do more of the work as their cost share. We're
starting with that model. It gives us more bang for the buck.
OWLC deg.RAMIFICATIONS OF FUNDING AT FISCAL YEAR 2010 LEVEL
Senator Nelson. As we all are aware of the fiscal
constrains, if additional funding isn't provided and if you're
funded at the fiscal year 2010 enacted level, what would it
take within your budget to absorb that kind of a budget cut?
Ambassador O'Keefe. Yes, Sir. We've looked at that, and,
just as a first principle, we want to preserve the momentum of
the numbers of people coming. It makes a big difference for
alumni networks, for qualify of nominations and, frankly,
quality of programming.
Also, by preserving those numbers we don't reduce the
grants to the communities, and these are community colleges,
service clubs, rotaries, and lots of different community
organizations. We did 700 communities last year.
So, our going, in principle, is not to diminish that, and
if we do so then, as a last resort. So, it means that you give
up somewhat on quality in terms of oversight. We do like to be
able to monitor a certain number of programs per year--
especially programs where we get the reports that they're not
as good as the other ones. And you do that by actually
observing how it's done. We give up a little bit of quality on
that.
The other approach, and the one that we would take, is we'd
have to look at our staffing, and we'd have to look at travel
and other things. At the end of the day, if we can't absorb
rising costs of transportation, hotels and other things, we
would reduce numbers. That's a last resort.
OWLC deg.IN-KIND GIVING AND SUPPORT
Senator Nelson. You've done an outstanding job in
leveraging nonappropriated funds over the last several years. I
think it's $1.7 million in donated goods and services from
hosts and grantees in 2009, and as your testimony indicates
that this level is estimated to be even higher in 2010, at $1.9
million.
Has the sluggish economy hampered your efforts to leverage
more nonappropriated funds, or are you able to continue to do
just about what you would expect to do?
Ambassador O'Keefe. It's odd. I think we must be counter-
cyclical, because we still have this great demand from
communities to host about twice what we can sustain. And they
continue to be generous, even in these difficult circumstances.
So, I am so impressed by the dedication of the communities that
are welcoming all of the delegates, and their willingness to
continue to do the home hosting, to pick up the meals, and
other things.
Senator Nelson. Do you see the opportunity, then to be able
to continue to grow at the same level that you've enjoyed in
the last couple of years?
Ambassador O'Keefe. I think that there's, frankly, an
absorptive capacity. And so, I think that number may remain the
same.
What we are looking at now is partnering with other
organizations that would put up the money for airfare, putting
up the money for, perhaps, part of the programming in the
United States. Organizations that already bring people to the
United States. And then, for about one-third of the cost that
we ordinarily would have, take their delegates and give them a
4- or 5-day OWLC experience.
Senator Nelson. If we increased those efforts, would it
help you make up that $600,000 difference?
Ambassador O'Keefe. I hope so. But I can't guarantee
anything, Senator.
Senator Nelson. I appreciate that.
Well, I've asked a number of questions. Is there any
question that I haven't asked that I should have?
Well, if not, I appreciate very much your candor.
Obviously, we're in this together. We want to find a way to
make it work for, as Dr. Billington says, the United States of
America. It's about more than just us. It's about our country.
And we understand the importance of LOC as a part of this
overall institution we call our country.
Thank you so very, very much for being here. We hear what
you're saying. We clearly empathize with it. We understand what
the consequences are if cuts are not made in an appropriate and
responsive way.
One thing that I've found not just in this position, but
also as Governor is that the more I knew about a program, the
harder it was to cut.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
Senator Nelson. So, you have given me a lot of information
to make it even harder to think about cutting.
Thank you very much.
Dr. Billington. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very, very much.
We're willing to work with you on these difficult problems.
Thank you so much.
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
were submitted to the agencies for response subsequent to the
hearing:]
Questions Submitted to Dr. James H. Billington
Questions Submitted by Senator John Hoeven
loc deg.IMPACT OF REDUCED FUNDING
Question. The Library of Congress's (LOC) fiscal year 2012
appropriations request is $666.7 million, an increase of $23.4 million,
or 3.6 percent, more than the fiscal year 2010 enacted level.
Unfortunately for all of us, the Congress is still negotiating the end
game for the fiscal year 2011 budget, and as you are well aware we are
contemplating how much to reduce your funding from the current level,
not how much to increase it. Please provide the subcommittee with the
impact of a 5 percent and a 10 percent reduction to LOC's total 2010
appropriation.
Answer. A 5 percent reduction to the fiscal 2010 base appropriation
level--a fiscal 2011 funding level of $650.1 million--would require
that LOC freeze hiring, freeze travel and training, substantially
reduce all contracts, grants, and general purchases, and implement a
staff furlough of 11 days. Fiscal year 2011 funding level at 10 percent
below the fiscal 2010 budget--or $613.5 million--would require all of
those cuts plus an additional 11-day staff furlough (total furlough of
22 days).
loc deg.FORT MEADE MODULE 5
Dr. Billington, you mentioned that one of the top-priority projects
for LOC in fiscal year 2012 is $8.88 million for Collection Storage
Module 5 (phase I of II) at Fort Meade, to expand the storage capacity
for LOC's collections. I note that LOC's request of $666.7 million,
which is an increase of $23.4 million, or 3.6 percent, more than the
fiscal year 2010 enacted level and the fiscal year 2011 current funding
level, does not include the $67.9 million requested in the Architect of
the Capitol's (AOC) budget for the ``Library Buildings and Grounds''
account. The subcommittee is not in a position this year to be able to
fully fund all of these increases, and we must balance LOC's requests
with AOC's requests and each of the other agencies funded in the
legislative branch bill.
Question. In order to fund the $8.88 million for Collection Storage
Module 5 at Fort Meade, would LOC be willing to forgo other increases
in its fiscal year 2012 budget request (not AOC's requests) to offset
the cost of the storage module?
Answer. LOC focused its priorities and limited the fiscal 2012
budget request to the most critical and timely needs. Aside from
mandatory pay and price-level adjustments, LOC's 3.6 percent increase
represented funding requests for a mandatory information technology
(IT) security initiative and for expanded research expertise that would
enable the Congressional Research Service to better respond to the
research and analysis needs of the Congress.
The $8.88 million request to fund the Collection Storage Module 5
at Fort Meade was included in AOC's budget. LOC partnered with AOC to
both prioritize the projects and initiatives that were included in
AOC's budget and to formulate a phased approach to funding the
Collection Storage Module 5 project so as make this major capital
investment as economically viable as possible for the legislative
branch budget.
Given the careful deliberations LOC went through to formulate the
fiscal year 2012 budget request, LOC is not in a position to forego
other requested increases to fund the $8.88 million for Collection
Storage Module 5. However, LOC is committed to working with the
subcommittee to determine the most-efficient approach to fund critical
needs, just as we worked diligently with your subcommittee staff to
assess priorities and evaluate trade-offs in this year's (fiscal year
2011) budget process.
Question. What exactly will the $8.88 million provide with regard
to Collection Storage Module 5? Will all of this funding be obligated
in fiscal year 2012?
Answer. The benefit of the two-phased construction approach is to
distribute the total cost of construction over 2 fiscal years, and to
allow for the construction of a complete and usable facility, following
each phase. This approach also allows for the funding to be provided in
consecutive fiscal years, which would provide for the completion of the
final project phase, without delay or interruption.
Under the two-phased construction approach, the $8.88 million
investment of phase I would complete all site infrastructure, building
structure, overhead fire suppression sprinklers, lighting, and the
basic building systems of heating and ventilation. This would allow for
temporary storage of boxed or palletized library materials and
unprocessed collections up to a height of 12 feet. The estimate for
phase I does not include the cost of high-bay shelving, pallet racking,
or climate control for the preservation-quality environment needed for
permanent collections storage. It is estimated the construction period
would be 2 years.
Question. For phase I of II, $8,89 million is requested--do you
know yet how much funding will be required to complete phase II?
Answer. Approximately 90 percent of the funding requested for phase
I would be obligated in fiscal year 2012. The remainder would be
utilized in fiscal year 2013 to accommodate construction contingency,
construction administration, and related testing and commissioning
activity.
AOC cost estimate for phase II is $9.58 million. This investment
includes customized high-bay collection storage shelving up to 32 feet
with integrated fire suppression systems, and a specialized climate
control system for permanent collections' preservation. AOC estimates
the total project cost of Collection Storage Module 5 (phase I and II)
in the amount of $18.46 million.
loc deg.IT SECURITY FUNDING
Question. LOC is requesting $2.75 million and five additional full-
time equivalents within the Office of Strategic Initiatives to expand
LOC's information security incident handling and response function.
If the subcommittee is able to provide the requested increase of
$2.75 million, how is that funding to be allocated?
Answer. The requested $2.75 million will enhance our security
incident handling and response function. This enhancement, resulting
form discussions with the House and Senate regarding assuring
confidentiality of LOC research provided to Members, will provide
protections similar to the House and Senate.
The funding will pay for security staff, contractor support, and
security tools.
loc deg.IMPACT OF NOT FUNDING IT SECURITY
Question. If the subcommittee is unable to provide this increase,
what is the impact to LOC?
Answer. Lack of funding for this security enhancement effort will
likely result in delays in the detection of threats, and delays in the
response to security incidents, including the investigation and
remediation of cybersecurity events at LOC. This could cause
information to be compromised and pose a risk to LOC and agencies with
which LOC interacts.
loc deg.CONTENT MANAGEMENT
Question. Security of electronic information is an important part
of every Federal Government agency's daily operations--to try to
prevent, or mitigate the effects of, the accidental or purposeful
deletion or corruption of information stored electronically.
How would LOC know if any of its electronic information had been
deleted or corrupted?
Answer. Long-term storage solutions have policy settings that
include when to delete information from the systems based on events,
age, etc. At LOC the long-term storage solution preservation policies
are set to never delete. Currently, data integrity is checked when the
file is ingested and when the file is migrated to newer solutions. (LOC
migrates archive data, e.g., our digital collections, every 3-5 years
as part of ensuring the data is not stored on obsolete technology.
During this process, the data integrity is checked.)
LOC is also working on a plan to re-architect the content
management of our digital collections. This will include separate data
integrity check policies for the various collections.
loc deg.RESTORING INFORMATION
Question. Does LOC have a plan for restoring information that has
been deleted or corrupted?
Answer. LOC protects its data from loss by deletion or corruption
by making multiple copies of the data in multiple locations. Even if
information has been accidentally deleted from disk by a user or
administrator and marked as deleted, the file is not physically deleted
from the primary or secondary copy. It can be recovered. If data is
deleted or corrupted on disk it can be retrieved and restored from the
primary copy or the remote secondary copy. Business and Web data are
backed up through scheduled processes using industry standard backup
and recovery software. Partial and full backups are taken and a second
copy is written to a remote cite. This data can be recovered using the
backup and recovery software.
Long-term storage of preservation data is stored on magnetic tape.
This data is ingested to a large disk cache where it goes through a
workflow process and then is written to tape and a second copy is
written to a remote site. The data is stored in a manner that makes
recall and use of this data fairly simple.
loc deg.CONSOLIDATION OF DATA CENTER ASSETS
Question. According to a recently released GAO report entitled
``Opportunities to Reduce Potential Duplication in Government Programs,
Save Tax Dollars, and Enhance Revenue (the Duplication Report)'', ``In
recent years, as Federal agencies modernized their operations, put more
of their services online, and increased their information security
profiles, they have demanded more computing power and data storage
resources. According to OMB, the number of Federal data centers grew
from 432 in 1998 to more than 2,000 in 2010. These data centers often
house similar types of equipment and provide similar processing and
storage capabilities. These factors have led to concerns associated
with the provision of redundant capabilities, the underutilization of
resources, and the significant consumption of energy.''
In February 2010, the administration launched the Federal Data
Center Consolidation initiative and issued guidance for Federal CIO
Council agencies that called for agencies to inventory their data
center assets, develop consolidation plans throughout fiscal year 2010,
and integrate those plans into agency fiscal year 2012 budget
submissions.
Is LOC working to reduce the size of its data center footprint?
Answer. Unlike most agencies LOC is in the business of collecting
and preserving data for future generations. The amount of LOC data
grows each year as more and more collection and preservation data is
acquired and stored in LOC systems. LOC is continually planning and
reworking the layout of the Data Center to maintain or shrink the
footprint.
Wherever possible, LOC backs data up on tape rather than spinning
disk, which uses more space and power. LOC also continually migrates
data on tape to the latest (higher-density tape) technologies
available. This allows LOC to grow collection and preservation data and
maintain the same footprint in the data center.
In an effort to reduce LOC data center footprint to allow for
future data storage growth, LOC has recently implemented a
virtualization infrastructure. The key benefit of this infrastructure,
as it relates to the question, is that centralizing and reducing the
number of physical servers will reduce the required amount of power,
air conditioning, and physical space allocations. LOC is also in the
process of implementing new network switches in the primary data center
(Madison Building.). Implementing these newer technology switches will
reduce the overall number of data center switches from 10 to 2. This
will further reduce the network infrastructure footprint in the data
center.
Last, in an effort to optimize the data centers operational
capabilities, LOC recently performed a study of all four LOC data
centers. This study examined the current environment with regards to
space allocation, power consumption and cooling capabilities. This
information was used to project future space and environmental
requirements based on current growth rates.
Question. How does LOC protect and backup its electronic data?
Answer. LOC protects its data by making multiple copies of the data
in multiple locations. LOC uses different strategies according to the
needs of the different categories of information:
Business and Web Data.--Business and Web data are backed up
through scheduled processes using industry standard backup and
recovery software. Partial and full backups are taken and a
second copy is written to a remote site.
Long-term Storage of Preservation Data.--Currently, LOC takes in
approximately 120 TB of preservation data a month. This will
increase to approximately 200 TBs a month by the end of 2011.
LOC has chosen to store this data on magnetic tape. Tape is a
reliable, mature technology that has an error rate several
magnitudes smaller than disk. It also has a very dense
footprint and consumes very little power. This data is ingested
to a large disk cache where it goes through a workflow process
and then is written to tape and a second copy is written to a
remote site. The data is stored in a manner that makes recall
and use of this data fairly simple.
Disk Replication and Disaster Recovery.--To support Continuity of
Operations Planning and disaster recovery, mission-critical
application data is replicated on disk at a remote site.
Bringing these applications on line at the remote site is
performed according to a priority set by LOC leadership. For
instance, one of the higher-priority applications is the
Legislative Information Service (LIS). LIS data is replicated
remotely and in the event of a disaster, the application and
its data can be brought online within a matter of hours. This
data is also protected by complete backup as well.
Question. What is LOC doing to take advantage of newer, more
reliable, disk-based storage, and back-up technology which can drive
down costs by reducing the overall data footprint at data centers?
Answer. LOC has built into its future technology plans a technology
refresh that migrates data from older technology to newer, denser, and
power-saving technology. Over the past 5-7 years LOC has moved from
using disks that can store 100 GB of data per disk drive to storing
data on disks that can store 2 TB of data per disk drive. This is a 20-
fold increase in density for nearly the same power requirements. LOC
continues to look at new disk technologies and assess their
applicability to LOC needs.
Regarding back-up technology, LOC has adopted tape technology
wherever possible. Disks are expensive and require more power and
cooling than magnetic tapes. Magnetic tape technology provides a
denser, less power-hungry, less error-prone, and less-expensive
alternative to spinning disks. It has a known migration path and mature
methods for assuring data integrity. LOC also has an audit program to
assure quality of the media and hardware.
loc deg.COST OF PROTECTING ELECTRONIC INFORMATION
Question. What are the costs associated with protecting LOC's
electronic information? Please submit a breakdown to the subcommittee.
Answer. The initial cost associated with protecting LOC's
electronic information is $13.976 million. In addition, there is an
annually recurring cost of $5.48 million.
loc deg.CLOUD COMPUTING
Question. The Federal CIO Council recently outlined a 25-point plan
that puts in place a cloud-computing first strategy for all Federal IT.
The plan boasts that cloud IT infrastructure creates the following
benefits:
Economical.--Cloud computing is a pay-as-you-go approach to IT,
in which a low initial investment is required to begin, and
additional investment is needed only as system use increases.
Flexible.--IT departments that anticipate fluctuations in user
demand no longer need to scramble for additional hardware and
software. With cloud computing, they can add or subtract
capacity quickly and easily.
Fast.--Cloud computing eliminates long procurement and
certification processes, while providing a near-limitless
selection of services.
Does LOC currently utilize, or plan to implement, a cloud-based IT
infrastructure to operate and deliver programs to the public?
Answer. LOC is currently implementing a virtualized environment to
provide cloud-based IT infrastructure that, while currently planned for
internal use only, can be adapted to provide public service. Many of
LOC's public facing services currently run on an internal cloud-based
infrastructure using shared CPUs, memory, and storage. LOC runs two
internal hosting environments, the Application Hosting Environment
(AHE) and the Financial Hosting Environment (FHE). The FHE hosts
sensitive systems and data. Examples includes the Momentum Financial
Management System, Health Services Organization (HSO) Medical
Information Management System (MIMS--sometimes referred to as Medgate,
Medgate is the actual software name). The AHE hosts most of LOC's other
applications.
loc deg.CONSIDERED PROGRAMS FOR THE CLOUD
Question. Are there particular computer applications like email or
other programs that LOC is considering moving to the cloud?
Answer. LOC is evaluating moving the current New Visitor Experience
(NVE) and MyLOC.gov from a Hosted Environment to a Cloud Environment.
The NLS/BPH is evaluating placing their Electronic Books on a cloud
system to enhance downloading electronic books to West Coast States.
LOC is currently using the cloud to host the Global Legal
Information Network (GLIN). Moreover, the OSI Digitization Projects
System is a cloud application using an Application as a Service cloud
offering from Appian.
We will continue to monitor the Federal agency guidance being
developed by the Office of Management and Budget, National Institutes
of Standards and Technology, and General Services Administration prior
to broadly implementing any cloud computing initiatives.
loc deg.SENSITIVE DATA CONTROLS
Question. What current controls do you have in place to ensure
sensitive data is not being released to the public?
Answer. LOC's IT security policies are based on best practices,
such as the NIST standards. Moreover, LOC uses best practices for
technical controls using guides from Defense Information Systems Agency
and the Center for Internet Security to secure servers, routers,
switches, workstations, Web servers, and databases. LOC uses
certification testing to ensure that security controls are in place
before new systems go into production and continuous monitoring
techniques to ensure that new vulnerabilities are addressed in a timely
manner. As part of LOC's IT security process, information is evaluated
to determine sensitivity and the security controls are based on the
level of sensitivity. Systems with sensitive information are placed
into a separate environment with more stringent security controls.
Additionally, LOC is monitoring for unusual data traffic patterns that
would indicate sensitive data being removed inappropriately from LOC.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
Senator Nelson. This hearing is now concluded.
[Whereupon, at 3:21 p.m., Thursday, March 31, the hearing
was concluded, and the subcommittee recessed, to reconvene
subject to the call of the Chair.]
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012
----------
THURSDAY, MAY 12, 2011
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 1:30 p.m., in room SD-138, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Ben Nelson (chairman) presiding.
Present: Senators Nelson and Hoeven.
U.S. SENATE
Office of the Secretary
STATEMENT OF HON. NANCY ERICKSON, SECRETARY OF THE
SENATE
ACCOMPANIED BY:
CHRIS DOBY, FINANCIAL CLERK
SHEILA DWYER, ASSISTANT SECRETARY
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR BEN NELSON
Senator Nelson. The subcommittee will come to order. Good
afternoon, everyone, and welcome.
My colleague Senator Hoeven has an Energy Task Force
meeting at this point in time. We have a 2 o'clock vote. So,
what will happen is, I will go until 2 o'clock, then we'll
recess for however long it takes me to go and vote, and then
hopefully the Senator will be able to join us after.
We meet, this afternoon, to take testimony on the fiscal
year 2012 budget request for the Secretary of the Senate,
Senate Sergeant at Arms (SAA), and the U.S. Capitol Police
(USCP). This is our fourth and final hearing for fiscal year
2012.
I want to welcome our three witnesses today: Nancy
Erickson, Secretary of the Senate; Terrance W. Gainer, Senate
Sergeant at Arms; and Phillip D. Morse, Sr., Chief of the
Capitol Police.
I want to start, today, by acknowledging the dedication and
hard work of all of your staff. The services provided by many
of your employees are rarely seen, but are highly relied upon
for the day-to-day operation of the Senate. I know that the
Senate is a very demanding place to work often requiring long
hours, under extraordinary pressure. And we sometimes are
accused of being high maintenance. But, I want you to know that
we sincerely appreciate everyone's work, and we're grateful to
all of the men and women who keep the Senate running safely and
smoothly every day.
I'd like to reiterate a few points that were made during
our first three hearings this year. My goal, going into fiscal
year 2011, was to hold the legislative branch flat; and I'm
proud to say that, despite the challenges we face, we've
surpassed that goal by cutting just more than $100 million
below the fiscal year 2010 enacted level. Furthermore, we have
accomplished this without requiring the agencies that assist us
in our day-to-day operations to implement, ``reductions in
force''. And, as you may have heard, in fiscal year 2012 I plan
to cut even further below the fiscal year 2011 number so that
we can lead by example on this subcommittee, when it comes to
getting our fiscal house in order. Putting forth a reasonable,
responsible budget for the legislative branch in fiscal year
2012 is my number one priority.
Ms. Erickson, we are pleased to have you here this
afternoon. I look forward to hearing your testimony. For fiscal
year 2012, your office is requesting a total of $32 million,
which is the same level of funding recently provided to your
office in the fiscal year 2011 continuing resolution. I realize
this level of funding is a reflection of the transfer of a $4.2
million Senate Information System (SIS), last year, to your
office from the SAA. I look forward to hearing more about the
specifics of your budget request and receiving an update on the
progress of the new Senate payroll system.
Mr. Gainer, first, I want to commend you for your smart
thinking, earlier this year, when you hired Nancy Olkewicz.
We've all benefited from her steadfast dedication and
loyalty to the United States Senate. And we continue to get
that now, as she works with the Appropriations Committee, and
this subcommittee, in particular. I'm certain you've already
benefited tenfold from the detailed knowledge and understanding
of this institution that she has brought with her to the new
job.
We're still recovering from our loss of her here on this
subcommittee, but Lila Helms is doing an outstanding job. It
happens to be her birthday today. The SAA request for 2012
totals $219 million, an increase of $214,000 more than the
recently enacted fiscal year 2011 level. I look forward to
hearing an update on the relocation of your printing, graphics,
and direct mail shop, and any security-related updates that you
may have to share with us.
Finally, Chief Morse, your fiscal year 2012 request totals
$387.6 million, which is an increase of $47 million, or 14
percent, more than the recently enacted fiscal year 2011 level.
I also want to note that, when it came to setting the fiscal
year 2011 levels, every agency, with the exception of the USCP
and the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), took a cut in
funding. You received a $12 million increase more than the 2010
funding level. Granted, much of this increase was to annualize
the funding correction, due to a salary miscalculation at the
department in fiscal year 2010. We will need to look carefully
at this request, given just how tight budgets are going to be
in fiscal year 2012. In particular, we'll be reviewing the
seven or so new initiatives you've identified, to see where we
might be able to realize some savings. I also look forward to
receiving an update on the radio modernization project from
you, as well.
Now I'd like to begin with the witnesses. I'd appreciate if
you might be able to keep your opening remarks to about 5
minutes, and submit the rest of your statements for the record.
Ms. Erickson, we'll start with you, and then we'll hear
from Mr. Gainer, and then Chief Morse.
SUMMARY STATEMENT OF NANCY ERICKSON
Ms. Erickson. Chairman Nelson, I appreciate this
opportunity to provide testimony on behalf of the Office of the
Secretary and its employees. I'm joined today by Sheila Dwyer,
the Assistant Secretary, and Chris Doby, our Financial Clerk,
who provides the steady hand in overseeing the Senate
Disbursing Office.
Since 1789, the Secretary of the Senate has been tasked
with legislative, financial, and administrative
responsibilities to support the Senate. I was reminded of our
office's historic role in supporting the Senate during new
Member orientation, when I had the opportunity to accompany our
new Senators and their spouses to the National Archives
legislative vault, where some of the Senate's earliest records
are stored. We looked, in awe, at the very first Senate
journal, and noted the Secretary's constitutional
responsibility in documenting the Senate's very first day of
business on March 4, 1789. Admiring the first Secretary of the
Senate's beautiful handwriting, I must say that I'm grateful
that this constitutional responsibility is carried out by our
Senate Journal Clerks who can rely on laptops to compile the
Senate Journal.
This year, I'm requesting $31,990,000 to support the
operations of the Office of the Secretary. This includes
$25,790,000 for salaries, $2 million for operations, and $4.2
million for the SIS program.
I'd like to highlight three points. First, the budget
request includes no increase for salaries or operations.
Second, the operating budget for the administration of the SIS
program, operations of which were assumed by this office last
year, is also unchanged. Finally, I would be remiss if I did
not point out that our 2012 budget request for operations is
the same as our 2008 appropriation.
Getting to this number has required careful assessments of
not only how we use our financial resources, but also how we
efficiently and effectively deploy our human resources. I'm
very proud of our 26 department managers and our accounts
administrator, who have been careful stewards of our resources,
and who have committed themselves to rethinking how we work,
with the goal of continuing superior service to the Senate.
Compared to the budgets of our legislative branch partners,
the Office of the Secretary's budget is small. However, we're
fortunate that we're structured in a way that allows our office
to operate efficiently. One example of this is our relationship
with the Senate SAA in the area of information technology (IT).
We rely on the SAA for our IT support requirements, ranging
from the technical support for our payroll and financial
systems to our enormous databases in the Office of Public
Records, which includes Senate campaign reports, financial
disclosure filings, travel reports, as well as registrant and
lobbyist filings under the Lobbying Disclosure Act, as amended.
We appreciate this relationship and underscore the importance
of these systems in carrying out our congressional mandates.
As you know, the SIS program was established by regulation
by the Rules Committee in 1987 to provide all Senate offices
access to online research services. During the past year, we
focused our efforts on cost containment and gathered feedback
from Senate staff on their research needs and the tools they
use. On the cost-containment front, as a result of contract
negotiations led by the Senate Librarian and procurement staff,
SIS program costs in 2011 were held to 2010 levels. The
successful negotiations, however, do not guarantee that there
will not be future price increases and, potentially, hard
decisions about what SIS services are added.
Based on feedback from Senate staff, it's clear that online
research plays a critical role in the daily work of the Senate.
These resources are focused on real-time news, legislative,
legal, and policy resources that are valued by staff. The
online research industry is rapidly changing. And as we move
forward in managing the SIS program, we will be vigilant in
pursuing opportunities to maximize the Senate's investment
while being mindful of costs.
With respect to our financial responsibilities, the
Disbursing Office, in tandem with SAA technical support,
researched and procured a vendor to implement a new payroll
system that met the Senate's unique requirements. We have a
rigorous schedule to ensure a smooth implementation, including
parallel testing with our current system before it's launched
early next year. The next phase of the payroll project will
include self-service options for employees.
[The information follows:]
As I mentioned in my testimony, the new payroll system will be
implemented in three phases. Phase I will replace existing
functionality. Phase II of the project will involve the implementation
of self-service functions for employees, such as change-of-address
requests, revising withholding amounts, and, eventually, making changes
in benefit selections, and will allow for electronic payroll
information notices to be sent, replacing the paper notices that
employees now receive. Phase III, which is not yet funded, is the
rollout of the new personnel system for Senate offices. When all three
phases are implemented, we envision that offices will be able, pending
approval of a digital signature format by the Committee on Rules and
Administration, to submit payroll changes electronically.
Ms. Erickson. As we've worked on the implementation of this
enormous and complex payroll project, I'm reminded of a simpler
time, when Senators and staff were paid with crisp $20 bills at
the front counter of the Disbursing Office, a Senate practice
until 1972.
Our Disbursing Office and Senate Webmaster, in coordination
with the Government Printing Office, are implementing a
statutory requirement that the report of the Secretary be
publicly posted on the Internet. The first posting of this
report will occur at the end of November 2011 and will be
available from a link on senate.gov in a PDF format.
We will continue work on the paperless voucher initiative
to reduce paper, streamline the voucher process, and for
continuity-of-operation purposes. In the meantime, I'm pleased
to report that paper vouchers were processed 10 percent faster
than the previous year, which is good news for your office
managers and your State vendors.
Following past practice, I asked the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) to audit the accounting books and
inventory processes in our stationery room and gift shop. And
I'm pleased to report that we received a positive audit with
valuable feedback. In fact, the GAO singled out our inventory
processes and warehouse operations as a model for other similar
Government entities.
PREPARED STATEMENT
I felt fortunate to be on the Senate floor to hear many of
the farewell remarks of departing Senators this past December.
And I was struck by a recurring theme in their recognition of
the staff who work behind the scenes to support the Senate. Our
staff, who have legislative, financial, and administrative
responsibilities, take great pride in their historic role in
serving the United States Senate, and we appreciate your
subcommittee's recognition and support of their important work.
Thank you.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Nancy Erickson
Mr. Chairman, Senator Hoeven, and members of the subcommittee,
thank you for your invitation to present testimony in support of the
budget request of the Office of the Secretary of the Senate for fiscal
year 2012.
It is a pleasure to have this opportunity to draw attention to the
accomplishments of the dedicated and outstanding employees of the
Office of the Secretary. The annual reports which follow provide
detailed information about the work of each department of the office,
their recent achievements, and their plans for the upcoming fiscal
year.
My statement includes:
--presenting the fiscal year 2012 budget request;
--implementing mandated systems--Financial Management Information
System (FMIS) and Legislative Information System (LIS);
--Continuity of Operations Planning (COOP); and
--maintaining and improving current and historic legislative,
financial, and administrative services.
sos deg.PRESENTING THE FISCAL YEAR 2012 BUDGET REQUEST
I am requesting a total fiscal year 2012 budget of $31,990,000. The
request includes $25,790,000 in salary costs and $6.2 million for the
operating budget of the Office of the Secretary. This request has been
kept at fiscal year 2011 levels and represents a flat budget. No
increase has been requested for salaries or operating expenses. In
addition, the operating budget for the administration of Senate
Information Services (SIS) program that was assumed by this office last
year has not been increased.
My total budget request for fiscal year 2012 is the same as last
year. The balance of our request is consistent with the amounts
requested and received in 2011 through the legislative branch
appropriations process.
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY APPORTIONMENT SCHEDULE
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount Budget
available estimates
Items fiscal year fiscal year Difference
2011 (pending) 2012
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Departmental operating budget:
Executive office............................................ 550 550 ..............
Administrative services..................................... 5,590 5,590 ..............
Legislative services........................................ 60 60 ..............
-----------------------------------------------
Total operating budget.................................... 6,200 6,200 ..............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
sos deg.IMPLEMENTING MANDATED SYSTEMS
Two systems critical to our operation are mandated by law, and I
would like to spend a few moments on each to highlight recent progress,
and to thank the subcommittee for your ongoing support of both.
FMIS
The FMIS is used by approximately 140 Senate offices. Consistent
with our strategic plan, the Disbursing Office continues to modernize
processes and applications to meet the continued demand by Senate
offices for efficiency, accountability, and ease of use. Our goals are
to move to an integrated, paperless voucher system, improve the WebFMIS
system, and make payroll and accounting system improvements.
During fiscal year 2010 and the beginning of fiscal year 2011,
specific progress made on the FMIS project included:
--WebFMIS was upgraded three times this year: in January 2010, August
2010, and November 2010. This system is used by administrative
managers, committee clerks, staff in the Sergeant at Arms
Office (SAA), and the Secretary's office to create vouchers and
manage their office funds, by the Disbursing Office to review
vouchers and by the Committee on Rules and Administration to
sanction vouchers. Additionally, it is used by staff who incur
official expenses, primarily staff who travel, to prepare their
Expense Summary Reports (ESRs). The releases provided both
technical and functional changes.
--FMIS 2010-1 was implemented in January 2010. This release
included a small number of enhancements for WebFMIS users
including an automated password reset feature, a warning to
the ESRs user when their document violates the 60-day
election rule limitations, adding graphs to the WebFMIS
summary reports, and implementing a pilot of electronic
invoice (EI) functionality, which allows a user to easily
create credit card reimbursement vouchers based on invoices
received electronically from the Senate's credit card
vendor. A pilot of the EI functionality began in January
and was offered to all offices in June 2010. By the end of
2010, 33 offices were using the EI functionality.
--FMIS 2010-2 was implemented in August 2010. This release included
a small number of enhancements for ESR users, but was
focused on implementing new functionality for the SAA
accounts payable (A/P) process. Processes were simplified
by automated retrieval of data from existing purchase
orders. An application, WebPICS provides pop-up windows
where users enter the required data which the system uses
to retrieve information from the purchase order. The users
verifies retrieved data and adds information necessary to
complete the process to create receiving reports, invoices,
and vouchers for payments against purchase orders.
--FMIS 2011-1 was implemented in November 2010 and included two new
fields (invoice date and invoice receipt date) on the
WebFMIS document create page and the document search
criteria page for all users; it gives SAA users the ability
to search by project code and job code using the document
search criteria page and users using the EI functionality,
the ability to search by traveler's name. A new version of
the ESR, ``Line Item Entry'' was also introduced to a pilot
group. This enables users to select from 1 of 3 travel
types of the ESR; single trip, multiple trips, or
interdepartmental travel, requiring different types of
information based on the type selected. It is anticipated
that this new version of the ESR will reduce rekeying by
staff and reduce the corrections to itineraries made by
administrative mangers, chief clerks and Disbursing's A/P
staff. A pilot of 10 offices and committees began in
November 2010. This version was given to all new Senators
of the 112th Congress.
--The computing infrastructure for FMIS is provided by the SAA. Each
year the SAA staff upgrades the infrastructure hardware and
software. During 2010 the SAA implemented two major upgrades to
the FMIS infrastructure. These included upgrading the database,
DB2, to version 9 in a two-step process, and upgrading the
mainframe operating system to version 1, release 11.
--During 2008 Disbursing implemented a prototype imaging system in
which paper vouchers and supporting documentation were imaged
by Disbursing staff and routed electronically. The hands-on
experience of this prototype was especially useful in refining
system requirements. In 2009 and completed in 2010, the
software for the image database and image viewer was selected,
and imaging and electronic signature requirements were
finalized. This information was coordinated with a separate SAA
smart card ID project to be utilized for electronic signatures.
In October 2010, a task order for adding document imaging and
electronic signatures to WebFMIS was signed. This task order
outlines work to be completed in 2010 through the spring of
2013.
--Finalized the selection of the PeopleSoft payroll system integrator
through a competitive bid process, signed the contract and
started with the fit gap sessions for the implementation of the
new system.
--Implemented State tax remittances via direct deposit for six
additional States and updated our access to the Federal Reserve
Bank (FRB) due to a change in FRB-supplied equipment.
During the remainder of fiscal year 2011 the following FMIS
activities are anticipated:
--Implementing WebPICS release for phase III which will focus on SAA
purchase order creation and approval;
--Coordinating with SAA the timeframes for the implementation of the
smart card ID project for electronic signatures;
--Implementing on-line distribution of monthly ledger reports using
Reveal via WebFMIS;
--Implementing Automated Clearing House (ACH) payment for the 16
remaining State taxes jurisdictions which require a programming
change;
--Participating in the yearly disaster recovery test; and
--Implementing FMIS release 2011-2 during the spring 2011. This
release is expected to allow the SAA A/P group and the
Secretary's account administrator the ability to image and
attach supporting documentation to the documents created via
WebPICS or WebFMIS.
During fiscal year 2012 the following FMIS activities are
anticipated:
--Continuing the implementation of online financial reports;
--Implementing FMIS 2011-3, which includes the deployment of an
imaging and electronic signatures pilot by Senate office.
--Implementing FMIS 2012-1 to include additional imaging features
from the pilot group requirements to support extended pilot
office participation.
--Implementing FMIS 2012-2 to provide capacity and stability
enhancements to support rollout to all offices and committees,
as well as enhancements to the pilot functionality based on
feedback gained through user group meeting and training
sessions;
--Continuing with the new payroll system implementation, conversion
and testing; and
--Reviewing existing systems and developing a long-term modification
and replacement plan for key financial systems.
A more detailed report on FMIS is included in the departmental
report of the Disbursing Office.
sos deg.LEGISLATIVE OFFICES
The Legislative Department provides support essential to Senators
in carrying out their daily chamber activities as well as the
constitutional responsibilities of the Senate. The Legislative Clerk
sits at the Secretary's desk in the Senate Chamber and reads aloud
bills, amendments, the Senate Journal, Presidential messages, and other
such materials when so directed by the Presiding Officer of the Senate.
The Legislative Clerk calls the roll of Members to establish the
presence of a quorum and to record and tally all yea and nay votes. The
office staff prepares the Senate Calendar of Business, published each
day that the Senate is in session, and prepares additional publications
relating to Senate class membership and committee and subcommittee
assignments. The Legislative Clerk maintains the official copy of all
measures pending before the Senate and must incorporate into those
measures any amendments that are agreed to. This office retains custody
of official messages received from the House of Representatives and
conference reports awaiting action by the Senate. The office staff is
responsible for verifying the accuracy of information entered into the
LIS system by the various offices of the Secretary.
Additionally, the Legislative Clerk acts as supervisor for the
Legislative Department, responsible for overall coordination,
supervision, scheduling, and cross-training. The department consists of
eight offices:
--the Bill Clerk;
--Captioning Services;
--Daily Digest;
--Enrolling Clerk;
--Executive Clerk;
--Journal Clerk;
--Legislative Clerk; and
--the Official Reporters of Debates.
Summary of Activity
The Senate completed its legislative business and adjourned sine
die on December 22, 2010. During 2010, the Senate was in session 158
days and conducted 299 roll call votes and eight live quorum calls.
There were 388 measures reported from committees and six special
reports submitted to the Senate. There were 569 total measures passed
or agreed to. In addition, there were 4,924 amendments submitted to the
desk.
Cross-training and COOP Planning
Recognizing the importance of planning for the continuity of Senate
business, under both normal and possibly extenuating circumstances,
cross-training continues to be strongly emphasized among the
Secretary's legislative staff. To ensure additional staff are trained
to perform the basic floor responsibilities of the Legislative Clerk,
as well as the various other floor-related responsibilities of the
Secretary, approximately one-half of the legislative staff are
currently involved or have recently been involved in cross-training.
Each office and staff within the Legislative Department
participated in numerous ongoing COOP discussions and exercises
throughout the past year. These discussions and exercises are a joint
effort involving the Office of the Secretary, the U.S. Capitol Police
(USCP), and the SAA.
Succession Planning
The average number of years of Senate service among the Secretary's
Legislative Department supervisors is 19 years. It is critical that the
Secretary's Legislative Department attract and keep talented employees,
especially the second tier of employees just behind the current
supervisors because of the unique nature of the Senate as a legislative
institution. The arcane practices and voluminous precedents of the
Senate make institutional experience and knowledge extremely valuable.
sos deg.BILL CLERK
The Office of the Bill Clerk collects and records data on the
legislative activity of the Senate, which becomes the historical record
of official Senate business. The Bill Clerk's staff keeps this
information in its handwritten files and ledgers and also enters it
into the Senate's automated retrieval system so that it is available to
all House and Senate offices through the LIS. The Bill Clerk records
actions of the Senate with regard to bills, resolutions, reports,
amendments, cosponsors, Public Law numbers, and recorded votes. The
Bill Clerk is responsible for preparing for print all measures
introduced, received, submitted, and reported in the Senate. The Bill
Clerk also assigns numbers to all Senate bills and resolutions. All the
information received in this office comes directly from the Senate
Floor in written form within moments of the action involved, so the
Bill Clerk's office is generally regarded as the most timely and most
accurate source of legislative information.
Assistance From the Government Printing Office (GPO)
The Bill Clerk's staff maintains an exceptionally good working
relationship with the GPO and seeks to provide the best service
possible to meet the needs of the Senate. The GPO continues to respond
in a timely manner to the Secretary's request, through the Bill Clerk's
office, for the printing of bills and reports, including the expedited
printing of priority matters for the Senate Chamber.
Legislative Activity
The Bill Clerk's staff processed 1,099 fewer legislative items than
in the previous Congress for an overall decrease of slightly less than
9 percent. For comparative purposes, below is a summary of the second
sessions of the 110th and 111th Congresses, and then between the
combined sessions of each Congress.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
110th 111th
Congress, 2nd Congress, 2nd Percentage
Session Session change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate bills.................................................... 1,217 1,139 -6.41
Senate Joint Resolutions........................................ 19 17 -10.53
Senate Concurrent Resolutions................................... 43 30 -30.23
Senate Resolutions.............................................. 311 320 +2.89
Amendments submitted............................................ 1,812 1,626 -10.26
House bills..................................................... 427 333 -22.01
House Joint Resolutions......................................... 4 6 +50.00
House Concurrent Resolutions.................................... 93 51 -45.16
Measures reported............................................... 452 388 -14.16
Written reports................................................. 274 275 +41.61
-----------------------------------------------
Total legislation......................................... 4,652 4,298 -7.61
===============================================
Roll call votes................................................. 215 299 +39.07
House messages \1\.............................................. 283 332 +17.31
Cosponsor requests.............................................. 7,306 4,947 -32.29
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This number reflects how many messages from the House are typed up by the Bill Clerks for inclusion in the
Congressional Record. It excludes additional activity on these bills.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percentage
110th Congress 111th Congress change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate bills.................................................... 3,741 4,059 +8.5
Senate Joint Resolutions........................................ 46 42 -8.7
Senate Concurrent Resolutions................................... 107 78 -27.1
Senate Resolutions.............................................. 729 707 -3.02
Amendments Submitted............................................ 5,704 4,924 -13.67
House bills..................................................... 940 715 -23.94
House Joint Resolutions......................................... 13 16 +23.08
House Concurrent Resolutions.................................... 186 118 -36.56
Measures reported............................................... 880 388 -55.91
-----------------------------------------------
Total legislation......................................... 12,346 11,047 -10.52
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
sos deg.CAPTIONING SERVICES
The Office of Captioning Services provides realtime captioning of
Senate Floor proceedings for the deaf and hard-of-hearing and
unofficial electronic transcripts of Senate Floor proceedings to Senate
offices on Webster, the Senate Intranet.
General Overview
Captioning Services strives to provide the highest-quality closed
captions. For the 17th year in a row, the Office has achieved an
overall accuracy average above 99 percent. Overall caption quality is
monitored through daily translation data reports, monitoring of
captions in real-time, and review of caption files on Webster. In an
effort to decrease paper consumption and printing costs, accuracy
reviews and reports will be completed and archived in electronic form
for the upcoming year.
The real-time searchable closed caption log, available to Senate
offices on Webster, continues to be an invaluable tool for all of the
Senate community. Legislative floor staff, in particular, continue to
depend upon its availability, reliability and contents to help them in
the performance of their duties. Additionally, the Senate Recording
Studio's complementary video component, Video Vault, adds searchable
video to the audio and text and has proven to be a valuable new tool
for Senate offices to utilize.
COOP Planning
COOP and preparation continue to be a top priority to ensure that
the office and staff are prepared and confident about the ability to
relocate and successfully function from a remote location in the event
of an emergency. Continual updates and review of the COOP plan and
discussion with staff throughout the year prepare individuals to have
confidence if called upon to execute the plan. The office also
participates with the Recording Studio in an off-site location exercise
of the COOP at least once a year.
sos deg.DAILY DIGEST
The Office of the Senate Daily Digest is pleased to transmit its
annual report on Senate activities during the second session of the
111th Congress. First, a brief summary of a compilation of Senate
statistics:
Chamber Activity
The Senate was in session a total of 158 days, for a total of 1,074
hours and 40 minutes. There were eight live quorum calls and 299 roll
call votes. (See attachment for 2009 Year Comparison of Senate
Legislative Activity).
Committee Activity
Senate committees held a total of 827 meetings during the second
session, as contrasted with 1,138 meetings during the first session of
the 111th Congress.
All hearings and business meetings (including joint meetings and
conferences) are scheduled through the Office of the Senate Daily
Digest and are published in the Congressional Record, on its Web site
on Senate.gov, and entered in the LIS, the Web-based applications
system. Meeting outcomes are also published by the Daily Digest in the
Congressional Record each day and continuously updated on the Web site.
Computer Activities
The Digest staff continues to work closely with Senate computer
staff to refine the LIS/document management system (DMS), including
further refinements to the Senate Committee Scheduling application
which will improve the data entry process.
The Digest office continues to electronically transmit the complete
publication at the end of each day to the GPO.
GPO
The Daily Digest staff work closely with the GPO on printing issues
and are pleased to report that occurrences of editing corrections or
transcript errors are infrequent.
20-YEAR COMPARISON OF SENATE LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITY \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate convened..................................... 1/3 1/3 1/5 1/25 1/4 1/3 1/3 1/27 1/6 1/24
Senate adjourned.................................... 1/3/92 10/9 11/26 12/01 1/3/96 10/4 11/13 10/21 11/19 12/15
Days in session..................................... 158 129 153 138 211 132 153 143 162 141
Hours in session.................................... 1,20044" 1,09109" 1,26941" 1,24333" 1,83910" 1,03645" 1,09307" 1,09505" 1,18357" 1,01751"
Average hours per day............................... 7.6 8.5 8.3 9.0 8.7 7.8 7.1 7.7 7.3 7.2
Total measures passed............................... 626 651 473 465 346 476 386 506 549 696
Roll call votes..................................... 280 270 395 329 613 306 298 314 374 298
Quorum calls........................................ 3 5 2 6 3 2 6 4 7 6
Public Laws......................................... 243 347 210 255 88 245 153 241 170 410
Treaties ratified................................... 15 32 20 8 10 28 15 53 13 39
Nominations confirmed............................... 45,369 30,619 38,676 37,446 40,535 33,176 25,576 20,302 22,468 22,512
Average voting attendance........................... 97.16 95.4 97.6 97.02 98.07 98.22 98.68 97.47 98.02 96.99
Sessions convened before 12 noon.................... 126 112 128 120 184 113 115 109 118 107
Sessions convened at 12 noon........................ 9 6 6 9 2 15 12 31 17 25
Sessions convened after 12 noon..................... 23 10 15 17 12 7 7 2 19 24
Sessions continued after 6 p.m...................... 102 91 100 100 158 88 96 93 113 94
Sessions continued after 12 midnight................ 4 9 7 3 1 ............ ............ ............ ............ 2
Saturday sessions................................... 2 2 2 3 5 1 1 1 3 1
Sunday sessions..................................... ............ ............ ............ ............ 3 ............ 1 ............ ............ 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
20-YEAR COMPARISON OF SENATE LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITY--Continued
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate convened..................................... 1/3 1/23 1/7 1/20 1/4 1/3 1/4 1/3 1/6 1/5
Senate adjourned.................................... 12/20 11/20 12/9 12/8 12/22 12/9 12/31 1/2 12/24 12/22
Days in session..................................... 173 149 167 133 159 138 189 184 191 158
Hours in session.................................... 1,23615" 1,04323" 1,45405" 1,03131" 1,22226" 1,02748" 1,37554" 98831" 1,42039" 1,07440"
Average hours per day............................... 7.1 7.0 8.7 7.7 7.7 7.4 7.2 5.37 7.44 6.8
Total measures passed............................... 425 523 590 663 624 635 621 589 478 569
Roll call votes..................................... 380 253 459 216 366 279 442 215 397 299
Quorum calls........................................ 3 2 3 1 3 1 6 3 3 8
Public Laws......................................... 136 241 198 300 169 313 180 280 125 258
Treaties ratified................................... 3 17 11 15 6 14 8 30 1 6
Nominations confirmed............................... 25,091 23,633 21,580 24,420 25,942 29,603 22,892 21,785 23,051 23,327
Average voting attendance........................... 98.29 96.36 96.07 95.54 97.41 97.13 94.99 94.36 96.99 95.88
Sessions convened before 12 noon.................... 140 119 133 104 121 110 156 147 148 116
Sessions convened at 12 noon........................ 10 12 4 9 1 4 4 4 2 6
Sessions convened after 12 noon..................... 21 23 23 21 36 24 32 33 41 36
Sessions continued after 6 p.m...................... 108 103 134 129 120 129 144 110 152 116
Sessions continued after 12 midnight................ 3 8 2 3 3 4 4 2 2 1
Saturday sessions................................... 3 ............ 1 2 2 2 1 3 5 2
Sunday sessions..................................... ............ ............ 1 1 2 ............ 1 1 4 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Prepared by the Senate Daily Digest--Office of the Secretary.
sos deg.ENROLLING CLERK
The Enrolling Clerk prepares, proofreads, corrects, and prints all
legislation passed by the Senate prior to its transmittal to the
Secretary of the Senate, House of Representatives, the White House, the
National Archives, and the United States Claims Court.
During the second session of the 111th Congress the Enrolling
Clerk's office prepared the enrollment of 78 Senate bills (transmitted
to the President); 4 Senate enrolled joint resolutions (transmitted to
the President); 7 Senate concurrent resolutions (transmitted to the
National Archives); and 40 Senate appointments (transmitted to the
House of Representatives). In addition, approximately 177 House of
Representatives bills; 30 House Concurrent Resolutions; 5 House Joint
Resolutions; and 2 conference reports, were either amended, passed, or
acted on by the Senate requiring the Enrolling Clerk's office staff to
work hundreds of amendments in a tightly managed schedule. In all there
were 61 messages delivered to the Clerk's office and 84 to the House
Chamber by the Enrolling Clerk's office relative to Senate action and
passage of legislation. The office also handled the appropriate
delivery to the House Clerk's office of approximately 248 House
enrolled bills and 11 House joint resolutions (1 vetoed) after they had
been signed by the President pro tempore.
During the second session, the Enrolling Clerk's office was also
involved in preparing and proofreading documents and taking messages to
the House of Representatives relative to the impeachment of Judge
Gabriel Thomas Porteous, Jr. of Louisiana. The Enrolling Clerk also
assisted the Executive Clerk in putting together the official copy of
the START Treaty agreement and helped organize Treaty amendments, in
addition to proofreading the document. The office performance was
successful, and all deadlines were met.
A total of 569 pieces of legislation were passed or agreed to
during the second session of the 111th Congress. Many other Senate
bills were placed on the calendar, all of which were processed in the
Enrolling Clerk's office including approximately 99 engrossed Senate
bills, 4 joint resolutions, 15 concurrent resolutions, and 244 Senate
resolutions. The office is also responsible for keeping the original
official copies of bills, resolutions, and appointments from the Senate
Floor through the end of each Congress. At the end of the second
session, the Enrolling Clerk's office places all official papers in
archive boxes where they are sent to the Senate Archivist for storage
at the National Archives.
The Senate Enrolling Clerk's is also responsible for transmitting
to the GPO electronically, for overnight printing, copies of the
original files of engrossed and enrolled legislation proofread and
formatted accordingly in our office.
COOP
In the second quarter 2010 the Enrolling Clerk attended two COOP
exercises at the GPO to test a number of printers for the COOP fly-away
kit designated to be available for the enrolling clerks in the event of
a COOP situation. In addition to testing the printers, the exercise
encompassed the important details of our operations necessary for the
engrossment and enrollment of legislation involving the use of printers
and specific paper stock supplied by the GPO.
Cost Savings
The Enrolling Clerk has reduced printing requests by one-third over
the past few years in addition to reducing its distribution of bills
from the GPO by one-half.
sos deg.EXECUTIVE CLERK
The Executive Clerk prepares an accurate record of actions taken by
the Senate during executive sessions (proceedings on nominations and
treaties) which is published as the Journal of the Executive
Proceedings of the Senate at the end of each session of Congress. The
Executive Clerk also prepares daily the Executive Calendar as well as
all nomination and treaty resolutions for transmittal to the President.
Additionally, the Executive Clerk's office processes all executive
communications, Presidential messages, and petitions and memorials.
Nominations
During the second session of the 111th Congress, there were 1,077
nomination messages sent to the Senate by the President, transmitting
21,836 nominations to positions requiring Senate confirmation and 21
messages withdrawing nominations sent to the Senate during the second
session of the 111th Congress. Of the total nominations transmitted,
435 were for civilian positions other than lists in the Foreign
Service, Coast Guard, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
and Public Health Service. In addition, there were 2,240 nominees in
the ``civilian list@'' categories named above. Military nominations
received this session totaled 19,161 (6,600 Air Force; 7,486 Army;
4,448 Navy; and 627 Marine Corps). The Senate confirmed 23,327
nominations this session. Pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 6 of
Senate Rule XXXI, 366 nominations were returned to the President during
the second session of the 111th Congress.
Treaties
There were four treaties transmitted to the Senate by the President
during the second session of the 111th Congress for its advice and
consent to ratification, which were ordered printed as treaty documents
for the use of the Senate (Treaty Doc. 111-5 through 111-8).
The Senate gave its advice and consent to six treaties with various
amendments, conditions, declarations, understandings, and provisos to
the resolutions of advice and consent to ratification.
Executive Reports and Roll Call Votes
There were six executive reports relating to treaties ordered
printed for the use of the Senate during the second session of the
111th Congress (Executive Report 111-2 through 111-7). The Senate
conducted 50 roll call votes in executive session, all on or in
relation to nominations and treaties.
Executive Communications
For the second session of the 111th Congress, 4,468 executive
communications, 62 petitions and memorials, and 29 Presidential
messages were received and processed.
Environmental Impact
In an effort to save money and eliminate unnecessary paper, the
Executive Clerk reduced the copies of nominations printed for the
committees by 95 percent during the 111th Congress, as all committees
except one allow the paperwork to be transmitted by email decreasing
the need for duplicate paper copies.
sos deg.JOURNAL CLERK
The Journal Clerk takes notes of the daily legislative proceedings
of the Senate in the ``Minute Book'' and prepares a history of bills
and resolutions for the printed Journal of the Proceedings of the
Senate, or Senate Journal, as required by article I, section V of the
Constitution. The content of the Senate Journal is governed by Senate
Rule IV, and is approved by the Senate on a daily basis. The Senate
Journal is published each calendar year.
The Journal staff take 90-minute turns at the Rostrum in the Senate
Chamber, noting the following by hand for inclusion in the Minute Book:
--all orders (entered into by the Senate through unanimous consent
agreements);
--legislative messages received from the President of the United
States;
--messages from the House of Representatives;
--legislative actions as taken by the Senate (including motions made
by Senators, points of order raised, and roll call votes
taken);
--amendments submitted and proposed for consideration;
--bills and joint resolutions introduced; and
--concurrent and Senate resolutions as submitted.
These notes of the proceedings are then compiled in electronic form
for eventual publication of the Senate Journal at the end of each
calendar year. Compilation is efficiently accomplished through
utilization of the LIS Senate Journal Authoring System. The Senate
Journal is published each calendar year, and in 2010, the Journal Clerk
completed the production of the 1,125 page 2009 volume. It is
anticipated that work on the 2010 volume, including the Impeachment
Journal, will conclude by December 2011.
COOP
In 2010, in support of the Office of the Secretary's commitment to
COOP, the Office of the Journal Clerk participated in the annual
Chamber Protective Actions/Briefing Center exercise in May.
Additionally, monthly tests of BlackBerry emergency notification and
laptop remote access procedures are conducted. The Journal Clerk
continued the practice of scanning the daily Minute Book pages into a
secure directory. The files are also copied onto a flash drive storage
device weekly, and transported off-site each night. Although the actual
Minute Books for each session of a Congress are sent to the National
Archives a year following the end of a Congress, having easily
accessible files, both on a remote server and on a secure portable
storage device, will ensure timely reconstitution of the Minute Book
data in the event of damage to, or destruction of, the physical Minute
Book.
sos deg.OFFICIAL REPORTERS OF DEBATES
The Office of the Official Reporters of Debates is responsible for
the stenographic reporting, transcribing, and editing of the Senate
Floor proceedings for publication in the Congressional Record. The
Chief Reporter acts as the editor-in-chief, and the Coordinator
functions as the technical production manager of the Senate portion of
the Record. The office interacts with Senate personnel on additional
materials to be included in the Record.
On a continuing basis, all materials to be printed in the next
day's edition of the Record are transmitted electronically and on paper
to the GPO. Much of the transcript of Senate Floor proceedings and
Morning Business is sent to the GPO electronically to allow for
production of the Record in a cost-conscious and timely manner. In most
instances, the paper copy of the Record is delivered by the GPO within
2 to 3 hours of its content being placed on the Internet at
approximately 7 a.m. every day.
The Chief Reporter, in conjunction with Senate office and committee
staff, works to ensure compliance with the ``2-page rule'' to cut down
on the printing costs of the Record by controlling the amount of
extraneous printing to be done by the GPO. As a result, these materials
are often condensed so as not to exceed the rule and/or are cited and
printed on Web sites with referencing so that they are available to the
interested public.
The Official Reporters of Debate completed the upgrade of its
stenotype machines this year. This past year, the office purchased five
additional Pro Cat Stylus stenotype machines, complementing the three
machines that were purchased last fiscal year, resulting in the most
efficient and up-to-date method of paperless recording of Senate
debate. All reporters' stenographic notes are now saved to electronic
files and are held for 5 years or more, saving the cost of storage and
purchase of bundled stenotype paper that was used in the older
machines.
sos deg.PARLIAMENTARIAN
The Parliamentarian's Office continues to perform its essential
institutional responsibilities to act as a neutral arbiter among all
parties with an interest in the legislative process. These
responsibilities include advising the chair, Senators and their staff,
committee staff, House Members and their staffs, and administration
officials on all matters requiring an interpretation of the Standing
Rules of the Senate, the precedents of the Senate, and unanimous
consent agreements, as well as provisions of public law affecting the
proceedings of the Senate.
The Parliamentarian or one of his assistants is always present on
the Senate Floor when the Senate is in session, ready to assist the
Presiding Officer in his or her official duties, as well as to assist
any other Senator on procedural matters. The parliamentarians work
closely with the staff of the Vice President of the United States and
the Vice President himself whenever he performs his duties as President
of the Senate.
The parliamentarians serve as the agents of the Senate in
coordinating the flow of legislation with the House of Representatives
and with the President, and ensure that enrolled bills are signed in a
timely manner by duly authorized officers of the Senate for
presentation to the President.
The parliamentarians monitor all proceedings on the floor of the
Senate, advise the Presiding Officer on the competing rights of the
Senators on the floor, and advise all Senators as to what is
appropriate in debate. The parliamentarians keep track of time on the
floor of the Senate when time is limited or controlled under the
provisions of time agreements, statutes, or standing orders. The
parliamentarians keep track of the amendments offered to the
legislation pending on the Senate Floor, and monitor them for points of
order. In this respect, the parliamentarians reviewed more than 1,600
amendments during 2010 to determine if they met various procedural
requirements, such as germaneness. The parliamentarians also reviewed
thousands of pages of conference reports to determine what provisions
could appropriately be included therein.
The Office of the Parliamentarian is responsible for the referral
to the appropriate committees of all legislation introduced in the
Senate, all legislation received from the House, as well as all
communications received from the executive branch, State and local
governments, and private citizens. In order to perform this
responsibility, the parliamentarians do extensive legal and legislative
research. During 2010, the Parliamentarian and his assistants referred
2,623 measures and 4,559 communications to the appropriate Senate
committees. The office worked extensively with Senators and their
staffs to advise them of the jurisdictional consequences of countless
drafts of legislation, and evaluated the jurisdictional effect of
proposed modifications in drafting. In 2010, as in the past, the
parliamentarians conducted several briefings on Senate procedure to
various groups of Senate staff and visiting international parliamentary
staff, on a nonpartisan basis.
During 2010, as has been the case in the past, the staff of the
Parliamentarian's Office was frequently called on to analyze and advise
Senators on a great number of issues arising under the Congressional
Budget Act of 1974, the Trade Act of 1974, the Congressional Review
Act, and many other provisions of law that authorize special procedural
consideration of measures.
During all of 2010, the parliamentarians were involved in
interpreting the ethics reform proposals adopted in 2007, especially
the language dealing with earmark accountability and scope of
conference.
Throughout 2010 until the convening of the 112th Congress, the
parliamentarians reviewed all of the Senators' certificates of election
for sufficiency and accuracy, returning those that were defective and
reviewing their replacements.
Since the election in 2010, all of the parliamentarians have
participated in the orientation sessions for the newly elected Senators
and have assisted each of them in their initial hours as Presiding
Officers. The parliamentarians also participated in an orientation
session on the Senate Floor for Senate staff.
COOP
The parliamentarians have each been trained on and successfully
remotely access the office's computers and hard drives, facilitating
communications, research, and other work after hours, and enabling them
to have the office function during possible emergencies. The
Parliamentarian's Office continues to participate extensively in
emergency preparedness training for the Senate Chamber and has been
heavily involved with the SAA Office of Police Operations, Security and
Emergency Preparedness for years in the planning phases of the Senate's
evacuation and shelter-in-place procedures.
sos deg.FINANCIAL OPERATIONS
Disbursing Office
The mission of the Senate Disbursing Office is to provide efficient
and effective central financial and human resource data management,
information, and advice to the offices of the United States Senate and
to Members and employees of the Senate. The Senate Disbursing Office
manages the collection of information from the distributed accounting
locations within the Senate to formulate and consolidate the agency
level budget, disburse the payroll, pay the Senate's bills, and provide
appropriate counseling and advice. The Senate Disbursing Office
collects information from Members and employees that is necessary to
maintain and administer the retirement, health insurance, life
insurance, and other central human resource programs and provides
responsive, personal attention to Members and employees on an unbiased
and confidential basis. The Senate Disbursing Office also manages the
distribution of central financial and human resource information to the
individual Member offices, committees, administrative and leadership
offices in the Senate while maintaining the confidentiality of
information for Members and Senate employees.
The organization is structured to enhance its ability to provide
quality work, maintain a high level of customer service, promote good
internal controls, efficiency and teamwork, and provide for the
appropriate levels of supervision and management. The long-term
financial needs of the Senate are best served by an organization
staffed with highly trained professionals who possess a high degree of
institutional knowledge, sound judgment, and interpersonal skills that
reflect the unique nature of the United States Senate.
Executive Office
The primary responsibilities, among others, of the Executive Office
are to:
--oversee the day-to-day operations of the Disbursing Office;
--respond to any inquiries or questions;
--maintain fully and properly trained staff;
--ensure that the office is prepared to respond quickly and
efficiently to any disaster or unique situation that may arise;
--provide excellent customer service;
--assist the Secretary of the Senate in the implementation of new
legislation affecting any of her departments; and
--handle all information requests from the Committee on
Appropriations and the Committee on Rules and Administration
The Disbursing Office, the Committee on Rules and Administration,
the House of Representatives and the U.S. Treasury finalized an
interagency agreement concerning payments for expenses made on behalf
of the Congressional Oversight Panel established by Public Law 110-343,
the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act. The Disbursing Office
continues to offer administrative support to this office.
The Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2010, Public Law 111-68
included an administrative provision requiring the Report of the
Secretary of the Senate to be published and publicly posted online,
starting with the report covering the first full semi-annual period of
the 112th Congress. Disbursing met several times with the GPO to start
the design of the Web page, and additional meetings will be held with
all interested parties in the coming months to finalize the development
of the report.
Front Office--Administrative and Financial Services
The Front Office is the main service area for all general Senate
business and financial activity. The Front Office staff maintains the
Senate's internal accountability of funds used in the groups daily
operations. The reconciliation of such funds is executed on a daily
basis. The Front Office staff also provides training to newly
authorized payroll contacts along with continuing guidance to all
contacts in the execution of business operations. It is the receiving
point for most incoming expense vouchers, payroll actions, and employee
benefits-related forms, and is the initial verification point to ensure
that paperwork received in the Disbursing Office conforms to all
applicable Senate rules, regulations, and statutes. The Front Office is
the first line of service provided to Senators, officers, and
employees. All new Senate employees (permanent and temporary) who will
work in the Capitol Hill Senate offices are administered the required
Oath of Office and Personnel Affidavit. Staff is also provided verbal
and written detailed information regarding pay and benefits. Advances
are issued to Senate staff authorized for official Senate travel
through the Front Office and cash and check advances are entered and
reconciled in Web FMIS. After the processing of certified expenses is
complete, cash travel advances are repaid.
Numerous inquiries are handled daily, ranging from pay, benefits,
taxes and voucher processing, to reporting, laws, and Senate
regulations; and must always be answered accurately and fully to
provide the highest degree of customer service. Cash and checks
received from Senate entities as part of their daily business are
handled through the Front Office and become part of the Senate's
accountability of federally appropriated funds and are then processed
through the Senate's general ledger system. The Front Office maintains
the Official Office Information Authorization Forms that authorize
individuals to conduct various types of business with the Disbursing
Office.
General Activities
Processed approximately 530 cash advances during the year and
initialized 920 check/direct deposit advances.
Received and processed more than 21,600 checks.
Administered Oath of Office and Personnel Affidavits to more than
1,700 new Senate staff and advised them of their benefits eligibility.
Maintained brochures for 12 Federal health insurance carriers and
distributed approximately 3,500 brochures to existing staff during the
annual Federal Benefits Open Season and to new Senate employees during
their Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) selection process.
Provided 22 training sessions to new administrative managers.
Administratively guided the three offices of the appointed Senators
that resulted from the death or resignation of sitting Senators, and
the 16 new Senate offices through the Senator-elect phase.
The Front Office continues its daily reconciliation of operations
and strengthening of internal office controls. Training and guidance to
new administrative managers and business contacts continued and was
enhanced by the revamping of training materials that were provided to
newly authorized personnel. The Front Office initiated a scanning
procedure that ensured secure flow of payroll-related documents through
the processing phase. Front Office staff continued assisting employees
in maximizing their Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) contributions and making
sure they are aware of the TSP Catch-Up provisions. The contribution
level for the new TSP employee automatic enrollment was emphasized. The
Front Office continued to provide the Senate community with prompt,
courteous, and informative advice regarding Disbursing Office
operations.
Payroll Section
The Payroll Section maintains the Human Resources Management System
(HRMS) and is responsible for processing, verifying, and warehousing
all payroll information submitted to the Disbursing Office by Senators,
committees, and other appointing officials for their staff, including
appointments of employees, salary changes, title changes, transfers,
and terminations. It is also responsible for input of all enrollments
and elections submitted by Members and employees that affect their pay
(e.g., retirement and benefits elections, tax withholding, TSP
participation, allotments from pay, address changes, direct deposit
elections, levies and garnishments, etc.) and for the issuance of
accurate salary payments to Members and employees. The Payroll Section
is responsible for the administration of the Senate Student Loan
Repayment Program (SLP) and for the audit and reconciliation of the
Flexible Spending Accounts (FSAs) and Federal Employees Dental and
Vision Insurance Program (FED VIP) bill files received each pay period.
The payroll section jointly maintains the ACH FedLine facilities with
the A/P section for the normal transmittal of payroll deposits to the
FRB. Payroll expenditure, projection, and allowance reports are
distributed electronically to all Senate offices semimonthly. The
payroll section issues the proper withholding and agency contribution
reports to the Accounting Department and transmits the proper TSP
information to the National Finance Center. In addition, the payroll
section maintains earnings records, which are distributed to the Social
Security Administration and employees' taxable earnings records, which
are used for W-2 statements. This section is also responsible for the
payroll expenditure data portion of the Report of the Secretary of the
Senate and calculates, reconciles, and bills the Senate Employees Child
Care Center for their staff employee contributions and forwards payment
of those contributions to the Accounting Section. The Payroll Section
provides guidance and counseling to staff and administrative managers
on issues of pay, salaries, allowances, and projections.
General Activities
In January 2010, the payroll section conducted all year-end
processing and reconciliation of pay records and produced W-2 forms for
employees and Federal and State tax agencies. They also facilitated the
imaging of those documents to the Document Imaging System. The payroll
section maintained the normal schedule of processing TSP election
forms.
In January 2010, an employee cost-of-living adjustments (COLA) of
2.42 percent was authorized and administered. Statutory rates and
program caps were updated in HRMS. Required documentation was issued,
received, reconciled, input, and adjusted as designated by appointing
officials.
The Disbursing Office, in tandem with SAA Technical Support,
researched and procured a vendor to implement a new payroll system. The
proposals of the bidders were diligently assessed and modifications
requested. Several demonstrations and technical forums were attended
and rated. Specific attention was paid to how the vendors would
accommodate the Senate's unique requirements, laws and regulations
governing the services and programs administered by the payroll system.
After extensive coordination, feedback and assessment, an implementer
selection was made. Staff attended week-long training to enhance their
ability to participate in system requirements, development, and
implementation. The Payroll Section also drafted and edited a complete
revision and update of the Payroll Procedures Manual in anticipation of
its need as a tool to facilitate the development and implementation of
the new payroll system.
As 2010 came to an end, the Disbursing Office and SAA had begun the
process of system development and implementation with the new vendor.
Fit gap sessions to analyze requirements started in February with an
expected completion of Phase I of the project during fiscal year 2012.
As a result of the passage of the Reservist Differential Pay
legislation, the office worked with the SAA computer support staff to
determine requirements, develop, test and implement programming
changes, develop processes and procedures, and implement those within
the guidelines set forth by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM)
and Defense Financial and Accounting Services. Offices and affected
employees were notified of the impact of the legislation.
The automatic enrollment provisions of the TSP Enhancement Act of
2009 took effect in August 2010. The office worked in tandem with the
SAA computer support staff and the TSP to determine system
requirements, develop, test, and implement changes and follow through
with postimplementation testing and reporting. New procedures were
developed and implemented and Senate-wide communications were written
and distributed.
Other minor changes were made to the HRMS as the need arose as a
result of regulated and policy changes. Changes to the retirement
creditability of Federal Employee Retirement System (FERS) sick leave
required legislative and procedural interpretation and required
interagency cooperation and coordination. The Disbursing Office
developed procedures and distributed communications throughout the
Senate.
The office procured a new retirement calculator tool that will
provide additional functionality to retirement counselors and enhance
their ability to provide a greater number of retirement estimates.
Procedures, training and usage development will occur in 2011.
In 2010, the payroll section implemented a number of system
modifications as a result of legislative, regulatory, and procedural
changes. The Department of the Treasury implemented a new Web-based
process for purchasing savings bonds by payroll deduction, which
required changes to existing procedures and required notification to
the affected Senate Members and employees. Passage of Reservist
Differential Pay was handled with coordinated development of
requirements, testing, system implementation, and procedural
development to facilitate the proper payments and tracking. Unusual
changes to specific State tax law required system modifications so that
residents of that State could remain in compliance with regards to
their State tax withholding. This required system development, testing,
implementation, and notification to the affected Members and staff.
As a result of the 2010 expiring terms of several appointed
Senators, the payroll section provided assistance and guidance to the
offices of incoming and outgoing Members. They also assisted Senator
Robert C. Byrd's staff upon his death. In addition, the staff
researched the specifics of applicable Senate resolutions to determine
their impact, if any, on outgoing and potentially outgoing staff in
order to ensure that current procedures allowed for the proper
administration of the resolutions and provided guidance to staff on
those resolutions.
The Payroll Section administers the SLP, which includes initiation,
tracking and transmission of the payments, determination of
eligibility, and coordination and reconciliation with office
administrators and program participants. Because of regulatory changes
within the Department of Education, extensive vendor processing changes
were necessitated. As a result many payments to vendors were not being
routed correctly once received at the designated address. This led to a
higher than usual need for payment tracking, reconciliation, and check
reissue. The SLP Administrator continues to improve processes for
administration of the program and documenting procedures. In addition,
the SLP Administrator developed an extensive list of ``frequently asked
questions'' which were distributed to administrative managers and
staff, and which have been published to Webster, the Senate's Intranet.
Employee Benefits Section (EBS)
The primary responsibilities of the EBS are administration of
health insurance, life insurance, TSP, and all retirement programs for
Members and employees of the Senate. This includes counseling,
processing of paperwork, research, dissemination of information, and
interpretation of retirement and benefits laws and regulations. The EBS
staff is also expected to have a working knowledge of the FSA Program,
the Federal Long Term Care (LTC) Insurance Program and Federal
Employees Dental and Vision Insurance Program (FEDVIP). In addition,
the sectional work includes research and verification of all prior
Federal service and prior Senate service for new and returning
appointees.
The EBS provides this information for payroll input. It also
verifies the accuracy of the information provided and reconciles, as
necessary, when official personnel folders and transcripts of service
from other Federal agencies are received. Senate transcripts of
service, including all official retirement and benefits documentation,
are provided to other Federal agencies when Senate Members and staff
are hired elsewhere in the Government. The EBS is responsible for the
administration and tracking of employees placed in leave without pay to
perform military service, including counseling with regard to continued
benefits, TSP Make-up contributions and Reservist Differential
payments. The EBS participates fully in the Centralized Enrollment
Clearinghouse System (CLER) Program sponsored by OPM to reconcile all
FEHB enrollments with carriers through the National Finance Center. EBS
is responsible for its own forms inventory ordering and maintenance, as
well as all benefits, TSP, and retirement brochures, for the Disbursing
Office. The EBS processes employment verifications for loans, bar
exams, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, OPM, and the Department of
Defense (DOD), among others. Unemployment claim forms are completed,
and employees are counseled on their eligibility. Department of Labor
billings for unemployment compensation paid to Senate employees are
reviewed in the EBS and submitted by voucher to the Accounting Section
for payment, as are the employee fees associated with FSAs.
Designations of Beneficiary for Federal Employees' Group Life Insurance
(FEGLI), retirement, and unpaid compensation are filed and checked by
the EBS.
General Activities
The year began with an extended 2009 benefits open season through
January 31, 2010, as mandated by the OPM.
With the death of Senator Robert C. Byrd, EBS counseled the
Senator's survivors regarding all benefits payable and assisted with
claims processing. EBS also provided benefits transition counseling to
all staff employed by Senator Robert C. Byrd, as well as, the
processing of the resultant retirement cases. EBS provided incoming
benefits counseling to Senators who were appointed in 2010. In
addition, the EBS provided outgoing counseling and retirement case
processing to Senators who left office in 2010 and to their staff.
The year brought about many benefits changes. OPM issued guidance
resulting from Public Law 111-84, which allows for unused sick leave to
be credited towards FERS retirement and the ability to redeposit FERS
refunds. The Affordable Care Act of 2010 created important benefits
changes that were emphasized in the 2010 Federal Benefits Open Season.
FEHB and FSA incurred major changes in dependent eligibility rules.
Flexible spending account, health savings accounts, and health
reimbursement accounts were subject to over the counter over-the-
counter drug eligibility and grace period changes. Premium assistance
for temporary continuation of health insurance coverage under the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 was extended through May
31, 2010.
OPM issued final regulations to expand the definition of
``qualified relatives'' under the long-term care insurance. TSP changes
in 2010 included the establishment of Spouse Beneficiary Accounts, the
L Fund 2050, and the August 1, 2010 implementation of the TSP Automatic
Enrollment provisions. In addition, the enrollment/change period for
the FEGLI Program was increased to 60 days.
Many employees changed health plans during the annual benefits open
season. These changes were processed and reported to carriers very
quickly. The Disbursing Office again offered Senate employees access to
the online ``Checkbook Guide to Health Plans'' to research and compare
FEHB plans. The Disbursing Office also hosted an open season benefits
fair, which was informational and well attended. The Benefits Fair
included representatives from local and national FEHB plans, as well as
representatives from LTC, FSA, and FEDVIP.
EBS conducted an agency-wide FERS seminar and attended interagency
Benefits Officers and TSP meetings. This was especially important this
year due to the many ongoing changes to many of the benefits programs.
EBS coordinated with the Office of Education and Training to
provide outgoing offices two sessions with the DC Department of
Employment Services and two sessions with the OPM to assist with
navigation of the Federal jobs Web site, USAJobs.
Disbursing Office Financial Management
Headed by the Deputy for Financial Management, the mission of
Disbursing Office Financial Management is to coordinate all central
financial policies, procedures, and activities; to process and pay
expense vouchers within reasonable timeframes; and to provide
professional customer service, training and confidential financial
guidance to all Senate accounting locations. In addition, the Financial
Management group is responsible for the compilation of the annual
operating budget of the United States Senate for presentation to the
Committee on Appropriations, and for the formulation, presentation and
execution of the budget for the Senate. On a semiannual basis, this
group is also responsible for the compilation, validation and
completion of the Report of the Secretary of the Senate. Disbursing
Office financial management is segmented into three functional
departments:
--Accounting;
--Accounts Payable; and
--Budget.
The Accounts Payable department is further subdivided into three
sections:
--Vendor Administration;
--Disbursements; and
--Audit.
The deputy coordinates the activities of the three functional
departments, establishes central financial policies and procedures, and
carries out the directives of the Financial Clerk and the Secretary of
the Senate.
Accounting Department
During 2010, the Accounting Department approved 52,000 expense
reimbursement vouchers and vendor uploads including 1,585 deposits for
items ranging from receipts received by the Senate operations, such as
the Senate's revolving funds, to cancelled subscription refunds from
Member offices. General ledger maintenance also prompted the entry of
thousands of adjustment entries that include the entry of all
appropriation and allowance funding limitation transactions, all
accounting cycle-closing entries, and all nonvoucher reimbursement
transactions such as payroll adjustments, COLA budget uploads, stop
payment requests, travel advances and repayments, and limited
payability reimbursements. The department continues to scan all
documentation for journal vouchers, deposits, accounting memos, and
letters of certification to facilitate both storage concerns and COOP
backup. The section also completed the 2009 year-end process to close
and reset revenue, expense, and budgetary general ledger accounts to
zero.
The Disbursing Office also started working with a Member's office
and the Senate Stationery Room to establish and design an online flag
ordering system using the Department of the Treasury's Pay.gov system
capabilities. The form has been completed and is undergoing review by
the Treasury. The Member's office will serve as a pilot office with
other offices joining as the process is refined. Testing is planned for
February 2011 with a possibility of other offices joining in March
2011.
The Department of the Treasury's monthly financial reporting
requirements includes a ``Statement of Accountability'' that details
all increases and decreases to the accountability of the Secretary of
the Senate, such as checks issued during the month and deposits
received, as well as a detailed listing of cash on hand. Also, reported
to the Department of the Treasury on a monthly basis is the ``Statement
of Transactions According to Appropriations, Fund and Receipt
Accounts,'' a summary of activity of all monies disbursed by the
Secretary of the Senate through the Financial Clerk of the Senate. All
activity by appropriation account is reconciled with the Department of
the Treasury on a monthly and annual basis. The annual reconciliation
of the Treasury Combined Statement is also used in the reporting to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) as part of the submission of the
annual operating budget of the Senate. During 2010, the Accounting
Department tested and implemented a FAMIS system report to calculate
the Treasury Combined Statement which is used for the OMB budget
submissions.
The Accounting Department continues to transmit Federal tax
payments for Federal, Social Security, and Medicare taxes withheld from
payroll expenditures, as well as the Senate's matching contribution for
Social Security and Medicare to the FRB through the IRS Electronic
Federal Tax Payment System (EFTPS). EFTPS is also be used to transmit
the quarterly 941 reports to the IRS. Payments for employee
withholdings for State income taxes were reported and paid on a
quarterly basis to each State with applicable State income taxes
withheld. System modifications installed in 2008 allow electronic ACH
payment of quarterly State taxes has resulted in a 64 percent
participation rate by taxing jurisdictions, up from 50 percent last
year. Twenty-seven of 42 tax jurisdictions are receiving their
quarterly State tax payments via ACH. Six States were added to the ACH
payments for the third quarter payments. System modifications are
necessary to transmit the remaining 15 tax jurisdictions via ACH
because of the unique State requirements for their transmissions.
Monthly reconciliations were performed with the National Finance Center
regarding the employee withholdings and agency matching contributions
for the TSP.
There are also internal reporting requirements, such as the monthly
ledger statements. These ledger statements detail all of the financial
activity for the appropriate accounting period with regard to official
expenditures in detail and summary form. It is the responsibility of
the Accounting Department to review and verify the accuracy of the
statements before Senate-wide distribution. During 2010 the Accounting
Department worked with the SAA computer staff to test the electronic
distribution of these monthly reports. It is hoped that this will be
implemented in 2011.
The Accounting Department, in conjunction with the Deputy for
Financial Management and the Assistant Financial Clerk, continues to
work closely with the SAA Finance Department in creating Senate-wide
financial statements in accordance with OMB Bulletin 01-09, ``Form and
Content of Agency Financial Statements'' and any updates required by
OMB Circular A-136, ``Form and Content of the Performance and
Accountability Reports''. Work continues toward the implementation of
the fixed asset system, and financial management software has been
upgraded and the license renewed.
Accounting also has a budget division whose primary responsibility
is compiling the annual operating budget of the United States Senate
for presentation to the Committee on Appropriations. The Budget
division is responsible for the preparation, issuance, and distribution
of the budget justification worksheets. The budget justification
worksheets for fiscal year 2012 were mailed to the Senate accounting
locations and processed in November 2010. The budget baseline estimates
for fiscal year 2012 were reported to OMB by mid-January 2011. The
budget analyst is also responsible for the preparation of 1099's and
the prompt submission of forms to the IRS before the end of the
January.
A/P: Vendor Administration
The Vendor Administration Section maintains the accuracy and
integrity of the Senate's central vendor (payee) file for the prompt
completion of new vendor file requests and service requests related to
the Disbursing Office's Web-based payment tracking system. This section
also assists the information technology (IT) department by performing
periodic testing and by monitoring the performance of the vendor
system. Currently, more than 17,300 vendor records are stored in the
vendor file, in addition to approximately 10,000 employee records.
Daily requests for new vendor addresses or updates to existing vendor
information are processed within 24 hours of receipt. Besides updating
mailing addresses, the section facilitates the use of ACH by switching
the mode of vendor payment from paper check to electronic deposit.
Whenever a new remittance address is added to the vendor file, a
standard letter is mailed to the vendor requesting tax and banking
information, as well as contact and email information. If a vendor
responds indicating they would like to receive ACH payments in the
future, the method of payment is changed.
All Web FMIS users are using the Staffer Functionality exclusively,
and new offices are automatically established with it. Senate employees
can electronically create, save, and file expense reimbursement forms,
track their progress, and get detailed information on payments using
this system. The most common service requests are for system user
identification and passwords and for the reactivation of accounts.
Employees may also request an alternative expense payment method.
Employees can choose to have their payroll set up for direct deposit or
paper check, but can have their expenses reimbursed by a method that
differs from their salary payment method.
The Vendor section works closely with the A/P Disbursements group
to resolve returned ACH payments. ACH payments are returned
periodically for a variety of reasons, including incorrect account
numbers, incorrect routing numbers, and, in rare instances, a
nonparticipating financial institution.
The Vendor section electronically scans and stores all supporting
documentation of existing vendor records and new vendor file requests.
When this section receives replies asking for ACH participation, the
vendors are asked if they wish to be notified by email when payments
are sent. Currently, more than 95 percent of ACH participants also
receive email notification of payment.
During 2010, the Vendor section processed more than 2,200 vendor
file additions, completed more than 3,200 service requests, mailed
approximately 1,100 vendor information letters, and converted more than
450 vendors from check payment to electronic payment.
A/P: Disbursements Department
The Disbursements Department is the entry and exit point for
voucher payments. The department physically and electronically receives
all vouchers submitted for payment. It also pays all of these vouchers,
as well as the items submitted by upload and the various certifications
and adjustments that are submitted periodically. The department
received approximately 107,000 vouchers. All of these items were paid
by the department via Treasury check or ACH. Multiple payments to the
same payee are often combined. As a result, 18,500 checks were issued,
while 71,100 ACH payments were required. The ACH volume increased 13
percent while the check volume decreased 18 percent for the year. This
is a desired result as the department continues its efforts to
substantially reduce reliance on paper checks.
The checkwriter system was upgraded and is now incorporated into
Web FMIS. The new functionality allows greater ease of access to
payment schedules for COOP purposes, but still maintains the security
necessary to prevent unauthorized use of the system. Payment schedules
may be retrieved, but payments cannot be made without proper
authorization. Tests have been conducted to ensure functionality in
case of emergency situations.
After vouchers are paid, they are sorted and filed by document
number. Vouchers are grouped in 6-month ``clusters'' to accommodate
their retrieval for the semi-annual Report of the Secretary of the
Senate. Files are maintained in-house for the current period and two
prior periods, as space is limited. Older documents are stored in the
Senate Support Facility (SSF). The inventoried items are sorted and
recorded in a database for easy document retrieval. Several document
retrieval missions were successfully conducted, and the department
continues to work closely with warehouse personnel.
A major function of the department is to prepare adjustment
documents. Adjustments are varied, and include re-issuance of items
held as accounts receivable collections, re-issuance of payments for
which nonreceipt is claimed, and various supplemental adjustments
received from the Payroll Department. Such adjustments are usually
disbursed by check, but an increasing number are now handled
electronically through the ACH. The department maintains a spreadsheet
that tracks cases of nonreceipt of salary checks, including stop
payment requests and re-issuance.
The department also prepares the stop payments forms as required by
the Department of the Treasury. Stop payments are requested by
employees who have not received salary or expense reimbursements, and
vendors claiming nonreceipt of expense checks. The Treasury Check
Information System (TCIS) allows the department to electronically
submit stop-payment requests and provides online access to digital
images of negotiated checks for viewing and printing. Once a check is
viewed, it is printed and may be scanned. Scanned images are then
forwarded to the appropriate accounting locations via email. During
2010, approximately 500 digital images of negotiated checks were
provided, and an additional 125 requests were received for stop
payments. The stop payment volume is a significant reduction (75
percent) and is attributable to increased ACH payment and the TCIS
check copy retrieval. The TCIS saves the Disbursing Office time, a
$7.50 processing fee for each request, is Web-based, and is accessible
from multiple workstations in Disbursing.
A/P: Audit Department
The A/P Audit Section is responsible for auditing vouchers and
answering questions regarding voucher preparation and the
permissibility of expenses and advances. This section provides advice
and recommendations on the discretionary use of funds to the various
accounting locations; identifies duplicate payments submitted by
offices; monitors payments related to contracts; trains new
administrative managers and chief clerks about Senate financial
practices and the Senate's FMIS; and assists in the production of the
Report of the Secretary of the Senate.
The section is organized at three different levels. The first level
is the supervisor. In addition to performing managerial tasks, the
supervisor also audits and sanctions vouchers as needed, and
coordinates testing related to system implementation and upgrades.
Eleven auditors process all incoming vouchers and uploads, and 3 of
them have the authority to sanction, on behalf of the Committee on
Rules and Administration, vouchers not exceeding $100. They also
sanction all travel and petty cash advances as well as non-Contingent
Fund items such as legal counsel, legislative counsel, and the Office
of Congressional Accessibility Services, as well as the for the
Congressional Oversight Panel.
A major function of the section is monitoring the fund advances for
travel and petty cash. Travel advances must be repaid within 30 days of
trip completion and petty cash advances must be repaid whenever new
funding authority is established. The system accommodates the issuance,
tracking, and repayment of advances. It also facilitates the entry and
editing of election dates and vouchers for Senators-elect. In addition
to other functionality, an advance type of petty cash was created and
is in use. Regular petty cash audits are performed by the section, and
all petty cash accounts were successfully audited in 2010.
The A/P Audit Section processed more than 107,000 expense items in
2010. Audit sanctioned approximately 56,000 vouchers under authority
delegated by the Committee on Rules and Administration. This translates
to roughly 9,600 vouchers processed per auditor, and 11,000 vouchers
posted per certifier. The voucher processing consisted of providing
interpretation of Senate rules, regulations and statutes and applying
the same to expense claims, monitoring of contracts, and direct
involvement with the Senate's central vendor file. On average, vouchers
greater than $100 that do not have any issues or questions are
received, audited, sanctioned electronically by the Senate Committee on
Rules and Administration using Web FMIS, and are expected to be paid
within 8 to 10 business days. These vouchers comprised more than 40
percent of all vouchers, and, as in the previous year, Disbursing
passed two postpayment audits performed by the Committee on Rules and
Administration. In 2010, the average for Committee on Rules and
Administration-sanctioned items was 5.45 days, and the average for
Disbursing sanctioned items was 3.55 days, roughly 10 percent faster
than the previous year.
Uploaded items are of two varieties:
--certified expenses; and
--vendor payments.
Certified expenses have been around since the 1980s, and include
items such as stationery, telecommunications, postage, and equipment.
Currently, the certifications include mass mail, franked mail, excess
copy charges, Photography Studio, and Recording Studio charges.
Expenses incurred by the various Senate offices are certified by SAA to
the Disbursing Office on a monthly basis. The expenses are detailed on
a spreadsheet which is also electronically uploaded. The physical
voucher is audited and appropriate revisions are made.
Telecommunications charges excepted, concentrated effort is put forth
to ensure certified items appear as paid in the same month they are
incurred. Telecommunications charges usually run 1 month behind as the
SAA must wait for the bills from external vendors.
Vendor uploads are used to pay vendors for the Senate Stationery
Room, Senate Gift Shop and State office rentals, and refund security
deposits for the Senate Page School. The methodology is roughly the
same as that for certifications, but the payments rendered are for the
individual vendors. Although these items are generally processed and
paid quickly, the State office rents are generally paid a few days
prior to the month of the rental, which is consistent with the general
policy of paying rent in advance.
The A/P Audit Group provided training sessions in the use of new
systems: the process for generation of expense claims and the
permissibility of expenses. They also participated in seminars
sponsored by the Secretary of the Senate, the SAA, and the Library of
Congress (LOC). The section trained 10 new administrative managers and
chief clerks and conducted four informational sessions for Senate staff
through seminars sponsored by the Congressional Research Service (CRS).
The A/P group also routinely assists the IT department and other groups
as necessary in the testing and implementation of new hardware,
software, and system applications. The implementation of Web FMIS 2010-
1 and 2010-2 allowed the SAA to use a Web-based system more
extensively. Additionally, new functionality was made available for
auditors to view the ESRs that accompany staff vouchers. A new menu
structure was also created for inquiries. Electronic invoicing for the
Senate-wide credit card provider, JP Morgan Chase, was also
implemented.
Disbursing Office Information Technology
FMIS
The Disbursing Office Information Technology (IT) department
provides both functional and technical assistance for all Senate
financial management activities. Activities revolve around support of
Web FMIS which is used by staff in 140 Senate accounting locations
(i.e., 100 Senate personal offices, 20 committees, 20 leadership and
support offices, the Office of the Secretary of the Senate, the SAA,
the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration Audit section, and the
Disbursing Office).
Responsibilities of the department include:
--supporting current systems;
--testing infrastructure changes;
--maintaining contact with system users to ensure their needs are
met;
--managing and testing new system development;
--preparing for the 112th Congress;
--planning;
--managing the FMIS project, including contract management;
--administering the Disbursing Office's Local Area Network (LAN); and
--coordinating the Disbursing Office's disaster recovery activities.
The Disbursing Office is the ``Abusiness owner@'' of FMIS and is
responsible for making the functional decisions about FMIS. The SAA
Technology Services staff is responsible for providing the technical
infrastructure, including hardware (e.g., mainframe and servers),
operating system software, database software, and telecommunications;
technical assistance for these components, including migration
management and database administration; and regular batch processing.
The office utilizes the support of a contractor, along with the SAA who
are responsible for operational support and application development.
The three organizations work cooperatively.
Highlights of the year include:
--supporting more than 4,000 FMIS users, of which 83 percent are
staff preparing ESRs;
--implementing three releases of FMIS, including two pilots and
moving the SAA onto Web-based interfaces:
--a pilot of electronic invoicing, by which a user can easily
create a voucher based on credit card data that the Senate
receives electronically;
--a new version of the ESR that builds the traveler's itinerary
based on the location of reported expenses. This reduces
rekeying of information by staffers and the number of
errors corrected by voucher preparers and the DO A/P staff;
and
--WebPICS for SAA requisitioners, approvers, receivers, and voucher
preparers; and
--testing infrastructure changes that included upgrades to the
mainframe operating system (Z/OS), the database (DB2), and the
mainframe user security module; and
--increasing the number of States to whom Disbursing sends State
taxes via direct deposit from 21 to 27; and
--preparing for the 112th Congress.
Supporting Current Systems
IT supports Web FMIS users in all 140 accounting locations, the
departments in the Disbursing Office (e.g., A/P, Accounting,
Disbursements, Vendor Administration, and Front Office sections), and
the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration Audit staff. The
activities associated with this responsibility include:
User Support.--Providing functional and technical support to all
Senate FMIS users; staffing the FMIS ``Ahelp desk@''; answering
hundreds of questions; and meeting with chiefs of staff,
administrative managers, chief clerks, and directors of various
Senate offices as requested;
Technical Problem Resolution.--Ensuring that technical problems
are resolved;
Monitor System Performance.--Checking system availability and
statistics to identify system problems and coordinate
performance tuning activities such as those for database access
optimization;
Security.--Maintaining user rights for all ADPICS, FAMIS, and Web
FMIS users;
System Administration.--Designing, testing, and making entries to
tables that are at the core of the system;
Support of Accounting Activities.--Performing functional testing
and production validation of the cyclic accounting system
activities. This includes rollover, the process by which tables
for the new fiscal year are created, and archive/purge, the
process by which data for the just lapsed fiscal year are
archived for reporting purposes and removed from the current-
year tables;
Support of the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration
Postpayment Voucher Audit Process.--Providing the data from
which the Committee on Rules and Administration Audit staff
selects a statistically valid sample of vouchers for $100 or
less. In this way, the Committee on Rules and Administration
Audit staff review vouchers sanctioned under authority
delegated to the Financial Clerk; and
Training.--Providing functional training to all Senate FMIS
users.
Testing Infrastructure Changes
The SAA provides the infrastructure on which FMIS operates,
including the mainframe, the database, security hardware and software,
and the telecommunications network. Activities for changes to the
infrastructure include testing of all functionality prior to
implementation and validating critical functionality
postimplementation. During 2010, the SAA implemented two major upgrades
to the FMIS infrastructure. These included upgrading the database, DB2,
to version 9 in a two-step process, and upgrading the mainframe
operating system to version 1, release 11, and at the same time,
changing the mainframe security system to a Resource Access Control
Facility.
Maintaining Contact With System Users To Ensure Their Needs are Met
Communicating with our large user base is critical to provide the
excellent service. IT meets on a regularly scheduled basis with
representatives from Accounting, A/P, and the SAA. In addition, IT
meets with user groups as it gathers requirements for new
functionality. Meetings are advertised, and users self-select to
participate. This year, IT met with the administrative managers, chief
clerks, and their staff who prepare the ESRs to discuss changes to the
data entry for the ESRs. Additionally IT met with SAA users who prepare
vouchers to discuss voucher and inquiry functionality developed in the
second phase of ``WebPICS'', a Web-based front end to ADPICS with
additional functionality developed to address SAA user needs.
Managing and Testing New System Development
During 2010, IT supervised development, performed extensive
integration system testing, and implemented changes to FMIS subsystems.
The implementation and production verification activities were
completed over a weekend in order to minimize system downtime to users.
Since 2006, multiple sub-system upgrades have been consolidated into
two or three releases each year. This reduced the amount of regression
testing required. In order to accurately reflect the variety of changes
in each release, the releases are now numbered by fiscal year. During
2010, Disbursing implemented the following three major releases:
--FMIS r2010-1, implemented in January 2010;
--FMIS r2010-2, implemented in August 2010; and
--FMIS r2011-1, implemented in November 2010.
In addition, IT worked on functionality that will be included in
future releases, of which one, the FMIS Imaging Product Analysis is
especially important.
FMIS 2010-1
FMIS 2010-1 was implemented in January 2010. This release included
a small number of enhancements for WebFMIS users including an automated
password reset feature, a warning to the ESR user when their document
violates the 60-day election rule, adding graphs to the Web FMIS
summary reports, and implementing a pilot of electronic invoice
functionality, which allows a user to easily create credit card
vouchers based on invoices received electronically from the Senate's
credit card vendor. A pilot of the electronic invoice (EI)
functionality began in January and was offered to all offices in June
2010. By the end of 2010, 33 offices were using the EI functionality.
The main focus of this release was implementing WebPICS, which
enables SAA users to access ADPICS functionality through a Web-based
front end, and provides additional functionality, such as a robust
search function. The SAA follows a structured procurement process that
includes creating requisitions, creating purchase orders from
requisitions, receiving goods, entering invoices, and creating vouchers
from purchase orders. For many years, the SAA has used ADPICS, a
mainframe system, to perform these activities. This was especially
difficult for occasional users. Using a variety of technologies, the
WebPICS project replaces use of ADPICS with access to user-friendly Web
pages. This release, the first of three planned releases, focused on
the needs of requisitioners and requisition approvers, who are
occasional users, and included:
--a robust requisition search function, through which a user can find
a requisition, its related purchase order, any change orders,
and the document's history, by entering minimal information,
such as the create date, the commodity code used, by whom it
was created or the department for whom it was created;
--links to purchase orders via a viewer that formats mainframe data
into Web pages;
--a streamlined requisition create function that displays data from
multiple ADPICS screens on three tabs:
--basic information on the header tab;
--what is being requested and who will pay for it (i.e., commodity
information, commodity specifications, and the accounting
information) on the items tab; and
--additional information for the vendor on the terms tab;
--a streamlined requisition change order function that shows, on the
same page, the old information and the new information;
--look-up tables for selecting, rather than typing, information such
as commodity codes and accounting codes when searching for and
creating requisitions; and
--use of the existing Web FMIS inbox to identify, check out, view,
and approve or reject requisitions.
A pilot of SAA requisitioners and requisition approvers began using
WebPICS in early January 2010, and all requisitioners and approvers
were trained and began using this functionality by the end of April, 3
months ahead of schedule.
FMIS 2010-2
FMIS 2010-2 was implemented in August 2010. This release included a
small number of enhancements for ESR users, but was focused on
implementing new functionality for the SAA A/P process (e.g., receipt
of goods, invoice processing and approval, voucher creation, and
approval). Processes were simplified by automated retrieval of data
from existing purchase orders. WebPICS provides pop-up windows where
users enter the required data which the system uses to retrieve
information from the purchase order. The user simply verifies retrieved
data and adds information necessary to complete the process to create
receiving reports, invoices and vouchers for payments against purchase
orders.
Four additional new search windows provide ability to easily find
original and related documents, including related images stored by SAA
Finance in OnBase:
--receiving report search;
--invoice voucher search;
--expenditure search, which provides the ability to search for
expenses processed within WebFMIS, WebPICS, and via upload, the
combination of which was not previously available in one query;
and
--purchase orders search by vendor.
The third WebPICS release, which will focus on purchase order
creation and approval is scheduled for implementation in the spring of
2011.
FMIS 2011-1
FMIS 2011-1 was implemented in November 2010 and included:
--Adding two fields, invoice date and invoice receipt date, to the
WebFMIS document create page and to the document search
criteria page for all users;
--Ability for SAA users to search by project code and job code using
the document search criteria page;
--Ability for users using the electronic invoice functionality to
search by traveler's name using the document search criteria
page; and
--Introduction to a pilot group a new version of the ESR, ``Line Item
Entry''.
This version enables users to select 1 of 3 travel ESR types:
--single trip;
--multiple trips; or
--interdepartmental travel, which requires different information
depending on the type.
Users then create an ESR in a more simplified format, entering
expenses by date, location, and expense type on a line-by-line basis.
The locations are selected from a list of cities provided by the U.S.
Postal Service. This format enables the itinerary to be built
automatically from the locations entered for each expense and is
produced in the format that complies with the standards for the Report
of the Secretary. This version of the ESR is expected to reduce
rekeying by staff and reduce the corrections to itineraries made by
office managers, chief clerks, and the Disbursing Office's A/P staff. A
pilot of 10 offices and committees began in November 2010.
Additionally, this version has been given to all new Senators of the
112th Congress.
FMIS Imaging
During 2008, Disbursing implemented a prototype imaging system in
which paper vouchers and supporting documentation were imaged by
Disbursing staff and routed electronically. The hands-on experience of
this prototype was especially useful in refining system requirements.
Under the FMIS Imaging Product Analysis project, begun in 2009 and
completed in 2010, software for the image database and image viewer was
selected, and imaging and electronic signature requirements were
finalized. This information was coordinated with a separate SAA smart
card ID project; the smart cards will be used for electronic
signatures.
In October 2010, a task order for the adding document imaging and
electronic signatures to WebFMIS was signed. This task order outlines
work to be completed between now and the spring 2013 in three phases
(six releases), including:
Phase 1.--Imaging only pilot (spring 2011);
Phase 2.--Office imaging and signatures pilot (summer 2011),
extended pilot (winter 2012), and full roll-out (summer 2012);
and
Phase 3.--Staffer imaging and signatures pilot (winter 2012) and
rollout (spring 2013).
Preparing for the 112th Congress
Using statistical information from fiscal year 2009 and fiscal year
2010, IT prepared for each new Senator in the 112th Congress (including
those whose terms began at the end of the 111th Congress) budget
information based on the spending patterns for the 111th Congress.
Additionally, IT participated in the planning sessions for the new
office manager training at which Disbursing presented an outline for
training and a sample quick reference guide regarding Senate financing.
The WebFMIS training schedule for the first quarter of 2011 was
revamped to include Web FMIS classes every 2 weeks instead of once a
month.
Planning
The Disbursing IT department performs two main planning activities:
Schedule Coordination.--Planning and coordinating a rolling 18-
month schedule; and
Strategic Planning.--Setting the priorities for further system
enhancements.
Schedule Coordination
In 2010, this department continued to hold two types of meetings
between Disbursing and the SAA to coordinate schedules and activities.
These were:
Project-specific Meetings.--A useful set of project-specific
working meetings, each of which has a weekly set meeting time
and meets for the duration of the project (e.g., archive/purge
meetings and WebFMIS budget function meetings); and
Technical Meetings.--A weekly meeting to discuss the active
projects, including scheduling activities and resolving issues.
Strategic Planning
During 2010 Disbursing drafted a 5-year schedule based on earlier
meetings to ``envision the future''. This is still under discussion and
review and will be affected by the schedule for implementing a new
payroll system, which will require substantial changes to current
systems, including the interface from payroll into the General Ledger
(FAMIS) of payroll expenditures and projections, the interface from the
payroll system into the master vendor file (in FAMIS), and the payroll
reports provided to the offices via WebFMIS.
Managing the FMIS Project
The responsibility for managing the FMIS project was transferred to
the Disbursing IT department during the summer of 2003, and includes
developing the task orders with contractors, overseeing their work, and
reviewing invoices. In 2010, the following two new task orders were
executed:
Service Year 2011 Extended Operational Support.--Covers
activities from September 2010 to August 2011; and
FMIS Imaging Pilot.--Covers tasks for adding document imaging and
electronic signatures to WebFMIS. This task order outlines work
to be completed between now and the spring of 2013 (six
releases in three phases), and provides functionality for the
Secretary and the SAA, office managers/chief clerks, the
Disbursing Office A/P and Accounting staff, and Senate staff
who prepare ESRs (e.g., staff who travel).
In addition, work continued under two task orders executed in prior
years:
--Service year 2010 Extended Operational Support (covered activities
from September 2009 to August 2010); and
FMIS Imaging Product Analysis.--Analyzed what software will be
used for paperless voucher processing, including managing
images, viewing images, annotating images and reading smart
cards, which will have a component of the electronic signature.
Administering the Disbursing Office's LAN
The Disbursing Office continued to administer its own LAN, which is
separate from the network used by the rest of the Secretary's Office.
It is used by more than 50 staff. Upkeep of the LAN infrastructure,
including performing routine daily tasks and replacing equipment
regularly, is critical to providing services. In addition, there are a
number of specialized administrative applications that are housed on
the Disbursing Office LAN. During 2010, LAN administration activities
included:
--maintaining and upgrading the Disbursing Office's LAN;
--installing specialized software; and
--maintaining projects for the payroll and benefits section.
Maintaining and Upgrading the Disbursing Office LAN
Disbursing maintained the existing workstations with appropriate
upgrades including:
--installing OnWeb, a Web-based 3270 emulation software;
--imaging critical PCs for easy recovery from hard disk crash or
other PC failure;
--replacing SNAP servers with Buffalo Terra stations; and
--installing a video teleconferencing (VTC) unit in the Disbursing
Office conference room.
Installing Specialized Software
Disbursing is responsible for sending direct deposit payments to
the Federal Reserve Bank (FRB). During 2010, IT updated Disbursing's
access to the FRB, due to a change in FRB-supplied equipment and
ensured that access was functioning from the Alternate Computing
Facility (ACF).
Maintaining Projects for Payroll and EBSs
During 2010, Disbursing supported three specialized applications
for the Payroll and EBSs:
--IT continued to support the imaging system developed by SAA staff.
This system electronically captures and indexes payroll
documents submitted at the front counter, and is critical for
the Payroll and EBSs. At the end of 2009, a new version of this
software was installed and only minor updates were needed in
2010.
--In addition, the systems administrator moved the CLER application,
a health insurance benefits validation service, to a new
standalone personal computer and worked with the SAA Network
Operations staff to establish point-to-point security for
access to the Department of Agriculture.
--The Government Retirement Benefits (GRB) software, which enables
benefits counselors to easily estimate retirement benefits
based on different scenarios, is now available to Disbursing
staff.
Coordinating the Disbursing Office's Disaster Recovery Activities
Disbursing anticipates testing in 2011 to include fail-over of its
systems to the ACF, activity at the ACF, and a new activity: fail-back
of the changed production data.
sos deg.administrative offices
Chief Counsel for Employment
The Office of the Senate Chief Counsel for Employment (SCCE) is a
nonpartisan office established at the direction of the Joint Leadership
in 1993 after enactment of the Government Employee Rights Act, which
allowed Senate employees to file claims of employment discrimination
against Senate offices. With the enactment of the Congressional
Accountability Act of 1995 (CAA), as amended, Senate offices became
subject to the requirements, responsibilities and obligations of 12
employment laws. The CAA also established the Office of Compliance
(OC). Among other things, the OC accepts and processes legislative
employees' complaints that their employer has violated the CAA.
The SCCE is charged with the legal defense of Senate offices in all
employment law cases at both the administrative and court levels. The
SCCE attorneys also provide legal advice to Senate offices about their
obligations under employment laws. Accordingly, each of the 140 offices
of the Senate is an individual client of the SCCE, and each office
maintains an attorney-client relationship with the SCCE.
The areas of responsibilities of the SCCE can be divided into the
following categories:
--Litigation (defending Senate offices in courts and at
administrative hearings);
--Mediations to resolve lawsuits;
--Court-ordered alternative dispute resolutions;
--Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) compliance;
--Union drives, negotiations, and unfair labor practice charges;
--Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliance;
--Layoffs and office closings in compliance with the law;
--Management training regarding legal responsibilities; and
--Preventive legal advice.
Litigation, Mediations, Alternative Dispute Resolutions
SCCE defends each of the Senate employing offices in all court
actions, hearings, proceedings, investigations, and negotiations
relating to labor and employment laws. SCCE handles cases filed in the
District of Columbia and cases filed in any of the 50 States.
Compliance With OSHA and ADA
The CAA mandates that, at least once each Congress, the OC shall
inspect each Senate office to determine whether each office is in
compliance with the OSHA and the public accommodation portion of the
ADA. The CAA authorizes the OC to issue a public citation to any office
that is not in compliance.
SCCE provides legal assistance and advice to each Senate office to
ensure that it is complying with the OSHA and the ADA. SCCE also
represents each Senate office during the OC inspections and advises and
represents each Senate office when a complaint of an OSHA or ADA
violation is filed against the office or when a citation is issued.
In 2010, SCCE pre-inspected 1,225 Senate rooms to ensure that
Senate offices are complying with the OSHA and the ADA. Inspections
included all Member offices, leadership and committee offices, offices
of the SAA, offices of the Secretary of the Senate in the Capitol and
the Capitol Visitor Center (CVC), as well as the Hart, Dirksen, and
Russell Senate Office Buildings and offsite buildings used by the
Senate.
During 2010, the enthusiasm and participation of Senate offices in
SCCE's pre-inspection safety program resulted in perfect safety records
for 64 Member offices and 13 committees. At the conclusion of the
inspections, no Senate office had any significant safety problem, and
no citations were issued during the 111th Congress.
Training Regarding Legal Responsibilities and Employee Rights
An important part of the legal services the SCCE offers is
educating Senate managers of their obligations and employees' rights
under the employment laws that govern Senate offices. SCCE regularly
conducts legal training for Senators, Senators-elect, and their staff,
Senate employees, and Senate interns.
In 2010, the lawyers of SCCE gave 69 legal seminars to Senate
offices, including, among others:
--The Congressional Accountability Act of 1995: Management's Rights
and Obligations;
--Senators-elect Orientation: Managing Your Offices in Compliance
with Employment Laws;
--Staff of Senators-elect: How to Set Up and Manage a Senate Office
in Compliance with the Law;
--Hiring the Right Employee: Advertising, Interviewing and Conducting
Background Checks without Violating the Law;
--How to Conduct I-9 and E-Verify Checks on New Hires;
--Common Employment Law Mistakes Managers Make;
--Evaluating, Disciplining, and Terminating Employees without
Violating the Law;
--Sexual Harassment in the Workplace: What is Prohibited and What Are
Employees' Rights and Obligations;
--A Manager's Guide to Preventing and Addressing Harassment in the
Workplace;
--Diversity in the Workplace: The Americans with Disabilities Act:
What Managers Must Know about Complying with the Law;
--Military Service Academies Interviewing in Compliance with the Law;
--The Requirements of the Family and Medical Leave Act; and
--The Requirements of the Equal Pay Act.
In addition to the above 69 seminars, SCCE conducted a series of
monthly seminars covering all major employment laws that govern Senate
offices. The purpose of the seminars was to educate Senate management
staff about their responsibility to ensure that their respective
offices comply with the CAA. The series was open to all chiefs of
staff, staff directors, administrative directors, chief clerks, and
office managers. Individuals who completed the series received a
certificate of completion from the Secretary of the Senate.
SCCE, working with the Senate Radio and TV Studio, now streams its
seminars to all Senate State offices so that the managers in State
offices can participate electronically in all SCCE live seminars. In
addition, SCCE electronically stores SCCE seminars to allow Senate
managers who were unable to attend a seminar to review it
electronically from their desk monitors at a later date. Finally, to
ensure that all Senate managers, whether in Washington, DC or a State
office, can easily learn about and register for SCCE's seminars, SCCE
added an online seminar registration process to its Web site.
Legal Advice
SCCE meets daily with Members, chiefs of staff, administrative
directors, office managers, staff directors, chief clerks, and counsel
at their request to provide legal advice. For example, on a daily
basis, SCCE advises Senate offices on matters such as interviewing,
hiring, counseling, disciplining, and terminating employees in
compliance with the law; handling and investigating sexual harassment
complaints; accommodating the disabled; determining wage law
requirements; meeting the requirements of the Family and Medical Leave
Act; management's rights and obligations under union laws and the OSHA;
and management's obligation to give leave to employees for military
service. In 2010, the SCCE had more than 1,695 client legal advice
meetings.
Also, SCCE provides legal assistance to Senate offices to ensure
that their office policies, job descriptions, interviewing guidelines,
and performance evaluation forms comply with the law and are updated as
employment laws change. In 2010, SCCE prepared 229 policy manuals for
Member offices and committees.
Union Drives, Negotiations, and Unfair Labor Practice Charges
In 2010, the SCCE provided guidance to managers and supervisors
regarding their legal and contractual obligations under union
contracts.
Environmental, Cost, and Space Savings
It has now been 10 years since SCCE became the first Senate office
to convert to a ``paperless'' office. By doing this, SCCE has benefited
the environment, cut costs, cleared office space, reduced storage
needs, and become more efficient. Having accomplished that project,
SCCE turned its attention to eliminating hard copy legal books in its
office. To this end, in 2009 SCCE eliminated 50 percent of its hard
copy legal library. In 2010, SCCE further reduced its book inventory by
20 percent. SCCE achieved this through a combination of scanning and
converting to electronic books. In addition to the above-mentioned
benefits, this project saves the office more than $6,000 annually, has
freed approximately 288 square feet of office space, and has saved time
by eliminating the need for staff members to update legal books on a
weekly basis with new paper inserts.
sos deg.conservation and preservation
The Office of Conservation and Preservation develops and
coordinates programs directly related to the conservation and
preservation of Senate records and materials for which the Secretary of
the Senate has statutory and other authority. Initiatives include:
--deacidification of paper and prints;
--phased conservation for books and documents;
--collection surveys, exhibits, and matting; and
--framing for the Senate Leadership.
Senate Library
As mandated in the 1990 Senate Library Collection Condition Survey,
the office continued to conduct an annual treatment of books identified
by the survey as needing conservation or repair. In 2010 conservation
treatments were completed for 173 volumes of a 7,000 volume collection
of House hearings. Specifically, treatment involved recasing each
volume as required, using alkaline end sheets, replacing acidic tab
sheets with alkaline paper, cleaning the cloth cases, and replacing
black spine title labels of each volume as necessary. The Office of
Conservation and Preservation will continue preservation of the
remaining 3,410 volumes.
Preservation
The Office of Conservation and Preservation completed 106 volumes
of House and Senate hearings and Congressional Records for the Senate
Library. These books were rebound with new end sheets and new covers
using the old spines when possible.
Committees
Conservation and Preservation assisted the Committee on the Budget,
Select Committee on Ethics, and the Joint Economic Committee with their
books being sent to the GPO for binding.
Exhibition
Conservation and Preservation assisted the Senate Historical and
Curator's offices in the installation of a new exhibition to mark the
150th anniversary of the Civil War. The exhibition replaced the
Inauguration exhibit in the Senate wing's first floor connecting
corridor.
sos deg.CURATOR
The Office of Senate Curator, on behalf of the Senate Commission on
Art, develops and implements the museum and preservation programs for
the United States Senate. The Curator collects, preserves, and
interprets the Senate's fine and decorative arts, historic objects, and
specific architectural features; and the Curator exercises supervisory
responsibility for the historic chambers in the Capitol under the
jurisdiction of the Commission. Through exhibitions, publications, and
other programs, the Curator educates the public about the Senate and
its collections.
Collections, Commissions, Acquisitions, and Management
This year 294 objects were accessioned into the Senate Collection.
Many of these historic objects were deposited with the Curator's Office
to ensure their safekeeping. These included a ticket from the 1945
Presidential Address to Congress; 13 artifacts from the 1939
congressional welcome of King George VI and Queen Elizabeth; 10 items
from the 1941 visit of Prime Minister Winston Churchill; 17 artifacts
from the 1943 visit of Madame Chiang Kai-Shek; various tickets,
programs, badges, passes, and other objects from 10 different Inaugural
ceremonies held between 1925 and 1989; 25 objects from funerals held in
the Senate Chamber; items from the 1953 memorial service for Senator
Robert A. Taft held in the Rotunda; and tickets from the Senate
nomination hearing for Elena Kagan as Associate Justice of the Supreme
Court of the United States.
A painting of Senator Bill Frist by artist Michael Shane Neal was
completed as part of the Senate Leadership Portrait Collection. It will
be unveiled in March 2011.
The most significant addition to the collection was the acquisition
of four small paintings by 19th century artist Constantino Brumidi,
created in preparation for frescoes in the Senate Reception Room (S-
213) and the Senate Committee on Military Affairs and Militia (S-128).
The Senate had long been aware of these historic oil sketches, which
formed the largest known private collection of Brumidi's Capitol works.
Thirty-nine new foreign gifts were reported in 2010 to the Select
Committee on Ethics and deposited with the Senate Curator's office on
behalf of the Secretary of the Senate. The office currently is
responsible for 211 foreign gifts, which are catalogued and maintained
in accordance with the Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act. Appropriate
disposition of 80 foreign gifts was completed following established
procedures.
The Office of Senate Curator continued to document and care for the
historic Russell Senate Office Building furnishings. In addition, the
search continued for Russell Senate Office Building furniture located
in private collections, museums, and libraries, and another 1909
partner desk was returned to the Senate from the University of Nevada
at Reno. In addition, the office drafted guidelines for the care of
these century-old furnishings to prevent the physical degradation of
the furniture, and, when appropriate, allow the pieces to be restored
to their original 1909 appearance.
The Curator's Office continued to work with the CVC project staff,
AOC representatives, and their consultants to resolve problems with the
heating, ventilating, and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment in the
Curator's two CVC collection storage spaces. In June 2009, consultants
determined that the HVAC equipment installed in the new storage rooms
was unable to meet environmental requirements and needed to be
replaced. New equipment was ordered and installed in the larger of the
two rooms. Fine tuning of this system is nearing completion.
Replacement of the HVAC equipment in the smaller room began in January
2011. These HVAC systems are essential to the Curator's mission to
preserve the Senate's significant collections.
Maintenance of the Senate's historic clocks continued under a
program established in 2009 to provide regularly scheduled care. Since
the Curator's staff assumed responsibility last year for winding the
Senate's historic clocks, the opportunity to closely observe their
function has helped alleviate recurring problems with timekeeping.
The care of collections on display has benefitted from the addition
of an automated maintenance record system that is now part of the
Senate collection database. Regular cleaning and care of the art and
historic furnishings is now tracked and recorded. Staff is alerted when
an object is due for care based on this new automated maintenance
program, thus saving considerable time when scheduling and planning
work.
The office enhanced its emergency preparedness for the collection
by identifying local disaster recovery companies to assist in a
disaster, and finalizing an emergency disaster guide. The guide
provides contact information on local art handlers, shippers, and
conservators, as well as information on how to address the care of
specific materials in the event of fire, water, infestation, or a
chemical emergency. Additionally, all new loan agreements were
digitized in a portable document format for easy retrieval off-site,
and a map noting the current location of loaned objects was created to
allow quick identification of loans that may be affected in an
emergency situation.
The office continued its program of photographing all objects for
the collection database. More than 50 objects were photographed, and a
total of 859 images out of 4,598 were resized for consistency. Staff
also worked with the Senate Photographic Studio on several special
projects, including documenting new signatures in the Senate Chamber
desk drawers, recording conservation and installation of artwork, and
photographing historic spaces. Such documentation is important for
recordkeeping, disaster preparedness, use on Senate.gov, and for
publications promoting the Senate's collections.
In keeping with scheduled procedures, all Senate collection objects
on display were inventoried, noting any changes in location. In
addition, as directed by S. Res. 178 (108th Congress, 1st session), the
office submitted inventories of the art and historic furnishings in the
Senate to the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration. The
inventories, which are submitted every 6 months, are compiled by the
Curator's Office with assistance from the SAA and AOC's Superintendent
of Senate Office Buildings.
Both recordkeeping and protection of the Senate's historic mirror
collection received considerable attention. The object files and
database entries for all 94 mirrors were reviewed and updated based on
established registration standards. Taking advantage of renovation
work, the office installed protective plinths on two mirrors. By
raising the mirrors from the mantels and creating a larger footprint,
the plinths shield the mirror frames from spills, damage from objects
displayed on the mantels, and routine dusting. In addition,
implementation of a plan to provide routine, on-site professional care
for the Senate's gilded frames, including mirror and picture frames,
began in 2010. A list of treatable damage was developed and several
frames repaired. Seventeen mirrors were also cleaned.
The office coordinated the approval by the Senate Committee on
Rules and Administration and the Commission on Art of mirror movement
guidelines. The guidelines safeguard these important decorative objects
from unnecessary damage due to excessive handling, and preserve each
mirror's significance by retaining its historic association with a
room.
Staff worked with the SAA Cabinet Shop to develop a list of the
multiple components of the writing boxes that are part of the Senate
Chamber desks. A computerized drawing of one of the boxes was completed
to aid in the work. Many of these writing boxes have sustained damage
over the years, and a comprehensive survey is needed to prioritize
repairs. Once the survey is completed, the Cabinet Shop will begin
refurbishing the boxes.
The official Senate chinaware was used at 16 receptions for
distinguished guests, both foreign and domestic, including a luncheon
for the King of Jordan, a tea for the President of Russia, and a tea
for the President of Haiti. The Secretary's china was inventoried and
used at three receptions sponsored by the chairman of the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee.
Conservation and Restoration
In addition to the regular maintenance required for the Senate's
historic clocks, extensive conservation occurred on two clocks: the
``Ohio'' clock and the architectural shelf clock in the Old Senate
Chamber. Both clocks have significant histories, and are exceptional
examples of 19th century American clock making.
The ``Ohio'' clock was purchased from Thomas Voigt of Philadelphia
in 1816, to be used in the Senate Chamber after renovations were
completed following the burning of the Capitol by the British. After
194 years of continuous use, accumulated grime, layers of varnish, and
repairs had taken their toll on the case and the eagle. Conservators
conducted microscopic studies of the finish layers that had built up
over time. Their findings provided new and exciting information about
the clock, and were the basis for re-gilding the historic eagle. The
clock's movement also required extensive repairs, especially to the
hands and the timekeeping mechanism. As a result of this conservation,
the ``Ohio'' clock now accurately reflects its 19th century appearance,
and, it is hoped, will continue to run for another 200 years.
The architectural shelf clock was purchased from the Bailey and
Kitchen Company of Philadelphia in 1846 to serve as the timepiece for
the Old Senate Chamber following removal of the ``Ohio'' clock. The
Bailey clock needed thorough cleaning and repair, as well as
replacement of material that has worn away over time due to continuous
use. During the conservation of the two clocks, the Curator's office
obtained new information about their physical histories that could only
be discovered during the course of treatment.
A condition assessment was completed in order to develop a
comprehensive scope of work for the restoration of the Senate Chamber
desk inkwells and sanders. These artifacts date to about 1930, and are
starting to show their age. The evaluation helped identify damaged
glass in need of replacement, broken or missing hinges, and corrosion
to the metal and loss of patina. The next phase is to finalize a scope
of work and select a conservator. Conservation is projected to begin in
2012 when other work in the chamber is scheduled.
Three portraits recently acquired for the Senate Leadership
Portrait Collection received preservation treatment. The portraits of
Senators Robert C. Byrd, Tom Daschle, and Trent Lott were given a final
protective coating of varnish, which is done only after the paint is
completely dry.
The office began the restoration of the eight Flemish oak benches
purchased in 1899 for the Senate Reception Room. Over time, their
carved back panels had been removed, their seats and backs upholstered,
and they were poorly refinished multiple times. The conservation
process included research into the original carved panels and finish,
and the difficult repair of the extensive upholstery damage. Once
returned to the Senate, the benches will reflect their original
appearance, and be ready to provide another century of service.
Historic Preservation
The Senate's historic preservation program seeks to formulate a
solid preservation policy reflective of the Senate's interests and the
need to preserve the Capitol's historic fabric and historical artistic
intent. Through various initiatives, the preservation program has
positioned itself as a valuable resource for the Senate, ensuring that
all projects are carefully considered and weighed in light of sound
preservation practices.
The Curator's Office continued to work closely with the AOC and the
SAA to review, comment, plan, and document Senate-side construction
projects (many of which are long-term initiatives) that involve or
affect historic resources. Such construction and conservation efforts
included:
--energy lighting upgrades;
--first responder antennae installation;
--mural restoration;
--smoke purge system installation;
--wall and ceiling restoration;
--scagliola conservation;
--third floor plaster repair; and
--the Brumidi Corridors restoration.
Through this work, the Curator's Office was able to ensure that the
highest preservation standards possible were applied to all Capitol
projects. The Curator's office continued its participation in a working
group (whose other members were the SAA, AOC, and Rules Committee) to
engage in several building projects to conserve and protect public
spaces and historic assets. In areas with conserved scagliola, the
office worked with the SAA to develop and install various surface
protection measures. Similarly, the Curator's Office worked with the
SAA to devise a solution to the furniture in the Brumidi Corridors
north door entrance. The challenging Senate Reception Room restoration
and rehabilitation project, developed by the Senate Curator and the AOC
Curator, has successfully moved forward. A pilot conservation project
was initiated by the AOC for part of the decorative wall design. The
Reception Room has a very complex pattern of surface treatments that
involve delicate toned glazes and precise application methods. The
office arranged to have existing room condition drawings completed,
surveyed the floor tiles, and placed informational signs in the room
detailing the conservation. Once the pilot is completed in late 2011,
the restoration of the remaining wall surfaces should proceed more
quickly.
Regarding the Brumidi Corridors restoration, the office assisted
the AOC in garnering support for a comprehensive, time-bound plan for
finishing the corridors. With the support of the Committee on Rules and
Administration and Senate Commission on Art, it is hoped that this 5-
year plan can move forward in 2011. It will be a major achievement when
these treasured corridors can be returned to their original artistry.
Historic Chambers
The Curator's staff continued to maintain the Old Senate and Old
Supreme Court Chambers, and coordinated periodic use of both rooms for
special occasions. The office staff worked with the USCP on the
procedures developed to record the after-hours access to the historic
chambers by current Members of Congress. Eighty-five requests were
received from current Members for after-hours access to the Old Senate
and Old Supreme Court Chambers.
Of special significance in the Old Senate Chamber was the re-
enactment swearing-in ceremonies for five Senators, and the closed
Senate session on the New START Treaty.
Loans to and From the Collection
A total of 61 historic objects and paintings are currently on loan
to the Curator's Office on behalf of Senate leadership and offices in
the Senate wing of the Capitol. The staff returned five loans,
coordinated six new loans, and renewed loan agreements for 34 other
objects. More than 37 loans are projected to be renewed next year.
Publications and Exhibitions
The Senate Commission on Art's enabling legislation (2 U.S.C. 2104)
requires that ``at least every ten years'' a Senate document be
published which lists all works of art, historical objects, and
exhibits currently within the Senate wing of the Capitol and the Senate
Office Buildings. The document was published this year with the
assistance of GPO. Encompassing more than 4,000 works of art and
artifacts, the inventory records the growth of the Senate collection
over the last 10 years; demonstrates the office's concerted effort to
acquire objects that enhance the collection; and provides a publicly
accessible list of the entire collection.
At the request of the Republican Leader's Office, the Curator
worked with the Senate Historical Office to produce a booklet to
supplement the existing Leader's suite brochure. The supplemental
publication includes color images and descriptions on the art in the
suite and highlights Kentucky connections to the suite's history.
In recognition of the Congressional Gold Medal to be awarded to
Constantino Brumidi, the office developed a publication on the
Capitol's artist. Staff worked with GPO on the layout and design for
the book, and the first two chapters have been completed. This
illustrated publication will highlight new scholarship from historians,
curators, and conservators about Brumidi's artistic endeavors in the
Senate wing of the Capitol.
In conjunction with the Senate Library and Senate Historical
Office, staff installed two exhibits outside the newly remodeled
Dirksen G-50 hearing room as requested by the Rules Committee. The
exhibits were placed in the showcases built into the walls of the
room's vestibule. One case highlights Senator Everett M. Dirksen, for
whom the building was named; the other case features the building--its
origins, construction, and architectural details.
A new exhibition was installed to mark the 150th anniversary of the
Civil War, replacing the Inauguration exhibit in the Senate wing's
first floor connecting corridor. This project was a joint effort
between the Senate Historical Office, Curator's Office, with assistance
from the Office of Conservation and Preservation, GPO, and the AOC
Paintings and Decorating Division. Traditionally, the story of the
Civil War is told from the perspective of the President or his military
commanders, but this exhibit illustrates the crucial role played by the
Senate and its Members during this national crisis.
Curator's staff finalized an online Web exhibit on Senate.gov
dispelling myths and rumors often heard about Senate art. Seven
different ``myths'' are included in the initial posting, featuring the
most prominent and oft-repeated apocryphal stories. The office also
increased its presence on the Web this year with a new section
highlighting the Senate's decorative art collection. Seventy-two
artifact pages were posted, from gilded mirrors and historic clocks, to
Senate Restaurant china, snuff boxes, and other important Senate
heirlooms. In addition, an online exhibition featuring artifacts
related to funerals held in the Senate Chamber was posted; and a new
Web section titled, ``Curator's Picks,'' highlighting the Curator's
favorite works in the Senate Collection, will be completed shortly.
Staff also proceeded with the design and outline for an historic spaces
section for Senate.gov. When completed, the site will guide visitors
through such treasures as the Old Senate and Old Supreme Court
Chambers, the President's Room, and other significant historic spaces.
At the request of the Committee on Rules and Administration, and
pursuant to S. Res. 53, the office installed a bronze plaque honoring
the work of African-American slaves in building the U.S. Capitol. The
plaque is located in the third floor east front connecting corridor of
the Senate wing, where a portion of the Capitol's original 1800
exterior wall can be seen.
Collaborations, Educational Programs, and Events
The Curator's staff assisted the National Archives again this year
with two exhibits for display in the vault at the Center for
Legislative Archives. Objects related to the Senate Chamber's 150th
anniversary continued on display, and were replaced with an exhibition
of objects related to Constantino Brumidi.
The Curator and staff assisted with numerous CVC-related projects
throughout the year. The Curator, Associate Curator, and administrator
provided support for the Congressional Historical Interpretation
Program (CHIP), including developing a new e-learning program and
guidebook; participated in the morning ``briefings'' to the Capitol
Guide Service to better inform them on Senate art and history;
conducted exhibition lectures for the public; reviewed exhibition text
and images; and at the request of the CVC oversight for the Senate, the
Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, continued to work closely
with the House Curator and AOC Curator to review products and
publications for the CVC gift shop.
The Senate Curator assisted the AOC Curator and House Curator on
various art-related research and projects, most notably the Rosa Parks
commission, display of the House Bierstadt paintings, and conservation-
related matters. The Senate Curator and staff also gave lectures on the
Senate's art and historical collections to various historical groups
and art museums. The staffs further assisted with the Secretary's
Senate staff lecture and tour series and were regular contributors to
Unum, the Secretary's newsletter.
Office Administration and Automation
The collections management database was reviewed, assessed, and
improved to include the reconfiguration of the artist information,
updates to loan and inscription records, and the creation of an object
maintenance table. This work will allow more efficient search
capabilities, a stable database, and an easier way of transferring
information into reports.
In the area of file management, the Curator's staff completed a
major restructuring of the office's electronic files, applying a new
organizational matrix and file naming protocols. Combined with this
effort, the office developed and implemented project close-out
procedures. This standardization and consistent records collation has
greatly improved the usability of the office resources, streamlined
office recordkeeping, and enhanced research capabilities.
COOP Planning
In the area of COOP preparedness, the office conducted its annual
table top exercise and trained staff to use remote desktop access
through a series of work-from-home exercises. The exercises proved
effective in identifying problems and troubleshooting issues before a
true emergency occurs.
Objectives for 2011
Conservation and preservation of the Senate's collections continue
to be a priority, and several major projects are planned for 2011. Two
of the Senate's most iconic works in the Old Senate Chamber will be
restored:
--the Eagle and Shield sculpture; and
--the portrait of George Washington by Rembrandt Peale.
In preparation, a detailed review of past treatments and analyses
by various conservators was undertaken in 2010. A scope of work will be
developed and a panel of experts will assist in the review process. The
conservation schedule will be coordinated with repairs planned in the
Old Senate so that the works of art are out of harm's way when
renovations begin. Additionally, conservation of the Senate Reception
Room benches will be completed.
Based on the findings from a condition assessment of the Senate's
collection of historic clocks completed in 2008, the Curator's Office
will continue to schedule necessary conservation for the clocks to
avoid deterioration of their parts and their function as accurate
timepieces. The tall case clock in the Vice President's Ceremonial
Office is next scheduled for treatment; both the case and movement will
require conservation.
Staff will begin the survey of the Senate Chamber desk writing
boxes, with the assistance of the SAA Cabinet Shop, and develop a plan
for their repair and ongoing maintenance. The interior and exterior of
the writing boxes will be assessed for condition, and the various
components will be inspected and documented. Repair work will begin in
2012, depending on the Senate's schedule.
With regards to the care of the Senate's historic mirrors, staff
will inventory the historic Russell House Office Building mirrors and
initiate a maintenance program for the nine historic oversized mirrors
located in committee hearing rooms. In order to increase the skill and
knowledge of the Curator's Office, several staff will participate in
hands-on training related to basic gilded frame repair. This will
reduce the need for professional conservators, improve the response
time to urgent repairs, and save the Senate money over time.
In the area of collections management, the office will continue
reviewing photographs in the collections database to ascertain that
each object has a documentation photograph and that it meets required
size parameters.
The office will further efforts to locate and recover historic
artifacts associated with the Senate, specifically tickets and programs
to Senate Chamber funerals and historic furnishings associated with the
Senate and Supreme Court (when it met in the Capitol).
The Curator's staff will confer with the AOC regarding preservation
issues related to Senate restoration and remodeling projects,
disseminate project information to the Senate, develop preservation
projects at the request of the Senate, conduct condition inspections,
and arrange necessary maintenance. The bulk of the office's project
management will involve advancing the restoration and rehabilitation of
the Brumidi Corridors, the Senate Reception Room, and the Strom
Thurmond Room.
With the assistance of GPO and the AOC Senate Superintendent, the
Curator's Office will create a new educational exhibit and brochure for
the sculpture Mountains and Clouds, located in the Hart Senate Office
Building atrium. The exhibit will feature information on the artist,
sculpture, conservation, and the maquette, or scale model. An exhibit
will also be mounted for the four new Brumidi paintings. The sketches
will be displayed in a public area, so that staff and visitors can
appreciate these important works of art.
Other education efforts will focus on Senate.gov. Staff will
continue to add objects to the decorative art section, as well as
update the Senate Chamber desk site to reflect the new seating
arrangement for the 112th Congress. A Web supplement will be added to
the United States Senate Catalogue of Fine Art, highlighting the art
collected by the Senate since the catalogue was published in 2002.
Additionally, the office will develop a schematic and assemble
resources for posting the historic spaces site. The first room targeted
will be the Old Senate Chamber. The historic spaces site will feature
the historical, artistic, and decorative elements of each space, as
well as restoration details where applicable.
The collections management database will be reviewed by the office
to determine if it can continue to serve the Senate's growing needs.
The collections database will also be backed up, cloned, and compressed
on a regular basis to prevent further corruption or potential loss of
data.
The office maintains a digital documentation database of all
legislation, precedents, and procedures related to the Senate
Commission on Art and Senate Curator's Office. These electronic records
will be upgraded and implemented with indexes and full annotations,
allowing easier search capabilities and access during a COOP emergency.
Also in the area of COOP preparedness, the office will conduct its
annual table top exercise, will refine and improve the navigability of
its online COOP plan, and will continue with its series of work-from-
home exercises to best prepare the office for an emergency situation.
Finally, the office will plan for any crisis that may affect the
Senate's collections by finalizing the disaster recovery guide to
include the new collection storage areas in the CVC.
sos deg.EDUCATION AND TRAINING
The Joint Office of Education and Training provides employee
training and development opportunities for all Senate staff in
Washington, DC and the States. There are two branches within the
office: Education and Training and Health Promotion. The Education and
Training branch is responsible for providing management and leadership
development, training on human resources issues and staff benefits,
writing, editing, legislative research and time management, as well as
offering technical training support for approved software packages and
equipment and new staff and intern information in either Washington, DC
or the State offices. This branch provides training as instructor-led
classes; one-on-one coaching sessions; specialized vendor provided
training; video teleconferencing; webinars; Internet-based training,
documentation, job-aids, and quickcards. The Health Promotion branch
provides seminars, classes, and screenings on health and wellness
issues. This branch also coordinates an annual health fair for all
Senate employees and plans blood drives every year.
Capitol Hill Training Events
The Office of Education and Training offered 1,278 classes and
events on Capitol Hill in 2010, drawing more than 10,000 participants.
The registration desk handled more than 25,000 email and phone requests
for training and documentation.
The above total includes 438 customized training sessions for 1,937
staff members. These sessions ranged from in-depth training of Senate
office system administrators, conflict resolution, and organizational
development. The office provides individual consultation on Web site
development and office systems training, as well as classes in resume
and interviewing skills building for staff whose Members have died,
announced their retirements, or been defeated.
The Senate's Intern Program is also a focus of the office. The
office provides training for intern coordinators as well as five
orientation and training sessions for approximately 500 interns.
The annual Senate Services Expo for Senate office staff had 35
presenters from the offices of the Secretary of the Senate, SAA, AOC,
USCP, and LOC providing an overview of their services to 250 staff.
This is part of the orientation for new staff and the aides to the
Senators-elect in addition to the seven orientation sessions held
shortly after the November elections.
State Training Events
The Office of Education and Training provided 85 learning
opportunities to State offices for which 2,813 State staff registered.
The office continues to offer the State Training Fair Program and
video teleconferencing and webinars as a means to train State staff. In
2010, two sessions of the State Training Fairs were attended by 63
State staff. In addition, 62 State administrative managers and
directors attended the State Directors Forum; 43 State staff
participated in a a Constituent Services Forum. Education and Training
also provided advanced all-staff meeting facilitation to more than 20
offices that were attended by more than 650 staff. Additionally, the
office offered 33 Video Teleconferencing classes, for which 1,707 State
staff registered and 28 webinars that were attended by 288.
To date, 692 State and Hill staff have registered and accessed a
total of 1,534 different lessons and publications using Internet-based
training covering technical, professional, and language skills. This
allows staff in both the Hill and State to take training at their
convenience. Education and Training also provides 54 Senate-specific
self-paced lessons that have been accessed more than 3,200 times.
Health Promotion
In the Health Promotion area, 3,070 staff participated in 56
activities throughout the year. These activities included:
--lung function and kidney screenings;
--eight blood drives;
--the Health and Fitness Day;
--seminars on health-related topics; and
--the Annual Senate Health Fair.
Health Promotion also coordinates Weight Watchers, yoga, and
Pilates sessions using its revolving fund. More than 260 staff
participated in at least one of these programs.
sos deg.GIFT SHOP
Since its establishment in 1992 (2 U.S.C. 121d), the Senate Gift
Shop has continued to provide outstanding service and products that
maintain the integrity of the Senate while increasing the public's
awareness of its mission and history. The gift shop serves Senators,
their spouses, staffs, constituents, and the many visitors to the U.S.
Capitol complex. The products available include a wide range of fine
gift items, collectibles, and souvenirs created exclusively for the
U.S. Senate.
Facilities
In addition to three physical locations, the gift shop has an
online presence on Webster, the Senate's Intranet. The Web site
currently offers an increasing selection of products that can be
purchased by phone, email, or by printing and faxing the order form
provided on the Web site. Along with offering over-the-counter and
walk-in sales, as well as limited Intranet services, the gift shop
administrative office provides mail order service via phone or fax, and
special order and catalogue sales via in person visit, email, phone, or
fax.
The gift shop maintains two warehouse facilities. The bulk of the
gift shop's stock is held in the Senate Storage Facility (SSF), an
offsite warehouse. While the SAA is in charge of the overall management
of the SSF, the director of the gift shop has responsibility for the
operation and oversight of the interior spaces assigned for gift shop
use. Storing inventory in this centralized, climate-controlled facility
provides protection for the gift shop's valuable inventory in terms of
physical security as well as improved shelf life for perishable and
nonperishable items alike.
The second gift shop warehouse is maintained within the Capitol
complex. This facility serves as the point of distribution of
merchandise to the gift shop store and the Capitol gift shop counter,
both of which have limited storage space. This warehouse accommodates
the gift shop's receiving, shipping, and engraving departments, as well
as supplying the inventory sold through the administrative and special
order office.
Sales Activities
Sales recorded for fiscal year 2010 were $1,566,884.32. Cost of
goods sold during this same period was $1,275,359.81, accounting for a
gross profit on sales of $291,524.51.
In addition to tracking gross profit from sales, the Senate Gift
Shop maintains a revolving fund and a record of inventory purchased for
resale. As of October 1, 2009, the balance in the revolving fund was
$2,969,766.74. The inventory purchased for resale was valued at
$2,964,598.93.
Additional Activity
Government Accountability Office (GAO) Audit
At the request of the Secretary of the Senate, in September 2010,
GAO conducted an inventory observation and audit of the gift shop
financial operations. The established departmental procedures and
policies implemented on a daily, monthly, and annual basis proved to be
instrumental in the gift shop's achieving a positive review during the
verbal feedback portion of the GAO exit interview. The recommendations
provided by the GAO at the conclusion of their observation had either
already been implemented or will be adapted as recommended as part of
our future operational procedures.
Environmental Fair
The gift shop participated in both 2010 U.S. Senate Environmental
and Energy Fairs sponsored by the AOC. Environmentally friendly
products that were displayed included wooden flag and desk boxes,
wooden pens, custom-designed wrapping paper produced from recycled
paper, aluminum water bottles, biodegradable travel mugs, and a travel
mug produced from 100 percent U.S. natural corn products.
Selected Accomplishments in Fiscal Year 2010
Official Congressional Holiday Ornaments
The design and style of this year's Congressional Holiday Ornament
reflected a new direction for the gift shop ornament program. No longer
part of a 4-year series with a unifying theme, this year the ornament
was created of cutwork metal assembled to create a three-dimensional
scene. Colorful enameling on all sides completed the effect. The 2010
holiday ornament is a winter scene of the east front of the Capitol on
a snowy evening with a horse-drawn carriage that suggests a time in our
history near the end of the 18th century.
Sales of the 2010 holiday ornament exceeded 29,000 ornaments, of
which more than 5,700 were personalized with engravings designed,
proofed, and etched by Senate Gift Shop staff. This highly successful
effort was made possible by the combined efforts of our administrative,
engraving, and store staffs.
Bookmarks
New products introduced in 2010 included bookmarks depicting images
of flowers and ground covers that are often planted by the AOC on the
Capitol grounds. In all, there are 11 varieties of plants depicted on
the canvas palettes. The images on these 2 8 canvas bookmarks
serve as a unique reminder of the ever-changing appearance of the
Capitol flower beds, and the anticipated timely changes that regularly
occur because of the area's seasonal weather conditions.
Webster Intranet Site
The Web site continues to expand with the addition of new
merchandise with assistance from the Senate Photography Studio. Product
descriptions are written in house.
The gift shop contributes an article highlighting products and
services to each issue of the Secretary's UNUM newsletter. In turn, the
Web site links to the electronic version of UNUM, a practice that has
increased traffic to the Web site and may be responsible for an
increase in the use of gift shop services by State offices.
Projects Recently Produced and New Initiatives for 2010
CVC
The Senate Gift Shop continued to supply them with a wide variety
of inventory product, offering service when needed, and advice on
purchase order, invoice, and operational processes.
Congressional Plate Series
The latest 8-year, four-plate series of the 112th, 113th, 114th,
and 115th Congress has been produced. The 112th plate is currently
being offered for sale. The plates for each of the future Congresses
will be made available during that respective congressional session.
This series has once again been designed and produced by Tiffany & Co.
The designs depict art and architecture from four of the most
historically significant rooms in the Capitol: the Senate
Appropriations Room, Old Senate Chamber, Old Supreme Court Chamber, and
President's Room.
sos deg.historical office
Serving as the Senate's institutional memory, the Historical Office
collects and provides information on important events, precedents,
dates, statistics, and historical comparisons of current and past
Senate activities for use by Members and staff, the media, scholars,
and the general public. The Office staff advises Senators, officers,
and committees on cost-effective disposition of their noncurrent office
files and assists researchers in identifying Senate-related source
materials. The historians keep extensive biographical, bibliographical,
photographic, and archival information on the more than 1,900 former
and current Senators. The staff edits for publication historically
significant transcripts and minutes of selected Senate committees and
party organizations, and conducts oral history interviews with key
Senate staff. The photo historian maintains a collection of
approximately 40,000 still pictures that includes photographs and
illustrations of Senate committees and nearly all former Senators. The
Office staff develops and maintains all historical material on the
Senate Web site, Senate.gov.
Editorial Projects
Sesquicentennial of the Civil War
The Historical Office has engaged in a number of projects to
commemorate the 150th anniversary of the Senate's role in the Civil
War. Historians have teamed with the Senate Curator to produce an
exhibit in the Capitol on ``The Senate's Civil War'', and have assisted
the staff of the CVC in selecting items for display related to the
Civil War and Reconstruction. The historians have also prepared a
booklet for distribution to remind Americans of the legislative and
investigatory component of a story that is more often presented from a
military or Presidential perspective. These projects will be
complemented by online features on the Senate's Civil War experience.
Revised Kennedy Caucus Room Brochure
The Senate's naming of the Russell House Office Building Caucus
Room in memory of John F., Robert F., and Edward Kennedy prompted the
revision and redesign of the brochure for the room. The brochure is
often used by Senators who host meetings in the Caucus Room. In
addition to explaining the architectural and legislative history of the
room, the brochure includes information on the Senators Kennedy and
their individual connections to the Caucus Room along with updated
photographs.
Documentary Histories of the U.S. Senate
The Historical Office continued work on its online documentary
history series, which presents case studies and primary-source
documentation for all contested Senate elections, censure and expulsion
cases, impeachment trials, and major investigations. Intended for use
within the Senate and by the general public, these documentary
histories are particularly valuable for teachers who seek to include
primary-source documents in their lesson plans. This project also
allows the Historical Office to update case studies of past events, and
to add new case studies as needed, eliminating the need for new print
editions of past publications, reducing costs and paper use. Three
parts (contested elections, censures, and expulsions) of this five-
stage project have been completed, and substantial progress was made in
the remaining two categories. Two cases were added this year in the
impeachment category, as well as a revised and updated summary page on
major investigations and case studies on the Pecora banking and
Watergate investigations. A third case study of the Civil War-era Joint
Committee on the Conduct of the War is nearing completion as well.
States in the Senate
In this collaborative project, staff historians have created
timelines and compiled selected illustrative images for each of the 50
States. The States in the Senate will highlight persons and events in
the State's history that relate to the U.S. Senate to be featured on
Senate.gov, which informs Senators, staff, and constituents alike. A
Web design for the project has been created in partnership with the GPO
and Web Technology that provides an interactive timeline for each State
with links to relevant documentary and visual material, along with a
table of Senators from each class with service dates. Staff have begun
entering the timeline data and lists of Senators, and have begun
identifying images for each timeline.
Administrative History of the Senate
The associate historian continued to prepare a historical account
of the Senate's administrative evolution since 1789. This study traces
the development of the offices of the Secretary of the Senate and SAA,
considers 19th and 20th century reforms that resulted in reorganization
and professionalization of Senate staff, and looks at how the Senate's
administrative structure has grown and diversified.
Rules of the United States Senate, Since 1789
In 1980, Senate parliamentarian emeritus Dr. Floyd M. Riddick, at
the direction of the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration,
prepared a publication containing the eight codes of rules that the
Senate adopted between 1789 and 1979. In the 1990s, the Senate
Historical Office staff, in consultation with Dr. Riddick, developed a
project to incorporate an important feature not contained in the 1980
publication. Beyond simply listing the eight codes of rules, the
Office's goal is to show how--and why--the Senate's current rules have
evolved from earlier versions. The Senate's historian emeritus has
continued work on this project, which will contain eight narrative
chapters outlining key debates and reasons for significant changes.
Appendices will include the original text of all standing rules and,
for the first time in one publication, all changes adopted between each
codification.
Biographical Directory of the U.S. Congress, 1774-Present
The Historical Office continues to expand and update the
Biographical Directory of the U.S. Congress as needed, including adding
new Member biographical entries and bibliographical citations that
incorporate recent scholarship. The Senate historians continue to work
closely with the historical staff of the House of Representatives to
maintain accuracy and consistency in this joint Senate-House database,
and to promote this valuable resource among historians, teachers,
students, and the public. Senate and House historians and technical
staff for the House of Representatives have collaborated to plan an
update of the online site in appearance and functionality, and have
approved a new template and overall appearance for the Directory. The
Senate archivist and her deputies have worked to expand and revise the
``Research Collections'' aspect of the database.
Party Conference Minutes, 1965-1977
In 1998 and 1999 the Historical Office staff edited, indexed, and
published the Minutes of the Senate Democratic and Republican
Conferences covering the years prior to 1964. The Historical Office is
currently preparing a similar volume for the Democratic Conference
including its minutes from 1965 to 1977. After January 1973, verbatim
transcripts were prepared for each Conference meeting, considerably
enlarging the documentation. This project has involved scanning and
editing 2,869 pages of transcripts for 102 meetings of the Conference
and inclusion of an index and explanatory annotations. With the
approval of the Conference, the minutes will be published, and a
similar editorial project will be proposed for the Republican
Conference minutes for this time period. The office has scanned an
additional 3,115 pages of transcripts for the 73 conferences between
1977 and 1982, for future publication.
Dirksen Senate Office Building Exhibits
The remodeling of the Dirksen Senate Office Building auditorium
into a hearing room created two large exhibit cases at its entrance.
Working with the staff of the Senate Curator and the Senate Library,
the Historical Office prepared exhibits that have now been installed on
the life and career of Senator Everett M. Dirksen, Senate Republican
leader from 1959 to 1969, and on the design and functioning of the
office building named in his memory.
Oral History Program
The Historical Office staff conducts a series of oral history
interviews to record personal recollections of various Senate careers.
Interviews were conducted with former Senator Roland W. Burris; Richard
Ahrenberg, who served on the staffs of Senators Paul Tsongas, George
Mitchell, and Carl Levin; Richard Baker, the Senate's Historian
Emeritus; Eliza Letchworth, former Republican Secretary; Charles
Ludlam, a former staff member for Senators James Abourezk and Joseph I.
Lieberman; and James Zigler, former Senate SAA. The office also
conducted an interview with Martin Charboneau and Mikhaila Fogel, the
pages who volunteered to stay behind and serve during the last weeks of
debate on the healthcare bill in December 2009. The office has also
continued to seek and conduct interviews with current and former Senate
spouses, and expanded on its collection of interviews highlighting the
role of women on Capitol Hill. The complete transcripts of 30
interviews conducted since the 1970s have been posted on Senate.gov.
That site features a different oral history interview series each
month, including digital audio-clips along with the interview
transcripts. The Historical Office has worked with the National
Archives to digitize past oral history interviews, which had been
archived on magnetic tape, for preservation purposes. Digitization also
allows for inclusion of short audio segments on Senate.gov. For Unum,
the Secretary of the Senate's newsletter, the staff has created a
regular series entitled ``Senate Voices'', which includes excerpts from
the oral histories with a contextual introduction.
Member Services
Educational Outreach
The historian and associate historian delivered a series of
``Senate Historical Minutes'' at the weekly Democratic and Republican
Conference luncheons. These ``minutes'' highlighted significant events
and personalities associated with the Senate's institutional
development. Many of them are now included on Senate.gov as
``Historical Minute Essays.'' The assistant historian advised the
congressionally mandated 50th Anniversary of the Vietnam War
Commemoration group of notable Senate accomplishments during the
Vietnam War era to be included in national commemorative event
planning.
Members' Records Management and Disposition Assistance
The Senate archivist held meetings with staff of Members who had
announced their retirement to discuss schedules for closing and to
ascertain specific archiving needs. These meetings emphasized planning
for the preservation of permanently valuable records, particularly
electronic records and selecting a home State repository with necessary
preservation resources. Information and insights derived from these
meetings has been incorporated into an ``archives toolkit'', providing
guidance for offices opening in the 112th Congress. Of the 16 Senators
who left office, 15 designated an archival repository. The archivist
provided extensive assistance to the staff of the late Senator Robert
C. Byrd to ensure the preservation of 1,500 cubic feet of records
documenting his entire Senate career. These records have been
transferred to the Robert C. Byrd Center for Legislative Studies at
Shepherd University. The archivist revised the Handbook for Closing a
Senator's Office and created an office closing timeline. The archiving
``Quick Cards'' available on the Secretary's Webster site were updated
and augmented by a fourth card on social media communications
archiving. The number of Senators who participated in Facebook, You
Tube, Twitter, and other Web 2.0 sites in the 111th Congress was
significant, and the Historical Office took the initiative to provide
guidance for archiving aspects of these online records.
A series of brown-bag lunch discussions took place for archivists
in Senate committees and Senators' personal staffs, focusing on records
management, storage and electronic records. A ``Coffee with the
Archivist'' of the United States also highlighted electronic records
preservation. Informal meetings of Capitol Hill Archivists and Records
Managers (CHARM) focused on description standards, electronic records,
bibliographic reports, and briefings at the Center for Legislative
Archives. A new initiative resulting from the CHARM meetings was the
series of staff exit interviews conducted by Senator Byron L. Dorgan's
archivist. These were edited by the Historical Office and then shared
with the rest of the Senate's archival community. A committee staff
interview form has been developed and is being adopted by committee
archivists and systems administrators, particularly because of the
context it provides to staff electronic files.
The Archivists' Listserv continues to be an effective means of
updating archival staff about records management and historical topics.
The Senate archivist worked with all of the repositories receiving
senatorial collections to ensure the adequacy of documentation and the
transfer of records with adequate finding aids, helping to lower costs
for the receiving repositories. The archivist presented an in-depth
records management seminar for Senate offices at the Modern Archives
Institute, which is now available for Senate staff on demand. The
archivist presented a paper on the significance and role of the
Advisory Committee on the Records of Congress at the Mid-Atlantic
Regional Archives Conference.
Committee Records Management and Disposition Assistance
The Senate archivist provided each Senate committee with staff
briefings, guidance on preservation of information in electronic
systems, and instructions for the transfer of permanently valuable
records to the National Archives' Center for Legislative Archives. A
survey of the committees' electronic archiving revealed that almost all
committees have voluminous electronic record backlogs requiring review.
The backlogs fall into three categories:
--files of committee staff that have departed the committee;
--files of share drives; and
--accumulated email.
There is a growing gap between the documentary quality of the
records being archived from committees that have archivists as opposed
to those without archivists. The archivist and deputy archivist have
been compiling specific reports documenting this discrepancy. They
distribute information on best practices for managing electronic
records and have encouraged committees to hire professional archivists
especially to focus on electronic archiving. There are now eight
committee archivists on six committees (two committees have separate
Democratic and Republican archivists.)
The archivist has been working with the Center for Legislative
Archives information technology specialists to improve Senate
infrastructure to facilitate the regular archiving of electronic
records. This will establish a system to allow the Senate to transfer
records in electronic form, eliminating the need for printing such
documentation. The infrastructure upgrade will also permit the Center
for Legislative Archives Holdings Management System to document the
loan of records back to the Senate more thoroughly through the use of
bar codes.
The archivist and deputy archivist are appointed members of the
Next Generation Finding Aid Task Force established by the Advisory
Committee on the Records of Congress to develop criteria to improve the
finding aids for the Senate's archival records. They provided
information and helped edit the first draft of the Report presented to
the Advisory Committee. They anticipate that the Task Force will
recommend adoption of the archivists toolkit as a system to manage
record transfers, and are prepared to mediate, oversee, and support
transfer documentation in this new application.
Over the past year, the Senate archivist oversaw the transfer to
the Archives of 568 accessions of Senate records totaling 1,638.5 cubic
feet of textual records and 627.28 gigabytes of electronic records. The
archivist and deputy archivists responded to 203 requests for loans of
archived records back to committees, totaling 1,028 boxes.
To further assist committee clerks, the archivists developed a new
archives transfer form that facilitates searches in older archived
records and brings Senate descriptive practices in line with archival
best practices. Enhanced description has resulted in greatly increased
accessibility of the records. Three basic archiving quick cards for
committees were posted to the Secretary's site and are periodically
updated. The cards supplement the Guidelines for Committee Staff
pamphlet and accompany a records-preservation PowerPoint briefing also
posted on the site. While this material has helped communicate the
importance of recordkeeping to committee staff, it does not replace the
effectiveness of a trained archivist on each committee staff.
A project is underway to scan committee record transfer sheets to
the National Archives, dating from 1982 through 2004, into the OnBase
document management system supported by the SAA. To date, records of 12
committees have been processed and updates are underway. The Center for
Legislative Archives has received this information on CD-ROM both as a
security measure and to enhance access to the records as they become
open for research
Advisory Committee on the Records of Congress
This 11-member permanent committee, established in 1990 by Public
Law 101-509, meets semiannually to advise the Senate, the House of
Representatives, and the Archivist of the United States on the
management and preservation of the records of the Congress. Its
membership representing the Senate includes the Secretary of the
Senate, who chaired the panel during the 110th Congress; the Senate
historian; and appointees of the secretary and the majority and
minority leaders. The Historical Office furnishes support services for
the advisory committee's regular meetings. Following the Senate
historian's participation in a meeting of the Public Interest
Declassification Board in July that focused on declassification of the
older records of the Congress, the Historical Office sent a request to
the Center to proceed with a systematic review of classified Senate
records more than 25 years old. As a result, the National
Declassification Center will begin a preliminary review and analysis of
declassification issues of the approximately 650 feet (1,625,000 pages)
of classified records that are more than 25 years old. Records of
highest anticipated research use will be given priority. The Historical
Office also was given the opportunity to comment on the National
Archives Reorganization Plan as it will affect Senate records,
encouraging the Archives to provide congressional records with
administrative support appropriate to the size of its holdings.
Educational Outreach
The Historical Office's correspondence with the general public has
increasingly taken place through Senate.gov. The historians maintain
and frequently update the Web site with timely reference and historical
information, and each month select related material to be featured on
the site. During the past year, the Office responded to more than 1,500
inquiries from the public, the news media, students, family
genealogists, congressional staffers, and academics, through the public
email address listed on Senate.gov. The diverse nature of their
questions reflected varying levels of interest in Senate operations,
institutional history, and former Members.
Working with the Web team, the historians have added to Senate.gov
such items as featured biographies, documentary histories, photo
exhibits, reference material, and additional oral history transcripts.
In preparation for the upcoming Civil War sesquicentennial, the
historians and staff have and continue to collaborate with the Web team
to create new online features exploring the role the U.S. Senate during
this national crisis, including an annotated time line of Senate-
related events, profiles of key Senators, landmark legislation of the
era, discussions of the constitutional crisis of secession, and a
documentary history of the Joint Committee on the Conduct of the War.
As the national commemoration of the war continues from 2011 to 2015,
these and additional features will be presented in a timely manner.
Staff presented seminars on the general history of the Senate,
Senate committees, female Senators, Senate Floor leadership, relations
between the press and the Senate, the U.S. Constitution, and the
history of Senate impeachment trials. The historians also participated
in Senate staff seminars and Members' office retreats, and conducted
dozens of briefings for specially scheduled groups. As part of the
orientation program for newly elected Senators, the historian delivered
an address on the historical evolution of the Senate, and joined the
associate historian in performing tours of the Senate Chamber and other
historic spaces of the Capitol. The historian also spoke at the
Senate's Constitution Day Program on the resources for researching
Senate history. The associate and assistant historian met with various
groups of teachers and students from around the Nation to aid in
coordinating classroom activities to promote a better understanding of
the Congress and its legislative duties, as well as working with
research fellows and visiting scholars.
Photographic Collections
The Senate photo historian continued to ensure history-focused
photographic coverage of the contemporary Senate by photographing
Senate committees, collecting formal photo portraits of new Senators,
and capturing significant Senate events in cooperation with the Senate
Photographic Studio. She continued to provide timely photographic
reference service by phone and email, while cataloging, digitizing,
relocating, and expanding the Office's 40,000-item image collection.
She assisted several Senate offices in creating collages of all the
Senators who previously served in that seat.
The photo historian assisted with the development of the Civil War
exhibit in the Capitol, by providing images from the Historical Office
collection and obtaining images from other repositories. She also
provided images for the two new exhibit cases in Dirksen Senate Office
Building outside of the auditorium. She collaborated with the
historical editor to design and publish the Kennedy Caucus Room
brochure.
The photo historian worked closely with the Senate Photographic
Studio during the transition to a new image browser, serving as a test
office for the new system. She facilitated the transfer of historical
maps found in the Russell Senate Office Building attic to the LOC
Geography and Maps Division.
As the founder of CHARM, an informal group of Senate archivists,
the photo historian planned numerous tours and professional development
events for committee and Member archivists.
COOP Planning
As the Historical Office's COOP Action Officer and Emergency
Coordinator, the photo historian continued to update the Office's COOP
plan in the Living Disaster Recovery Planning System. She made regular
back-ups of the office's vital electronic records to store off-site in
a secure environment. She trained new staff members and interns in the
Office's emergency evacuation procedures.
CVC
The historians supplied information and guidance to the staff of
the CVC related to the educational component of the exhibition gallery.
They have participated in the training program for staff-led tours, and
provided text, images, and general editorial review for a new Web-based
training program for staff and tour guides. They made regular
presentations on the history of the Senate in training seminars for
Senate staff and interns, and gave morning ``briefings'' to the Capitol
Guide Service. They provided ``exhibit talks'' in the CVC, contributed
to the training of visitor assistants who guide visitors through the
exhibition gallery, worked with exhibit staff to plan rotations of
documents and images, and advised the CVC staff on its educational
outreach programs.
sos deg.HUMAN RESOURCES
The Office of Human Resources was established in June 1995 by the
Secretary as a result of the CAA. The office focuses on developing and
implementing human resources policies, procedures, and programs for the
Office of the Secretary of the Senate that fulfill the legal
requirements of the workplace and complement the organization's
strategic goals and values.
These responsibilities include recruiting and staffing; providing
guidance and advice to managers and staff; training; performance
management; job analysis; compensation planning, design, and
administration; leave administration; records management; maintaining
the employee handbooks and manuals; internal grievance procedures;
employee relations and services; and organizational planning and
development.
The Human Resources staff administers the following programs for
the Secretary's employees: the Public Transportation Subsidy program,
Student Loan Repayment Program, Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)
program, parking allocations, and the summer intern program that offers
college and other postgraduate students the opportunity to gain
valuable skills and experience in a variety of Senate support offices.
Human Resources staff has completed migration of eligible commuters to
the Smart Benefits Program, which is operated by the Washington
Metropolitan Area Transit Authority.
Recruitment and Retention of Staff
Human Resources staff have the ongoing task of advertising new
vacancies or positions, screening applicants, interviewing candidates,
and assisting with all phases of the hiring process. Human Resources
staff coordinate with the SAA Human Resources Department to post all
SAA and Secretary vacancies on the Senate Intranet, Webster, so that
the larger Senate community may access the posting from their own
offices. In an effort to reach a larger and more diverse applicant
pool, the department uses multiple posting forums to reach potential
applicants for employment. As a result, the Human Resources Department
processed more than 3,000 applications for vacancies in the Secretary's
Office, including review of applications, coordinating scheduling of
candidates for interview, sending out notices to both successful and
unsuccessful candidates, and finalizing new hire paperwork. All new
hires also receive orientation from the Human Resources staff when they
come on board.
Training
In conjunction with the Senate Chief Counsel for Employment, staff
continue to develop and deliver training for department heads and
staff. Training topics include sexual harassment, interviewing skills,
FMLA administration, and an overview of the CAA. Human Resources staff
also works with different department employees on topics specific to
their group in outreach efforts to enhance teamwork in the workplace.
Interns and Fellows
Human Resources staff manage the Secretary's internship program.
From posting vacancies, conducting needs analyses, communicating,
screening, placing and following up with all interns, the staff keeps a
close connection with these program participants in an effort to make
the internship most beneficial to them and the organization.
DOD's Operation Warfighter (OWF) Program
In December 2010, Human Resources on behalf of the Secretary
received approval to host Wounded Warriors from the OWF program. The
unpaid internship program is open to all wounded and ill servicemembers
assigned to a Military Treatment Facility, an Army Warrior Transition
Unit, the USMC Wounded Warrior Regiment, the Air Force Wounded Warrior
Program, or the Navy Safe Harbor Program. The program positively
impacts the recuperation process, and provides meaningful activity
outside of the hospital environment that positively impacts wellness.
Combined Federal Campaign (CFC)
The office has again taken an active role in the CFC for the Senate
community at-large. The office staff serve as co-directors of the
program. The staff participates in kick-off meetings, identifies key
workers in each office, and disseminates and collects necessary
information and paperwork.
sos deg.INFORMATION SYSTEMS
The staff of the department of Information Systems provides
technical hardware and software support for the office of the Secretary
of the Senate (SecSen). Information Systems staff also interface
closely with the application and network development groups within the
SAA, GPO, and outside vendors on technical issues and joint projects.
The department provides computer-related support for all local area
network (LAN) servers within the Office of the Secretary of the Senate.
Information Systems staff provide direct application support for all
software installed workstations, initiate and guide new technologies,
and implement next-generation hardware and software solutions.
Mission Evaluation
The primary mission of the Information Systems department is to
continue to provide the highest level of customer satisfaction and
computer support for the office of Secretary of the Senate. Emphasis is
placed on creating and transferring legislative records to outside
departments and agencies, fulfilling Disbursing Office financial
responsibilities to the Member offices, and complying with office
mandated and statutory obligations.
Fiscal Year 2010 Technology Initiative Summary
The department technology initiatives concentrated in four specific
areas:
--Improvements in work flow process efficiency;
--Deployment of improved hardware and software technologies;
--Business continuity planning and disaster recovery improvements;
and
--Network perimeter and end point security awareness.
Operate More Efficiently
Replaced all computer workstation hardware in the Capitol; Hart,
Dirksen, and Russell Senate Office Buildings; and Webster Hall
locations. Developed, tested, and installed application software for
the Senate Library, Curator, Historian, Human Resources,
Interparliamentary Services, Public Records, Captioning, LIS Project
Office, and Page School staff locations.
Completed second phase of network printer hardware replacement
program by replacing all network printers in 21 departments and offsite
locations with improved high-speed models that reduce energy use up to
50 percent with instant-on technology.
Replaced all BlackBerry device hardware for Secretary of the Senate
staff (73 units) and applied soft token virtual private network access
to the Senate network for all device users.
Purchased and installed the Disbursing Office GRB server hardware.
Purchased and installed server and application to remotely deploy
software updates to all Disbursing workstation hardware.
Deployment of Improved Hardware and Software Upgrades
Legislative Offices.--Completed 18 major LIS software upgrades and
installed the updated LIS application software in all legislative clerk
offices, ACFs, and offsite home laptop locations. Virtualized the LIS
applications for the Senate Library staff which streamlined the
availability of application for LIS users.
Added network array storage portable servers at the ACF. This
solution provides a nightly scheduled backup of Secretary of the Senate
workstation software to the Secretary of the Senate Emergency
Operations Centers (EOC).
Virtualized the workflow process in the Office of Public Records
(OPR) providing high availability to their computer desktops for OPR
staff when they are not at their normal desktop office locations.
Retired a dedicated AT&T fiber link between the OPR and the Federal
Elections Commission (FEC). Worked with the SAA Network Engineering
staff to implement a replacement VLAN connection to the FEC which is
more secure and can be expanded to alternate locations if needed.
Upgraded legislative staff with improved laptop hardware for a more
streamlined and secure connection to the Senate network.
Created a virtualized and encrypted software solution for the
Senate Enrolling Clerk in order to process legislation when located
offsite. Virtualization of mission critical workstation applications
lowers the support time and cost required to keep offsite laptops
updated with current software revisions. It also provides a more
efficient process to migrate existing applications to numerous systems,
making it available to a wider range of key personnel who require the
application access.
Upgraded and migrated BlackBerry device users to the BlackBerry
Exchange Server Version 5.0 Server solution. Information System support
staff now has a process to monitor the BlackBerry device operation and
provide a higher level of remote BlackBerry support.
Added additional staff with secure access to the Senate network
through the Senate Web portal with Passface account access. Presently
119 of 169 personnel assigned to the Secretary of the Senate's hybrid
enterprise (70 percent) have some form of secure remote access to
Senate network resources.
Developed a standardized software template and replaced all
Disbursing Office laptops.
Worked with the Senate library staff and the SAA Technology
Development staff to integrate an incident reporting software
application for Library staff use. This issue tracker application
resides on a Secretary of the Senate server and documents the support
issues for the SIS program.
Business Continuity Planning and Disaster Recovery Improvements
Secure remote access to essential applications and information is
integral to pandemic preparedness and business continuity initiatives.
By scaling existing technologies, and integrating new hardware
solutions, the overall level of H1N1 planning preparedness was
dramatically elevated in the each office. This level of proactive
planning significantly impacted the remote access capability and
provided staff the needed access to the Senate network resources during
the February 2010 blizzard.
In the event GPO ``fails-over'' their operation at North Capitol
Street, NW., changes to the legislative file transfer process to
support transactions between the Secretary's office and GPO have been
implemented. A secondary back-up (encrypted) file transfer method has
also been implemented among GPO, the Senate Office of Legislative
Counsel, and the office of the Secretary.
Completed the Parliamentarian office indexing software project and
migrated the previous process to a new hardware platform. The results
allow a virtualized environment to index precedent information without
purchasing a specific laptop or personal computer.
Installed additional laptop hardware for the office of Captioning
Services in the Capitol. This ensures that if Captioning staff is
displaced from their location they can continue to provide content to
the Senate Recording Studio (SRS). Successfully tested final SRS
channel link in October 2010.
Redesigned and enhanced the operation of Member accountability
application used during COOP exercises by implementing a virtualized
desktop process to run the application. Integrating this application
with a remote desktop feature to ensure the application is always
available for staff during a COOP event. Extended this virtual solution
for the Secretary of the Majority and the Secretary of the Minority
offices.
Virtualized the OPR hardware server, office workstations, and
scanning operation. In fiscal year 2010, completed the second phase to
encompass both the server and client application process.
Implemented and integrated personal computer teleconferencing
application into the existing video teleconferencing (VTC) network.
This provides offsite VTC to internal Senate users without the need for
a VPN connection. Upgraded hardware products in the Office of the
Secretary and Disbursing Office conference room locations.
Network Perimeter and End Point Security Awareness
In partnership the SAA Security Operations Center, installed the
next generation Senate antivirus and firewall protection.
Information Systems staff continue to monitor email spam filtering
applications. Present rate of undesirable email messages average 9,000
messages per day.
Implemented a monthly automatic backup of critical workstation
software applications. This process eliminates countless hours of
attempting to clean infected systems. Additionally, these monthly
backups can be stored at an offsite facility and serve as a tool in
restoring workstation applications in the event of an emergency.
Information Systems staff continue to monitor network security
ensuring best practice information is available to all staff. Developed
global security server policies to automatically lock computer
terminals after 1 hour of application inactivity.
Staff continues to manage the Alerts notification database for all
Secretary staff. Database information is verified nightly to ensure
email, voice, and BlackBerry PIN information is valid and will function
during an emergency.
After implementation of the software deployment server, Information
Systems staff continue to maintain the inventory of all applications
for 280 workstation installations. Information Systems now has the
ability to review in real time which systems require application
updates and can deploy security patches without interruption to the
business owner.
Ongoing and Future Projects From 2010
As server and laptop hardware nears the end of the maintenance
life-cycle, replace older hardware servers with virtual server
solutions. All Active Directory server hardware was updated in fiscal
year 2010, and wherever possible virtual solutions were implemented in
order to provide a higher level of network resource availability,
reduce data center hardware costs, and reduce electricity usage.
Evaluate low-cost computing terminal emulation hardware for offsite
and designated COOP locations.
sos deg.interparliamentary services
The Office of Interparliamentary Services (IPS) is responsible for
administrative, financial, and protocol functions for all
interparliamentary conferences in which the Senate participates by
statute, for interparliamentary conferences in which the Senate
participates on an ad hoc basis, and for special delegations authorized
by the Majority and/or Minority Leaders. The office also provides
appropriate assistance as requested by other Senate delegations.
The statutory interparliamentary conferences are:
--NATO Parliamentary Assembly;
--Mexico-United States Interparliamentary Group;
--Canada-United States Interparliamentary Group;
--British-American Interparliamentary Group;
--United States-Russia Interparliamentary Group;
--United States-China Interparliamentary Group; and
--United States-Japan Interparliamentary Group;
In 2010, IPS staff were responsible for organizing the following
interparliamentary conferences:
--the U.S.-China Interparliamentary Group in China;
--the U.S.-Russia Interparliamentary Group in the United States;
--the Canada-U.S. Interparliamentary Group in the United States; and
--the Mexico-U.S. Interparliamentary Group in Mexico.
As in previous years, all foreign travel authorized by the Majority
and Minority Leaders is arranged by the IPS staff. In addition to
delegation trips, IPS provided assistance to individual Senators and
staff traveling overseas. Senators and staff authorized by committees
for foreign travel continue to call upon this office for assistance
with passports, visas, travel arrangements, and reporting requirements.
IPS receives and prepares for printing the quarterly consolidated
financial reports for foreign travel from all committees in the Senate.
In addition to preparing the quarterly reports for the Majority Leader
and the Minority Leader, IPS staff also assist staff members of
Senators and committees in filling out the required reports.
IPS maintains regular contact with DOD, the Department of State and
foreign Embassy officials. The office staff organizes visits for
official foreign visitors and assists them in setting up meetings with
leadership offices. The staff continues to work closely with other
offices of the Secretary of the Senate and the SAA in arranging
programs for foreign visitors. In addition, IPS is consulted by
individual Senate offices on a broad range of protocol questions.
Occasional questions come from State officials or the general public
regarding congressional protocol.
On behalf of the Senate Majority and Minority Leaders, IPS staff
arrange official receptions for heads of state, heads of government,
heads of parliaments, and parliamentary delegations. Required records
of expenditures on behalf of foreign dignitaries under authority of
Public Law 100-71 are maintained by IPS.
Planning is underway for the Mexico-U.S. Interparliamentary Group,
the U.S.-China Interparliamentary Group, and the British-American
Parliamentary Group which will be held in the United States in 2011.
COOP Planning
IPS regularly reviews its COOP plan with ongoing discussions,
updating materials kept offsite, evaluating evacuation procedures, and
working from remote sites.
sos deg.LIS PROJECT
The LIS is a mandated system (section 8 of the 1997 Legislative
Branch Appropriations Act, 2 U.S.C. 123e) that provides desktop access
to the content and status of legislative information and supporting
documents. The 1997 Legislative Branch Appropriations Act (2 U.S.C.
181) also established a program for providing the widest possible
exchange of information among legislative branch agencies. The long-
range goal of the LIS Project is to provide a ``comprehensive Senate
Legislative Information System'' to capture, store, manage, and
distribute Senate documents. Several components of the LIS have been
implemented, and the project is currently focused on a Senate-wide
implementation and transition to a standard system for the authoring
and exchange of legislative documents that will greatly enhance the
availability and re-use of legislative documents within the Senate and
with other legislative branch agencies. The LIS Project Office manages
the project.
Background: LIS Augmentation Project (LISAP)
An April 1997 joint Senate and House report recommended
establishment of a data standards program, and in December 2000, the
Senate Committee on Rules and Administration and the Committee on House
Administration jointly accepted the Extensible Markup Language (XML) as
the primary data standard to be used for the exchange of legislative
documents and information. Following the implementation of the LIS in
January 2000, the LIS Project Office shifted its focus to the data
standards program and established LISAP. The overarching goal of the
LISAP is to provide a Senate-wide implementation and transition to XML
for the authoring and exchange of legislative documents.
The current focus for the LISAP is the continued development and
implementation of the XML authoring system for legislative documents
produced by the Office of the Senate Legislative Counsel (SLC), the
Office of the Enrolling Clerk, the Committee on Appropriations, and the
GPO. The XML authoring application is called LEXA, an acronym for
Legislative Editing in XML Application. LEXA replaces the DOS-based
XyWrite software used by drafters to embed locator codes into
legislative documents for printing. The XML tags inserted by LEXA
provide more information about the document and can be used for
printing, searching, and displaying a document. LEXA features many
automated functions that provide a more efficient and consistent
document authoring process. The LIS Project Office has worked very
closely with the SLC, the Enrolling Clerk, and the editorial and
printing staff of the Committee on Appropriations to create an
application that meets the needs for legislative drafting.
LISAP: 2010
The LIS Project Office continued to provide support to the SLC, the
Senate Committee on Appropriations, and the Senate Enrolling Clerk in
their use of LEXA for drafting, engrossing, and enrolling. GPO also
uses LEXA to complete measures for printing. Several new features and
fixes were added in LEXA releases to make the drafting process faster,
more efficient, and more consistent. The LIS staff trained new drafters
and interns in the use of LEXA.
Changes to LEXA included upgrading all users to Xmetal 5.5. Xmetal
is the underlying software for LEXA, and the 5.5 version is Vista-
compatible. In the latter half of 2010, the LIS Project Office began a
project to update the underlying software, Xmetal, to version 6.0 which
is Windows 7-compatible. The upgrade projects required extensive
testing of LEXA on multiple operating systems including XP, Vista, and
Windows 7. LEXA improvements included updates to the conversion from
locator to XML and additional features for the office drafting
appropriations bills to accommodate the different styles and formats of
those bills. A new feature was added to create title amendments as
separate documents, and new functionality was created to combine a list
of titles or divisions into one document and to split a single document
into multiple titles or divisions.
COOP Planning
Several procedures have been implemented to provide for COOP. All
source code and data files are backed up nightly to a drive in the
office, and each LIS Project Office staff member carries an encrypted
flash drive containing the office COOP plan, documentation, and the
most recent version of LEXA. All the software and documentation
required to create the development environment and a LEXA end user
environment are available in duplicate copies of the LIS Project Office
fly-away kit. The COOP plan and the fly-away kits are updated
frequently, and one fly-away kit is kept in an off-site location.
Regular testing of the ability to work remotely is conducted via Senate
laptops and personal computers to ensure that application development
and user support can continue if access to the office is not possible.
LISAP: 2011
The LIS Project Office will continue to work with and support all
the offices now using LEXA to produce legislative documents.
Enhancements to LEXA make the process more efficient and consistent so
that most of the legislative measures produced by those offices will be
created as XML documents. All LEXA users will be upgraded to Xmetal
6.0: some users on XP, some on Windows 7, and a few on Vista.
The LIS Project Office will continue to work with the House, GPO,
and the LOC on projects and issues that impact the legislative process
and data standards for exchange. These groups are currently
participating in two projects with the GPO, one to define requirements
for replacing the Microcomp composition software and another to handle
graphics in some legislative documents. The office will work with the
SLC and their House counterpart office to implement new functionality
for maintaining and printing the compilations of existing law in XML.
sos deg.LIBRARY
The Senate Library provides legislative, legal, business, and
general information services to the United States Senate. The LOC's
collection encompasses legislative documents that date from the
Continental Congress in 1774; current and historic executive and
judicial branch materials; an extensive book collection on American
politics, history, and biography; a popular collection of audiobooks;
and a wide array of online resources. The LOC also authors content for
three Web sites:
--LIS.gov;
--Senate.gov; and
--Webster, the Senate's Intranet.
The transition of the SIS program from the Senate SAA to the Senate
Library continued with the transfer of contracts for news-related
services in October 2010. Two town hall style meetings and six focus
group sessions provided opportunities for Senate staff to provide
direct feedback on the Senate's online research tools. The Library
hosted an online survey in December to reach State staff and those
unable to attend the focus group sessions. Results from the survey will
be used to review program offerings and to target outreach and training
efforts related to those resources.
The LOC's creation of new Web-based content, judicious selection
and investment in online resources, expanded outreach and training
opportunities, and use of technology to support alternative means for
information delivery continues to meet the Senate's increasing demand
for information.
Notable Achievements
Successful outreach efforts contributed to an increase in Library
usage in the following areas over the past year: total patron accounts
are up 44 percent, new patron accounts are up 26 percent, and online
book requests are up 36 percent. Loans of audiobooks increased 22
percent and new books by 15 percent.
A new Webster page, Nomination Hearings for Supreme Court Justices,
provides links to full-text hearings since Louis Brandeis in 1916.
The Library catalog now provides Senate staff with desktop access
to more than 34,000 electronic versions of items in its collection, an
increase of 15 percent more than 2009.
A new table, Senate Freshmen since Direct Election (1914), was
added to Senate.gov.
Two well-received exhibits, one on the ``Senatorial Life of Everett
Dirksen'' and the other on the ``Dirksen Senate Office Building'', were
installed at the request of the Senate Committee on Rules and
Administration in the cases flanking the entrance to the Dirksen
auditorium (SDG-50). The exhibits were collaborative efforts with the
Senate Curator's Office and the Senate Historical Office.
Successful collaboration between the Library, the Office of Web
Technology, and the Assistant SAA/CIO Office resulted in the creation
of a completely new taxonomy for the Senate Services Directory (Red
Book) on Webster. Online access to the Red Book will occur in early
January 2011.
Senate Library Inquiries, Online Book Requests, and Patron Accounts
The increase in requests for online materials, the availability of
new and enhanced database offerings, and the expanded availability of
resources on the Web have dramatically increased the demand for Library
resources. Inquiries in 2010 increased 12 percent more than 2009,
reflecting new Web-based service promotional initiatives. These numbers
show that Senate staff and others are using Senate.gov and Webster
content authored by the library. Reference librarians continue to
assist Senate staff with challenging research in areas including legal
and public records, legislative histories, news and journal articles,
and to find answers to questions they ``can't figure out how to
tackle.'' \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Comment by a survey respondent in the 2011 SIS Online Survey
Report, p. 34.
SENATE LIBRARY INQUIRIES
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Web page visits Change from
Year Traditional ------------------------------------------------ Total prior year
Webster LIS Senate.gov (percentage)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2010.................................................... 26,696 88,886 19,000 2,926,712 3,061,294 +12
2009.................................................... 27,318 70,461 21,092 2,612,897 2,731,768 +8
2008.................................................... 27,283 51,048 29,468 2,429,380 2,537,179 +67
2007.................................................... 26,309 65,793 32,121 1,392,947 1,517,170 -10
2006.................................................... 31,032 80,375 20,156 1,561,138 1,692,701 +88
2005.................................................... 33,080 57,608 26,775 782,588 900,051 ( \1\ )
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Baseline.
The Library received 666 online book requests in 2010, an increase
of 36 percent more than the previous year. The increase can be
attributed to the online book request form on the Library catalog, as
well as to the online bibliographies that highlight the Library's
collections of audiobooks, travel books, and new books. Audiobook loans
increased by 22 percent, travel books by 25 percent, and new books by
15 percent more than 2009 levels.
The Library's concerted effort in 2010 to reach new patrons
resulted in a 44 percent increase in borrowing accounts more than 2009.
Seventy-four percent of the Library's patrons are Senate office and
committee staff members while the remaining 26 percent of users are
support office staff.
Almost half of this patron base consists of new users of the
library. A total of 999 new patrons were registered in 2010, an
increase of 26 percent more than the number registered in 2009.
Other activities for 2010 included setting up 274 new computer
accounts for our patron workstations, and providing the following
document printing and delivery services:
INFORMATION SERVICE SUPPORT ACTIVITIES
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category Total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Circulation:
Document deliveries................................. 4,499
Item loans.......................................... 3,251
Pages printed:
Microform pages printed............................. 857
Photocopies......................................... 71,983
---------------
Document delivery total........................... 80,590
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate Library Content Creation
Senate.gov Web Site Content
A new table, Senate Freshmen Since Direct Election (1914), was
added to Senate.gov. This table counts Senate freshmen at the beginning
of each Congress and includes appointments that occurred just before or
after the opening of the Congress.
Senate Webster Content
A new page, Nomination Hearings for Supreme Court Justices, was
launched in June in advance of scheduled confirmation hearings for
Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan. The page provides links to full-text
hearings since Louis Brandeis in 1916. This page is tied to another
Library-authored page, How to Find Supreme Court Nomination
Information. The full-text hearings were also made available through
the Library catalog, and Library staff created two new finding aids for
JSTOR, a nonprofit service of more than 1,000 academic journals and
other scholarly content, and appellate court briefs.
SIS Program Content
The Library's Digital and Instructional Resources Librarian led two
working groups to create two new Webster pages that highlight SIS
resources. The first group worked on a FrontPage (the SIS home page)
redesign that includes tabbed navigation and links to more Senate-wide
databases. The other group researched the online availability of
newspapers in each State, which make up the State NewsWatch page. Both
pages were created in response to feedback from Senate focus groups and
launched at the beginning of the 112th Congress.
Senate Library Web Site Content
A library team revised and updated the About the Library, Using the
library, and Borrowing Books pages on the library's Web site. These
pages now provide staff a clearer understanding of the library
services, policies, and collections.
Other Digital Content
Library staff initiated a retrospective digitization of the Senate
Executive Calendars in response to staff requests for older editions of
the calendar. This collaborative project between the library and the
Senate Executive Clerk will build a complete digital collection from
the library's bound editions and form the basis for a future online
digital archive.
Senate Knowledge Base
The Senate knowledge base is an institutional repository of data to
support the Webster site taxonomy project and Webster search
enhancement. To date, 1,154 document records and 2,016 term records in
the Senate knowledge base are supporting the Webster taxonomy and
search projects. The 45 percent increase in the number of terms and 19
percent increase in the number of documents created this year is a
result of a restructuring of the database to support the online Senate
Services Directory (Red Book) and reporting for ``keymatches''.
Webster Online Services Directory (Red Book) Redesign
The online Services Directory is a joint effort between the SAA's
Assistant Sergeant at Arms/Chief Information Office and the Library.
The Red Book was a printed directory (last published in November 2010)
created by the Senate telephone operators as a finding aid for commonly
requested numbers and services. The online Senate Services Directory is
driven by a completely new taxonomy that is managed through the Senate
knowledge base.
Webster Search Enhancement
Librarians improve Webster search results by analyzing popular
search terms and matching them with topically relevant pages or search
engine ``keymatches'' (which are managed through the Senate knowledge
base). This improves the chances a searcher will find what he or she is
looking for on Webster. During 2010, 245 ``keymatches'' were
established and 240 edits were made to update Web page links.
Instruction and Outreach Programs
Reference librarians conduct a wide variety of classes and tours
for Senate staff including, Insider's Guide to Webster, LIS Savvy,
Research Tools on Your Desktop, Services of the Senate Library, and Got
Questions? In 2010, 91 classes and tours were offered, with a total of
379 Senate staff participating. Classes and tours are held frequently
to allow librarians to interact with smaller groups and create a more
customized learning experience for the attendees.
LOC, Office of Web Technology, and the Joint Office of Education
and Training collaborated on redesigning the LOC class registration
page. The redesign offers a more streamlined registration process, has
reduced posting errors, and has increased the opportunities for the
reference team to market classes to Senate staff.
LOC gave numerous tours to Senate groups and outside library
professionals, including each semester's Senate Page School class,
librarians from the Supreme Court Library and the National Defense
University, library school students, and 18 separate groups of summer
interns from Senate offices. The LOC hosted a university library school
student on a semester-long practicum. The LOC also participated in the
Senate Services Fair, reaching out to 91 attendees.
In an effort reach Senate staff more directly, an email signatures
pilot program was launched to highlight library services, resources,
training opportunities, and the SIS online survey. The email signatures
link to a featured resource and change monthly to coordinate with the
Library's overall promotional program. Other promotional efforts
include several Webster announcements and flyers with monthly LOC and
SIS vendor training course offerings.
Two new reading lists were created to highlight books in the LOC's
collection: The Civil War in Books and Great Reads for New Senate
Staff. Both bibliographies are available on Webster and are highlighted
with display cases and Web promotional announcements. The Civil War in
Books is the LOC's contribution to the commemoration of the
sesquicentennial of the start of the Civil War, and the Great Reads
list is designed to reach new Senate staff who want to broaden their
knowledge of Senate history and their understanding of legislative
process and procedure.
Collection Development
Audiobooks
The Library acquired 35 new audio book titles in 2010, bringing the
total number to 125 titles. Designed to assist users with diverse
needs, including those who may be visually challenged, the program
remains popular with patrons whose 797 loans were equivalent to
circulating each item in the collection six times over. An online
bibliography on Webster contains links to the catalog and the online
book request form.
New Digital Resources
The LOC worked with LexisNexis and Westlaw to remove the login
prompt and provide direct Senate-wide access to title-level database
search pages through its Serials Solutions A-Z electronic journals list
on Webster. A tangible result of these efforts to improve utility saw
overall searches increase 19 percent to 5,524 and a 60 percent increase
in the use of all online resources indexed over the same period last
year. Content was updated to include 43 new databases that result from
changes in vendor offerings.
In 2010, the library began offering Senate-wide access to these e-
books, all published by Congressional Quarterly:
--Guide to Congress;
--Guide to the Presidency;
--Guide to U.S. Elections;
--Landmark Legislation, 1774-2002; and
--Major Acts of Congress.
The Library began offering Senate-wide access to a legislative
histories database on the LexisNexis congressional platform. The
legislative histories database provides information on all hearings and
reports associated with a law and provides direct links to the full
text of these congressional documents.
Library reference services were enhanced through the acquisition of
Federal News Service transcripts and JSTOR archival journal content.
These resources expand the range of questions that reference librarians
can answer.
Government Documents
As a participant in GPO's Federal Depository Library Program, the
Library receives selected categories of legislative, executive, and
judicial branch publications. The library received 10,078 government
publications in 2010. In response to the trend of issuing government
documents in electronic format, 5,505 links were added to the library
catalog, bringing the total number to 34,443, an increase of 15 percent
more than last year. The links provide Senate staff desktop access to
the full text of each document.
ACQUISITIONS, 2010
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category Total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Congressional documents................................. 7,790
Executive and judicial branch publications.............. 2,288
Books (including audiobooks and e-books)................ 761
Electronic links........................................ 5,505
---------------
Total acquisitions................................ 16,344
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Legislative Validation
The Library's Legislative Validation Clerk verifies and edits the
accuracy and consistency of data and legislative information published
by Secretary of the Senate staff in the LIS, the DMS, the Congressional
Record, Senate.gov, and Webster. The clerk's work also requires the
verification of selected Congressional Record Index entries (print and
electronic) and includes comparing electronic entries made by
legislative staff or data entry clerks from various agencies with the
printed Congressional Record Index and notifying the offices of
discrepancies.
Between January and December 2010, the Legislative Validation Clerk
submitted 248 corrections out of hundreds of thousands of verified
legislative actions that took place during the year.
LEGISLATIVE VALIDATION CLERK CORRECTIONS, 2010
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Submitted
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill, Enrolling, Executive, Journal, and Legislative 88
Clerks.................................................
Reporters of Debates, Morning Business Editor, and Daily 109
Digest.................................................
GPO and LOC--LIS........................................ 51
---------------
Total, corrections................................ 248
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cataloging
The Library's cataloging staff produces and maintains a catalog of
more than 213,000 bibliographic items. During 2010, they added 3,736
new titles to the catalog and performed 23,839 record maintenance and
enhancement activities. New materials are in large part made up of
congressional materials that are cataloged and made available to staff
and patrons the same day. The 45 percent decrease in new titles
cataloged from the previous year can be attributed to a decrease in the
number of retrospective materials cataloged and an increased attention
to catalog maintenance and enhancement activities, such as correcting
subjects and names that have become obsolete and retrospectively adding
full-text content and book jacket images to existing records.
Catalogers' time and skills at categorizing and describing content
are increasingly in demand for taxonomy-related projects designed to
enhance Webster, including creating the records that drive
functionality in the new online Red Book Senate Services Directory and
analyzing logs of unsuccessful searches to create ``keymatches'' that
target Webster search results.
Cataloging staff participated in a nationwide project, coordinated
by the LOC, to create a set of test records for evaluating new
cataloging rules, called Resource Description and Access (RDA), that
are slated for possible implementation in 2011. After receiving in-
house training, catalogers contributed 39 RDA test records.
Catalogers created 553 bibliographic records for Senate hearings
not yet printed from information in the Congressional Record Daily
Digest and the combined hearings schedule on Webster. This includes
field hearings that are not listed in the Daily Digest. These records
provide preliminary access for Senate staff and remain in the catalog
until the printed hearing is received and cataloged.
The catalog is updated nightly to ensure that Senate staff will
retrieve accurate and current information on Library holdings. The
addition of 538 book jacket images in 2010, an increase of 79 percent,
enhanced the catalog's visual appeal.
Library Automation
The Library worked with the Information Systems Office to develop
and deploy a new updated workstation template for the Library. For the
first time, the new workstations made use of virtual access to
frequently updated applications, eliminating conflicts between
applications, reducing required workstation maintenance, and minimizing
staff disruption.
A server-level upgrade of the integrated library system software
used to maintain our online catalog was completed, and a new Web-based
interface for generating reports from the system was implemented. The
new system takes advantage of enhancements in the catalog database and
offers new reporting formats.
A new virtual server was implemented to house the Senate knowledge
base. The database software was installed in December in preparation
for the migration of the database. The virtual server provides
enterprise-level data backup and replaces obsolete hardware. The
Information Systems Office provides maintenance support for the virtual
server and remote management tools for use by Library staff.
The Library and the Information Systems Office worked with SAA
staff to configure and test an off-the-shelf application to log, track,
and route incoming SIS support requests. New processes and procedures
were also established to monitor email and telephone requests and
establish data entry and statistical requirements.
Preservation, Binding, and Collection Maintenance
Technical Services staff continued to participate in book repair
training sessions led by the Director of the Office of Conservation and
Preservation. Trainees repaired 330 volumes, an increase of 74 percent
from 2009, making significant progress in the preservation of the
library's bound book collection.
The library continues to preserve and protect rare and fragile
print materials in its collections using commercial binding services
procured through GPO. In 2010, a total of 456 volumes were sent out for
binding, and 378 volumes were completed, with excellent results.
Budget
Budget negotiations with database vendors resulted in flat or
reduced pricing for online research services and subscriptions. Budget
savings from price reductions in 2010 online research services and
subscriptions totaled $38,077 over the next 3 years. After 13 years of
budget monitoring, savings total $149,013. This continual review of
purchases eliminates materials not meeting the Senate's current
information needs. This oversight is also critical in offsetting cost
increases for core materials and for acquiring new materials.
Special Projects
Unum, Newsletter of the Office of the Secretary of the
Senate
Unum, the Secretary's quarterly newsletter, has been produced by
Senate Library staff since October 1997 and is distributed throughout
the Senate and to former staff and Senators. It serves as an historical
record of accomplishments, events, and personnel news in the Office of
the Secretary of the Senate. Highlights from the 2010 Unum issues
include articles written by department interns on the history of the
August recess, the State of the Union dinner hosted by the Secretary of
the Senate; a feature on the slave labor plaque installed in the
Capitol; a piece on the Curator's ``Rumors'' Web site; two articles
about archiving Senate records by Senate Archivist Karen Paul; a
feature about the 150th anniversary of the Civil War from a
congressional viewpoint; and the continuation of the ``Senate Voices''
series prepared by the Historical Office that contains excerpts of oral
histories of former staffers.
National Library Week
David O. Stewart, author of Impeached. The Trial of President
Andrew Johnson and the Fight for Lincoln's Legacy, was the featured
speaker at the Library's 12th annual book talk in honor of National
Library Week.
Display Cases
Two well-received displays, one on the ``Senatorial Life of Everett
Dirksen'' and the other on the ``Dirksen Senate Office Building'', were
installed at the request of the Senate Rules Committee in the cases
flanking the entrance to the Dirksen auditorium (SDG-50) in
collaboration with the Senate Curator's Office and the Senate
Historical Office. Hallway display cases outside the LOC continue to
educate staff and visitors alike while highlighting the LOC's
collections. Display cases featured this year include:
--Civil War Capitol;
--Civil War in Books;
--Kids Books on Political Pets;
--Great Reads for New Staff; and
--History Lives at Your Library, a display highlighting African-
American contributions to government, aviation, and medicine.
The Great Reads for New Staff reading list has proved especially
popular with staff and circulation of the books on the list
skyrocketed. The Civil War in Books and the Civil War Capitol display
are part of the LOC's commemoration of the 150th anniversary of the
start of the Civil War.
Cooperative Projects
Hearing URL data from the Library catalog is exported weekly to
provide LIS and THOMAS with full-text links to Senate hearings. The
library contributed 1,051 new Senate hearing links to the LIS database
during 2010, a 50 percent increase more than 2009.
The Library's Cataloging Supervisor completed work with Joint
Committee on Taxation staff on a project to supply bibliographic
records for a set of committee documents submitted for scanning at the
Federal Scanning Center at LOC. The Committee provided the LOC with
printed versions of any documents in the set not already in our
collection. In 2010, a total of 412 new titles were added to the LOC's
catalog as a result of this project.
Major Library Goals for 2011
Complete procurement of Senate-wide online research services for
fiscal year 2012.
Create a team to evaluate Library course offerings and explore
opportunities to contribute to the Office of Education and Training's
task-based curriculum tracks. Provide a unified presentation of Library
and SIS vendor-sponsored training on FrontPage.
Complete transition of the Red Book Services Directory from pilot
project to production service. Continue to develop new entries for the
alphabetical organization display.
Create an outreach committee to coordinate content, methods, and
dissemination of targeted service and promotional offerings to reach
new Senate offices and State staff.
Task a working group with review and enhancement of SIS custom user
interface for LexisNexis.
Continue to work with SIS program vendors to make additional news-
related content available through Senate NewsWatch and the InfoViewer
product.
Provide cataloging staff training in preparation for the possible
implementation of new cataloging rules, called Resource Description and
Access (RDA), by LOC and other libraries worldwide.
SENATE LIBRARY ACQUISITIONS FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2010
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Books Government documents Congressional publications
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reports/ Total
Ordered Received Paper Fiche Hearings Prints Bylaws Docs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
January.............................................. 22 61 120 21 307 10 113 157 789
February............................................. 7 30 109 64 219 9 77 123 631
March................................................ 33 67 145 126 455 22 165 361 1,341
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1st Quarter.................................... 62 158 374 211 981 41 355 641 2,761
==================================================================================================
April................................................ 25 73 152 70 334 16 94 120 859
May.................................................. 26 62 35 90 255 17 155 277 891
June................................................. 20 105 171 129 263 8 105 167 948
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2nd Quarter.................................... 71 240 358 289 852 41 354 564 2,698
==================================================================================================
July................................................. 23 73 97 32 343 12 113 249 919
August............................................... 16 42 237 7 304 10 70 403 1,073
September............................................ 82 52 174 60 184 4 76 205 755
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3rd Quarter.................................... 121 167 508 99 831 26 259 857 2,747
==================================================================================================
October.............................................. 22 102 85 42 334 3 54 372 992
November............................................. 15 63 39 15 357 11 96 100 681
December............................................. 8 31 225 43 364 13 92 192 960
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4th Quarter.................................... 45 196 349 100 1,055 27 242 664 2,633
==================================================================================================
2010 Total........................................... 299 761 1,589 699 3,719 135 1,210 2,726 10,839
==================================================================================================
2009 Total........................................... 314 831 1,653 464 3,660 204 1,162 2,540 10,514
==================================================================================================
Percentage change.................................... -4.78 -8.42 -3.87 +50.65 +1.61 -33.82 +4.13 +7.32 +3.09
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE LIBRARY CATALOGING STATISTICS FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2010
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bibliographic records cataloged
S. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hearing Books Government documents Congressional publications Total
numbers ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- records
added to Docs./ cataloged
LIS Paper Audio/ E- Paper Fiche Electronic Hearings Prints Pubs./
Books Reports
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
January.................................. 36 26 4 3 ......... 17 222 26 67 365
February................................. 25 13 ......... ......... ......... 16 131 17 57 234
March.................................... 28 17 1 3 ......... 9 243 7 131 411
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1st Quarter........................ 89 56 5 6 ......... 42 596 50 255 1,010
==============================================================================================================
April.................................... 34 29 7 8 ......... 8 75 ......... 62 189
May...................................... 17 24 ......... 10 ......... 10 127 8 206 385
June..................................... 73 22 1 4 ......... 7 116 6 104 260
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2nd Quarter........................ 124 75 8 22 ......... 25 318 14 372 834
==============================================================================================================
July..................................... 9 20 3 ......... ......... 13 200 4 97 337
August................................... 17 18 2 2 ......... 8 166 1 90 287
September................................ 8 29 8 3 ......... 8 73 4 43 168
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3rd Quarter........................ 34 67 13 5 ......... 29 439 9 230 792
==============================================================================================================
October.................................. 27 42 14 8 2 2 76 27 163 334
November................................. 21 73 5 10 5 18 104 70 57 342
December................................. 17 25 1 7 ......... 6 263 64 58 424
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4th Quarter........................ 65 140 20 25 7 26 443 161 278 1,100
==============================================================================================================
2010 Total............................... 312 338 46 58 7 122 1,796 234 1,135 3,736
==============================================================================================================
2009 Total............................... 331 677 155 107 317 153 3,876 1,185 321 6,791
==============================================================================================================
Percentage change........................ -5.74 -50.07 -70.32 -45.79 -97.79 -20.26 -53.66 -80.25 +253.58 -44.99
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE LIBRARY DOCUMENT DELIVERY FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2009
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Micrographics Photocopiers
Volumes Materials Facsimiles center pages pages
loaned delivered printed printed
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
January........................................ 376 322 17 50 4,361
February....................................... 202 286 16 83 4,154
March.......................................... 360 390 11 99 4,417
----------------------------------------------------------------
1st quarter.............................. 938 998 44 232 12,932
================================================================
April.......................................... 282 420 12 100 9,032
May............................................ 252 318 14 49 5,495
June........................................... 248 326 11 91 9,294
----------------------------------------------------------------
2nd quarter.............................. 782 1,064 37 240 23,821
================================================================
July........................................... 285 382 16 60 11,443
August......................................... 220 374 13 109 3,867
September...................................... 255 377 27 20 4,753
----------------------------------------------------------------
3rd quarter.............................. 760 1,133 56 189 20,063
================================================================
October........................................ 212 362 34 8 4,942
November....................................... 306 395 41 108 4,860
December....................................... 253 397 11 80 5,365
----------------------------------------------------------------
4th quarter.............................. 771 1,154 86 196 15,167
================================================================
2010 Total..................................... 3,251 4,349 223 857 71,983
================================================================
2009 Total..................................... 3,118 4,159 212 1,378 71,756
================================================================
Percentage change.............................. +4.27 +4.57 +5.19 -37.81 -4.77
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
sos deg.PAGE SCHOOL
The United States Senate Page School exists to provide a smooth
transition from and to the students' home schools, providing those
students with as sound a program, both academically and experientially,
as possible during their stay in the Nation's capital, within the
limits of the constraints imposed by the work situation.
Summary of Accomplishments
Accreditation by the Middle States Commission on Secondary Schools
continues through April 2013.
Two page classes successfully completed their semester curriculum.
Closing ceremonies were conducted on June 4, 2010 and January 28, 2011,
the last day of school for each semester.
Orientation and course scheduling for the spring 2010 and fall 2010
pages were successfully completed. Needs of incoming students
determined the semester schedules.
English usage pre- and post-tests were administered to students
each semester and the results were reviewed by faculty to determine
what usage instruction or remediation was needed.
A foreign language seminar on basic grammar terminology was offered
fall 2010.
Study skills sessions were provided to identified students in need
of training.
Faculty and staff provided extended educational experiences to
pages, including 20 field trips, two guest speakers, opportunities to
play musical instruments and vocalize, and foreign language study with
the aid of tutors. Eight field trips to educational sites and two guest
speakers were provided for summer pages as an extension of the page
experience.
National tests were administered for qualification in scholarship
programs. Fourteen pages took 28 Advanced Placement exams in 11
subjects.
The community service project embraced by pages and staff in 2002
continues. Items for gift packages were collected, assembled, and
shipped to military personnel serving in various locations. Pages
included letters of support to the troops.
The evacuation plan and COOP plan have been reviewed and updated.
Pages and staff continue to practice evacuating to primary and
secondary sites.
Staff and pages participated in escape hood training, and staff
renewed certification in CPR/AED procedures.
All students and staff participated in a Constitution Day event.
Computer Services upgraded the Page School's library computers to
include Microsoft 2007.
Summary of Plans
Our goals include:
--Individualized small group instruction and tutoring by teachers on
an as-needed basis will continue to be offered, as well as
optional academic support for students preparing to take AP
tests;
--Foreign language tutors will provide assistance to students, and a
foreign language seminar on basic grammar terminology will
continue to be offered each semester;
--The focus of field trips will be sites of historic, political, and
scientific importance which complement the curriculum;
--English usage pre- and post-tests will continue to be administered
to students each semester to assist faculty in determining
needs of students for usage instruction; and
--Staff development options include attendance at seminars conducted
by Education and Training and subject matter and/or educational
issue conferences conducted by national organizations.
sos deg.PRINTING AND DOCUMENT SERVICES
The Office of Printing and Document Services (OPDS) serves as
liaison to GPO for the Senate's official printing, ensuring that all
Senate printing is in compliance with title 44, U.S. Code as it relates
to Senate documents, hearings, committee prints, and other official
publications. The office assists the Senate by coordinating,
scheduling, delivering and preparing Senate legislation, hearings,
documents, committee prints and miscellaneous publications for
printing, and provides printed copies of all legislation and public
laws to the Senate and the public. In addition, the office assigns
publication numbers to all hearings, committee prints, documents and
other publications; orders all blank paper, envelopes, and letterhead
for the Senate; and prepares page counts of all Senate hearings in
order to compensate commercial reporting companies for the preparation
of hearings.
Printing Services
During fiscal year 2010, the OPDS prepared 3,698 requisitions
authorizing GPO to print and bind the Senate's work, exclusive of
legislation and the Congressional Record. Since the requisitioning done
by the OPDS is central to the Senate's printing, the office is uniquely
suited to perform invoice and bid reviewing responsibilities for Senate
printing. As a result of this office's cost accounting duties, OPDS is
able to review and assure accurate GPO invoicing as well as play an
active role in helping to provide the best possible bidding scenario
for Senate publications.
In addition to processing requisitions, the Printing Services
Section coordinates proof handling, job scheduling and tracking for
stationery products, Senate hearings, Senate publications and other
miscellaneous printed products, as well as monitoring blank paper and
stationery quotas for each Senate office and committee. OPDS also
coordinates a number of publications for other Senate offices, such as
the Curator, Historian, Disbursing, Legislative Clerk, Senate Library,
as well as the U.S. Botanic Garden, USCP, AOC, and the CVC. These tasks
include providing guidance for design, paper selection, print
specifications, monitoring print quality, and distribution. Last year's
major printing projects included:
--semi-annual report of the Secretary of the Senate;
--tributes to retiring Senators;
--art and historic objects in the Senate;
--The Kennedy Caucus Room brochure;
--2010 Senate Telephone Directory;
--Senate gallery passes and visitor badges; and
--CVC tour tickets and informational brochures.
Hearing Billing Verification
Senate committees often use outside reporting companies to
transcribe their hearings, both in-house and in the field. OPDS
processes billing verifications for these transcription services
ensuring that costs billed to the Senate are accurate. OPDS utilizes a
program developed in conjunction with the SAA Computer Division that
provides greater billing accuracy and information gathering capacity;
and adheres to the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration's
transcription services billing guidelines for commercial reporting
companies. During 2010, OPDS provided commercial reporting companies
and corresponding Senate committees a total of 820 billing
verifications of Senate hearings and business meetings; more than
59,000 transcribed pages were processed at a total billing cost of
$554,214.
During 2010, the office processed all file transfers and billing
verifications between committees and reporting companies electronically
ensuring efficiency and accuracy.
Secretary of the Senate Service Center
The Service Center within OPDS is staffed by experienced GPO
detailees who provide Senate committees and the Secretary of the
Senate's office with complete publishing services for hearings,
committee prints, and the preparation of the Congressional Record.
These services include keyboarding, proofreading, scanning, and
composition. This allows committees to decrease, or eliminate,
additional overtime costs associated with the preparation of hearings.
Additionally, the Service Center provides work for GPO detailees
assigned to legislative offices during Senate recesses.
Document Services
The Document Services Section coordinates requests for printed
legislation and miscellaneous publications with other departments
within the Secretary's office, Senate committees, and GPO. This section
ensures that the most current version of all material is available, and
that sufficient quantities are available to meet projected demands. The
Congressional Record, a printed record of Senate and House Floor
proceedings, Extension of Remarks, Daily Digest and miscellaneous
pages, is one of the many printed documents provided by the office on a
daily basis. In addition to the Congressional Record, the office
processed and distributed more than 10,000 distinct legislative items
during the 2nd Session of the 111th Congress, including Senate and
House bills, resolutions, committee and conference reports, executive
documents, and public laws.
The demand for online access to legislative information continues
to be strong. Before Senate legislation can be posted online, it must
be received in the Senate through OPDS. Improved database reports allow
the office to report receipt of all legislative bills and resolutions
received in the Senate which can then be made available online and
accessed by other Web sites, such as LIS and Thomas, used by
congressional staff and the public.
Customer Service
The primary responsibility of OPDS is to provide services to the
Senate, but documents are also made available to the general public and
other government agencies. During 2010, more than 12,000 requests for
legislative material were received at the walk-in counter, through the
mail, by fax, and electronically. Online ordering of legislative
documents and the Legislative Hot List Link, where Members and staff
can confirm arrival of printed copies of the most sought after
legislative documents, continued to be popular. The site is updated
several times daily each time new documents arrive from GPO to the
Document Room. In addition, the office handled thousands of phone calls
pertaining to the Senate's official printing, document requests, and
legislative questions. Recorded messages, fax, and email operate around
the clock and are processed as they are received, as are mail requests.
The office stresses prompt, courteous customer service while providing
accurate answers to Senate and public requests.
On-demand Publication
The office supplements depleted legislation where needed by
producing additional copies in the DocuTech Service Center, staffed by
experienced GPO detailees who provide Member offices and Senate
committees with on-demand printing and binding of bills and reports.
On-demand publication allows the department to cut the quantities of
documents printed directly from GPO and reduces waste. The DocuTech is
networked with GPO, allowing print files to be sent back and forth
electronically. This allows OPDS to print necessary legislation for the
Senate Floor, and other offices, in the event of a GPO COOP situation.
Accomplishments and Future Goals
Over the past year, the OPDS has faced challenges by providing new
services for customers and improving existing ones. Of particular note
is the office's commitment to help ``green'' the Senate. During 2010,
more than 5.5 million sheets of 100 percent recycled paper were ordered
by Senate offices, representing a 22 percent increase more than the
previous year. During the last 3 years orders for fully recycled stocks
have increased 750 percent. The office works diligently to track
document requirements, monitoring print quantities, and reducing waste
and associated costs. More than 400 new and revised print jobs were
routed electronically for customer approval improving turnaround time
and efficiency.
The office continues working with the GPO on behalf of its
customers, to improve efficiency and to meet the evolving needs of the
Senate. Focus on COOP and emergency preparedness will continue.
sos deg.PUBLIC RECORDS
The Office of Public Records receives, processes, and maintains
records, reports, and other documents filed with the Secretary of the
Senate that involve the Federal Election Campaign Act, as amended; the
Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995, as amended; the Senate Code of
Official Conduct: Rule 34, Public Financial Disclosure; Rule 35, Senate
Gift Rule filings; Rule 40, Registration of Mass Mailing; Rule 41,
Political Fund Designees; and Rule 41(6), Supervisor's Reports on
Individuals Performing Senate Services; and Foreign Travel Reports.
The office provides for the inspection, review, and publication of
these documents. From October 2009 through September 2010, the Public
Records office staff assisted more than 2,000 individuals seeking
information from reports filed with the office. This figure does not
include assistance provided by telephone or email, nor help given to
lobbyists attempting to comply with the provisions of the Lobbying
Disclosure Act of 1995, as amended (collectively, the ``LDA''). In
addition, the office works closely with the Federal Election
Commission, the Senate Select Committee on Ethics, and the Clerk of the
U.S. House of Representatives concerning the filing requirements of the
aforementioned Acts and Senate rules.
Fiscal Year 2010 Accomplishments
The office continued to implement S. 1, the Honest Leadership and
Open Government Act (HLOGA), which amended the LDA and the Senate Code
of Conduct. The office posted two guidance updates and concentrated on
LDA compliance issues, referring 2,473 cases of potential noncompliance
to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia. The Senate Office of
Public Records continued to test COOP plans and pandemic response
plans.
Plans for Fiscal Year 2011
The Public Records office will assess technology infrastructure
needs, as well as continue to semiannually review and update the LDA
Guidance as needed. The office will continue to develop and implement
educational information and tools that will help all report filers
comply fully with the law and assist customers in accessing the
information they seek.
Automation Activities
During fiscal year 2010, the Senate Office of Public Records worked
with the SAA to enhance database performance for all issue areas and
improve public query programs.
Federal Election Campaign Act, As Amended
The act requires Senate candidates to file quarterly and pre- and
postelection reports. Filings totaled 5,147 documents containing
358,500 pages.
Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 (LDA), As Amended
The LDA requires semi-annual financial and lobbying activity
reports. As of September 30, 2010, there were 4,635 registrants
representing 18,776 clients. The total number of individual lobbyists
disclosed on 2010 registrations and reports was 12,754. The total
number of lobbying registrations and reports processed was 131,410.
Public Financial Disclosure
The filing date for Public Financial Disclosure Reports was May 17,
2010. The reports were made available to the public and press by June
16, 2010 as required by statute. Public Records staff provided copies
to the Select Committee on Ethics and the appropriate State officials.
A total of 3,191 reports and amendments were filed containing 21,651
pages. There were 463 requests to review or receive copies of the
documents.
Senate Rule 35 (Gift Rule)
The Senate Office of Public Records received 316 Gift Rule/Travel
reports during fiscal year 2010.
Registration of Mass Mailing
Senators are required to file mass mailing reports on a quarterly
basis. The number of pages submitted during fiscal year 2010 was 495.
sos deg.STATIONERY ROOM
The United States Senate Stationery Room is the provider of office
and administrative supplies, personalized stationery, and special order
items for official Government business. The Stationery Room serves all
Members, support offices, and other authorized organizations.
The Stationery Room fulfills its mission by:
--Utilizing open market, competitive bid, statutorily required, and/
or GSA schedules for supply procurement;
--Maintaining sufficient in-stock quantities of select merchandise in
order to best meet the immediate needs of the Senate community;
--Developing and maintaining productive business relationships with a
wide variety of vendors to ensure sufficient breadth and
availability of merchandise;
--Maintaining expense accounts for all authorized customers and
preparing monthly activity statements;
--Managing all accounts receivable and accounts payable
reimbursement; and
--Ensuring the integrity of all funds and other government assets
under our control.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Statistics
-----------------------------------
Fiscal year 2009 Fiscal year 2008
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gross sales......................... $3,343,167.00 $3,594,733.94
===================================
Sales transactions.................. 44,626 47,459
Purchase orders issued.............. 6,354 6,586
Vouchers processed.................. 7,022 7,073
Office deliveries................... 5,986 5,661
Number of items delivered........... 136,021 134,191
Number of items sold................ 390,528 439,042
Total cartons received offsite...... 22,583 ................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
GAO Audit
At the request of the Secretary of the Senate, in September 2010,
GAO conducted an inventory observation and audit of the Stationery Room
financial operations. The Stationery Room received a positive review
during the verbal feedback portion of the GAO exit interview. The
recommendations provided by GAO at the conclusion of their observation
had either already been implemented or will be adapted as recommended
as part of our future operational procedures.
Fiscal Year 2011--Looking Ahead
Subject to funding availability, the Stationery Room anticipates an
upgrade to its point-of-sales operations, by upgrading/replacing
obsolete signature capture devices at the counter. This update would
permit transaction receipts to be emailed to the office at the time of
sale, eliminating the generation and loss of paper receipts, and a more
environmentally friendly process.
The Stationery Room hopes to launch a pilot project that will allow
constituents to make online flag purchases from Senate offices
utilizing credit cards to orders. In addition, the Stationery Room
anticipates launching online ordering of stationery supplies by Member
and committee offices in 2011.
sos deg.WEB TECHNOLOGY
The Department of Web Technology is responsible for the Web sites
that fall under the purview of the Secretary of the Senate:
--the Senate Web site (Senate.gov)--available to the world;
--the Secretary's internal Web site (Webster.senate.gov/secretary)--
available to the Senate Staff;
--central portions of the Senate Intranet (Webster.senate.gov)--
available to the Senate Staff; and
--the Senate Legislative Branch Web site (Legbranch.senate.gov)--
available to the Senate, House of Representatives, LOC, AOC,
GAO, GPO, Congressional Budget Office (CBO), and USCP.
The Senate Web Site--Senate.gov
The Senate Web site content is maintained by more than 30
contributors from seven departments of the Secretary's office and three
departments of the SAA. Content team leaders regularly share ideas and
coordinate the posting of new content. All content is controlled
through the Secretary's Web Content Management System (CMS) managed by
the Department of Web Technology.
Major Additions to the Web site in 2010
Rumors! Tall Tales About Senate Art http://www.senate.gov/
artandhistory/art/myths/myth_homepage.htm
The online exhibit dispels common rumors regarding Senate art. This
project was a multi-year effort, and the final online version is the
product of close collaboration with the Curator's Office.
Artifact Browse List Collections
http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/art/common/collection_list/
Interior.jsp.
http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/art/common/collection_list/
Sittername_List.jsp.
http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/art/common/collection_list/
Beyond_Cap_Hill.jsp
Created new and interesting ways for the Curator's Office to group
artifacts and for these artifacts to be displayed, researched, and
enjoyed by a large and diverse audience. The flexibility of these lists
made it possible to reorganize the artifacts on Senate.gov into a much
more useful manner.
Decorative Art Added
http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/art/a_three_sections_with_teasers/
DecorativeArts.htm.
The previously mentioned artifact browse lists were instrumental to
getting new genres of artifacts online. The addition of furniture,
mirrors, timepieces, and ephemera makes even more of the Senate Art
collection available for all to enjoy in a fun and informative display.
Daily Senate Floor Report
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/floor_activity/
floor_activity.htm.
The online report highlights morning, legislative, and executive
business that occurred in the previous day. This one report combines
information previously only available in several different documents
and provides hyperlinks to relevant information, such as bill summary
and status pages, treaties, nominations, and roll call votes. Previous
days' data will be made available in the coming year.
Public Records Feedback Form
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/Public_Disclosure/
feedback_form.htm.
The newly added Web form provides an additional avenue of
communication with the Office of Public Records.
Investigation Committees
http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/
Investigations.htm.
Produced new page templates and modified existing ones to allow the
Historical Office to showcase and share their rich historical accounts
of Senate and Joint Committees involved in investigations. These
highlight Members involved and trace the origins through the outcome of
these Committees. This is surely an area that will continue to expand
over the years as we are able to add more information about past
investigation Committees and as future ones arise.
Committee FAQ
http://www.senate.gov/general/common/generic/committee_faq.htm.
In response to many emails sent to the public Webmaster account,
data gathered from Web traffic tools, and analysis of searches entered,
this new page was created to answer question about committees and clear
up common misconceptions.
Legislative Process Information Enhanced
http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/legislative/
d_three_sections_with_teasers/process.htm.
Revamping this section greatly added to the amount of information
available on the legislative process. A related enactment of law
section was also created and linked as a companion: http://
www.senate.gov/legislative/common/briefing/Enactment_law.htm.
Senate Chronology Page
http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/history/one_item_and_teasers/
chronology.htm#chrono logy=y1787_1800.
Implemented a new and interesting way to display historical
information in conjunction with the Historical Office. The new display
puts all information on a single page which allows the user far more
interaction.
Seven Featured Biographies
http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/history/one_item_and_teasers/
featured_biographies.htm.
Four Oral Histories
http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/history/
g_three_sections_with_teasers/oralhistory.htm.
Visitors Section Expanded
http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/visiting/
a_three_sections_with_teasers/visitors_home.htm.
Unique subsections were added in the visitors section for
employment and procurement opportunities. The employment page allows
for the browsing of positions available with the Secretary of the
Senate, SAA, Member, and committee offices. The information for these
positions come from unique systems and are combined into a single
useful resource location.
Homepage feature articles were published on the following topics:
--Yea or Nay voting in the Senate;
--Celebrate National Library Week: Browse Senate Art Publications;
--Biographical Directory: Who's Who in Congress;
--The Role of Committees in the Legislative Process;
--Senate Art Exhibits: Learning about the Senate;
--Focus on the Constitution: The Connecticut Compromise; and
--Explore the Senate's Decorative Art Collection.
Secretary's Intranet--Webster.senate.gov/secretary
The Secretary of the Senate Intranet (http://webster.senate.gov/
secretary) continued to expand information and services offered. An
archive for UNUM, the newsletter of the office of the Secretary of the
Senate, was established and linked to from the front page. Web-based
order forms were maintained, expanded, and enhanced for the requesting
of specific legislative documents, class registration, blank paper,
room reservations, and stationery product suggestions.
A catalog-based ordering system was developed for the Stationery
Office, which will allow staff to order online. The new system is
managed with the content directly from the Stationery Office's existing
Microsoft Retail Management System (RMS). The ordering system was
designed and implemented with the intent of being especially helpful to
State offices. This project was a multiple-year effort involving
several different departments and the diligent work of four interns who
were instrumental in associating pictures with products.
FrontPage, the Web portal for the SIS, was moved to the Secretary's
internal domain and has a completely new look. Web technology worked
very closely with the Senate Library to help establish and provide
surveys, announcements, and information regarding the transition in
addition designing, developing, and launching the new site,
frontpage.senate.gov, in a short period of time. The design utilizes
more advanced technologies to make the site interesting and useful. All
feedback suggests the new design is very helpful and well received by
users.
Webster Central Web site--Webster.senate.gov
In conjunction with the SAA, Chaplain, and Senate Rules Committee,
Web Technology continued administering, managing, and enhancing the
central section of Webster. Web Technology partnered with the SAA and
the Senate Library to enact major changes to the services tab, the
search functions, and the links available on the lower left of the home
page.
The services tab is now a categorical listing of services available
to the Senate that provides relevant Web pages, phone numbers, and
addresses in a very easy to use interface. The data is produced using a
taxonomy system and integrated through the CMS. The same source data is
used to populate the newly expanded Webster search. This very advanced
technique allows the same source file used for the services to produce
the most relevant search results in the new directory in real time and
without additional work.
Web Technology continue to further streamline the management of
content on the central site by repurposing additional files that are
already updated through existing systems on Senate.gov. The expansion
of repurposed data continues to reduce duplicative efforts, increase
consistency, relevancy, and timeliness of data displayed on Webster.
Standardizing on XML across both sites and having them integrated into
the Secretary's CMS was essential to making this possible.
Senate Legislative Branch Web site (Legbranch.senate.gov)
The Legbranch server is accessible by the Senate, House of
Representatives, LOC, AOC, GAO, GPO, CBO, and USCP. Web technology
maintains a basic Web site for a Capitol Hill email messaging working
group managed by the SAA. In the future the server will be used to
share more information with other Capitol Hill entities.
Accomplishments of the Office of Web Technology in 2010
Completed the CMS upgrade on time and under budget. New hardware
hosts the most currently released versions of the software (as of
January 2010) that comprises the CMS. This upgrade has proven to be the
most stable environment yet. Additionally, Web Technology built a
complete development repository that mimics the production environment.
This allows us a much greater ability to customize the system and try
out various solutions without compromising the uptime or efficiency of
the production version.
Added the Daily Senate Floor Report to Senate.gov. This represents
a milestone, as this project has been worked on for approximately the
past 5 years. The online report highlights morning, legislative, and
executive business that occurred the previous day. This one report
combines information previously only available in various printed
documents. Having much of the data hyperlinked to relevant information,
such as bill summary and status pages, treaties, nominations, and roll
call votes, makes this a tremendously useful resource.
Audited the Senate.gov Web pages regularly, updating, enhancing,
and correcting pages; verifying content; and reviewing individual page
designs throughout Senate.gov for accessibility and usability.
Additionally, attended training on the latest advances in coding
techniques to ensure accessibility and applied them to our sites.
Constantly monitored data feeds from the LIS/DMS system ensuring
content on Senate.gov was current and all processes were functioning
properly. This is of vital importance regarding information such as
committee hearing schedules, vote data, and Member contact information.
Worked with new Senate offices to establish and maintain temporary
Web pages including a picture, biography, and contact information until
they were able to get permanent Web sites established.
Responded to approximately 1,000 emails from the general public
regarding Senate.gov sites. Worked with various content providers, Web
support groups, the SAA, Member, and committee offices to make
suggestions and resolve issues.
Continually reviewed and adjusted search operations and canned
matches for both Senate.gov and Webster based on user tendencies and
requests. A major addition was the creation and maintenance of a new
Google onebox for the services (Red Book) recently released.
Prepared for the release of an online version of the Secretary of
the Senate's Report. Collaborated with the Disbursing Office, the
Committee on Rules and Administration, and GPO to formulate a strategy
to provide the report in a useful and secure manner.
Produced several new versions of the Senate Chief Counsel for
Employment Web site. Worked closely with the office to achieve their
desired look through several iterations of design, development, and
review.
Designed and developed a seminar registration application for the
Senate Chief Counsel for Employment. The system allows customized links
to be sent which auto-populates a registration form along with a
complete class list.
Conducted user testing with Senate staff and interns to increase
understanding of current Web site interactions, desires, and best
practices.
Participated in Capitol Hill working group determining ideal manner
of providing public legislative data in a secure, downloadable, and
searchable format. Other entities involved in this project are the
House of Representative, GPO, and the LOC.
Helped organize Capitol Hill-wide Webmaster meetings, where best
practices were shared across entities. Regularly gave presentations and
facilitated conversations during meetings.
Continually trained and practiced working from remote locations to
be prepared should the need arise. All staff members are fully capable
of accomplishing their job functions from any location with Internet
access. This was accomplished largely through configuring virtual
machines that mimic our workstations on office laptops, which we all
may access. Regardless of which staff member uses which laptop, the
experience will be ubiquitous and consistent with being in the office.
Aided the Senate Library in aspects of SIS transition. The new
FrontPage interface exposes many more resources in an easy to use
manner. In leveraging advances in Web 2.0 technologies, Web Technology
is able to take greater advantage of available space and provide robust
information concisely. Through designing and developing the system in
XML and leveraging the CMS it is easy for nontechnical users to update
and maintain.
Worked extensively with the Senate Library in the continued
development, implementation, and maintenance of taxonomies utilizing a
knowledge base system. Participated in the planning, design,
development, and administration for including the ``Red Book'' data in
the knowledge base and then on Webster.
Created virtualized development server for the Secretary's
Intranet. Also, maintained virtualized production server for the
Secretary's Intranet and dedicated search server.
Worked with the Historical Office and GPO in the design of a new
stand-alone site for the Historical Office's States project that will
be available to the public as well as Senate staff. All required data
templates for the new site have been established in the content
management system.
Continued to enhance subject-based collection lists for the Senate
Curator. Initially the lists organized art objects by sitters. It has
been expanded to other subject areas, all drawn from the Curator's
maintained object database, along with more advanced control options
for Curator staff.
Developed a new vote menu display that utilizes legislative handles
and has new display features as requested from the Legislative Clerks.
Working closely with the LIS/DMS group to implement requested data
changes that will coincide with the new display.
Successfully transitioned more than 700 hyperlinks to GPO's FDSys
as they phase out GPOAccess.
Built an entire new back-up server for the CMS at the ACF with the
SAA, ensuring our COOP plan can be implemented. The ACF server is an
exact replica of the production system and is continually tested to
serve as a real time replacement should the production server become
inoperable. Shortly after the upgrade was completed, Senate.gov
experienced a hardware failure that necessitated the use of the ACF
environment while the Senate was in session and votes were occurring.
Due to extensive planning, Web Technology was able to stand up the
alternative system in approximately 1 hour, a major accomplishment.
Senate.gov Usage Statistics
In 2010 an average of more than 275,000 visits occurred per day on
Senate.gov. Again this year, approximately 26 percent of visitors
entered through the main Senate homepage. The majority came to the site
through the main Senators' contact page; growth in visits is likely due
to the addition of XML data to the contact page and associated
automated requests.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Visits from
Title of Web page Visits/month Average United States
duration (percentage)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate.gov site................................................. 8,521,779 16 minutes 90
Senate homepage................................................. 1,856,960 15 seconds ( \1\ )
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Not available.
Reviewing statistics on Web page usage helps the content providers
better understand what information the public is seeking and how best
to improve the presentation of that data. Visitors are consistently
drawn to the following content items, listed in order of popularity.
MOST VISITED PAGES IN 2010
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average
Top pages Visits/month Visits/month duration
(seconds)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senators contact info list...................................... 276,248 624,056 42
Committees...................................................... 67,194 92,871 37
Legislation and records......................................... 56,264 75,156 80
Active legislation.............................................. 49.139 63,931 167
Votes home...................................................... 48,793 68,966 68
111th, 2nd Session vote menu.................................... 44,242 74,223 146
Employment positions............................................ 40,471 48,703 416
Calendars....................................................... 33,594 73,100 182
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By a huge margin, the most popular page on the main Senate Web site
is the list of Senators with links to their Web sites, comment forms,
main office addresses, and telephone numbers. Visitors also continue to
be interested in legislative matters in 2010 with Roll Call Vote
Tallies, the Active Legislation table, Committee assignments, and
schedules being particularly popular. The visits per month did decrease
across some of the most visited pages on the site. A big increase is
noted for the visitors to the employment pages now offered on
Senate.gov indicating this is a much used and valuable resource.
Senator Nelson. Thank you.
Senator Hoeven has now joined us.
Do you have any opening remarks that you might want to make
before we ask the SAA to make his presentation?
Senator Hoeven. Only briefly, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
My only opening comment, at this point, is to thank all of
you for being here, and even more so for the incredible job
that you do. I've just been here a short while, but I can't
help but be impressed by what you do and how well you provide
for not only the Members themselves, but also for all the other
things that you do that go into a really complex and difficult
job. This, of course, is the people's capitol in the greatest
Nation in the world. And so, your responsibility is tremendous.
And you're really on a world stage. I can think of all the
times that I saw, on television, Terry Gainer leading the
President in during the State of the Union Address. And, of
course, all of the things that go into securing these premises,
Chief, and still making it friendly to the public.
PREPARED STATEMENT
And so, Nancy, to you, and to all of you, for the job that
you do, again, in providing for the Senators, the Members of
Congress, and, at the same time, keeping this incredible
complex that is so historically significant and so magnificent
in every way for the responsibility you have and the way that
you conduct your duties every day, I just want to commend you
for that; and, of course, look forward to working with you on
this very important aspect of doing that important job; and, of
course, that's the budget.
So, thank you so much.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Senator John Hoeven
Thank you, Chairman Nelson, for calling this hearing to consider
the fiscal year 2012 legislative branch budget requests for the
Secretary of the Senate, the Sergeant at Arms (SAA), and the United
States Capitol Police (USCP). I would like to join you in welcoming our
witnesses: Secretary of the Senate, Nancy Erickson; Senate SAA, Terry
Gainer; and the Chief of the USCP, Phillip Morse; and their deputies
and assistants who will be assisting with testimony. I thank you all
for being here with us today for this important discussion on how the
agencies you represent are planning to move forward in the coming
fiscal year.
The Secretary of the Senate's office is requesting $31.99 million,
a slight increase of 0.2 percent to restore the across-the-board
rescission that was taken of all non-defense, discretionary
appropriations in the final fiscal year 2011 continuing resolution.
This funding request maintains the transfer of the Senate Information
Services program from the SAA to the Secretary's office, so I am
pleased to have both of you here today to speak about this particular
program, its funding needs and the success of its transfer.
The SAA total request is $219.2 million, an increase of $214,000,
or 0.1 percent, which includes $77.6 million for salaries and $141.6
million for expenses. The subcommittee worked very closely with the SAA
and the Secretary's office last year to ensure that appropriate funding
was in place for the Telecom Modernization and Payroll System Upgrade
projects, so I am very interested in hearing about how those projects
are progressing.
Finally, the USCP request totals $387.6 million, an increase of
$47.5 million, or 14 percent, which includes an increase of $22.2
million, or 8 percent, for salaries and $25.3 million, or 40 percent,
for expenses. I am interested to hear about improvements that have been
made in the budget formulation process, after the budget
miscalculations from fiscal year 2010, and whether or not any
improvements have been made in the overtime issue that the USCP
continues to face. And of course, I look forward to an update on the
Radio Modernization Program.
As you are all painfully aware, the completion of the fiscal year
2011 appropriations process included great debate on both sides of the
aisle and both sides of the Capitol on how best to reduce overall
spending across the Federal Government. While we made reductions to
many funding levels in the legislative branch, for the most part each
of the appropriations accounts within your agencies was either held
relatively harmless or received an increase when compared to fiscal
year 2010. I would suggest that you should not anticipate receiving
such favored treatment in the fiscal year 2012 budget--we must
seriously begin the process of scaling back funding in all
appropriations accounts, even if it means giving up some of the
services we are accustomed to receiving here in the Capitol complex.
I look forward to working with you on the funding issues for your
agencies as we move through the fiscal year 2012 process.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Nelson. Thank you, Senator Hoeven.
Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper
STATEMENT OF HON. TERRANCE W. GAINER, SENATE SERGEANT
AT ARMS
Mr. Gainer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member
Hoeven. I appreciate the opportunity to join my colleagues
before you this afternoon to discuss our budget submission for
the upcoming fiscal year.
I ask that my written testimony be submitted and made part
of the record.
Senator Nelson. And it will be.
Mr. Gainer. Mr. Chairman, we have spoken, over the past few
years, about the importance of tightening our belts amidst the
fiscal turmoil we find ourselves in, and we have heard you with
unmistakable clarity. Senator Hoeven and I and my two
colleagues recently met with him and had a very similar
conversation.
Accordingly, the budget request I have submitted for fiscal
year 2012 is, as you indicated, just a bit more than $219
million. That is an increase of less than $250,000 more than
the fiscal year 2011 enacted level, and 9 percent, or $20
million, below the amount I requested in fiscal year 2011. This
year, we have chosen to defer requests for upgrades to our IT
systems and for increased capacity for our data storage
networks, requests we would have made in a better budget
environment.
To the extent we have some urgent needs that cannot be
deferred further without affecting operations of the Senate, we
will submit a request to the subcommittee to use our remaining
prior year unobligated funds to cover them.
I am proud of the efforts my staff has made to reduce costs
across the agency, and we will continue to look for ways to
achieve additional savings with uncompromising service to the
community.
The SAA is a member of the legislative branch procurement
group--this is an example of some savings--which enables
legislative branch agencies to recognize savings and economies
of scale by working together on common contracts and
acquisition activity. Through these combined efforts,
legislative branch agencies have saved $6.6 million during 2009
and 2010.
Mr. Chairman, our budget has remained virtually flat for 3
consecutive years. We have identified and eliminated all of the
so called low-hanging fruit in our budget. I fear that further
reductions will adversely impact our service to you and the
Senate community. In order to be good stewards of the
taxpayers' money, it is my responsibility to make sure that we
are providing the infrastructure, security, and support needed
for this institution to run smoothly. These services take place
not only here in Washington, but in the 454 State offices.
My 40-plus-page written testimony covers accomplishments
and challenges during the past year. Let me give you just a few
highlights.
In the last 2 years, our phone system was overwhelmed by
the massive volume of calls generated by the healthcare debate.
Senators were upset, rightly so, and so were your constituents.
There were gaps in the phone service between Members and their
constituents, and our voicemail system was unable to withstand
the pressure. It was our job to ensure that this does not
happen again.
To that end, offices were introduced, last year, to the
Watson Messaging and Watson Online directory updates. These
functions provide one of the key things officers were asking
for: the ability to tailor their internal processes to better
meet their constituents' needs. The new phone system, which
will begin to roll out later this year, will be even more
robust than the current one, and will eliminate the volume-
related issues we have seen in the past.
Our IT successes this year included the continuation of our
server virtualization efforts. We will reduce energy,
maintenance, and support costs by running more than 500 servers
in the virtual environment.
Our Help Desk team achieved a customer satisfaction rating
of more than 96 percent--an excellent level. We successfully
processed 257 million email messages in the past year, while
protecting our customers from spam and malicious messages.
And we continue to update the tools the Senators and staff
can use to stay connected with each other and their
constituents: adding smartphones and other mobile wireless
devices to our catalog, and upgrading the already robust video
conferencing capabilities.
This subcommittee granted us approval last year to relocate
our printing, graphics, and direct-mail function from Postal
Square on Capitol Hill to the new offsite facility located in
Landover, Maryland. Thank you very much. We are very grateful
for your leadership on this endeavor, and proud to report that
the project is on schedule, actually a little bit ahead of
schedule, and under budget, and will generate a substantial
savings in cost as we move forward. Our return-on-investment
calculations appear to be right on target. We'll save more than
$10 million in the 20 years, for about a 3.6 percent return on
investment.
During 2010, our post office processed the second-highest
volume of mail in the last decade. I'm pleased to announce, in
February of this year the Senate Post Office began accepting
credit and debit cards, an added convenience for our customers.
There's been very good feedback on that.
The number of floor proceedings has increased, the number
of committee hearings has substantially increased, the number
of radio feeds that we've sent out has increased. All this has
been brought about by the allocations that you, Chairman, and
your budget committee have given us.
In May 2010, we opened a Hart Senate Office Building
appointment desk to assist staff in escorting guests to the
Capitol. Our five Senate appointment desks collectively
welcomed nearly 165,000 guests during 2010. Our customer and
employee satisfaction levels have never been higher. The
numbers are very good, both within the SAA and Senate-wide.
But, providing quality service to the Senate wouldn't be
possible without our close working relationship with the
Secretary of the Senate, the USCP, the Architect of the Capitol
(AOC), and the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration.
Recently, just as another example, in working with the
Senate Rules Committee and the USCP, we implemented a new
Senate floor closure policy that establishes a clear and
concise hours of operations of the doors. This initiative will
save 8,970 hours of overtime and $553,000 annually. Chief Morse
and the Rules Committee worked very hard on that.
We have a great team, led by Martina Bradford, my deputy;
Bret Swanson in Operations; Chris Dey, our Chief Financial
Officer; Pat Murphy, Human Resources Director; Kim Winn, the
Chief Information Officer; Christy Prietsch, who serves the
entire Senate community and has been very busy in the Employee
Assistance Program; Cam Stickley, Education and Training
Director; Becky Daugherty, our protocol officer; Rich
Majauskas, in Continuity and Emergency Preparedness; Mike
Stenger, in Intelligence and Protective Services; and Rick
Edwards, in Capitol Operations.
The only area in which I have not been successful is to
change Nancy Olkewicz from an oppressor to one who's oppressed.
But, we are working on that. And I will be happy to answer any
questions.
PREPARED STATEMENT
But, I would just like to say something to my partner,
Chief. Many of the drivers of the USCP budget increase lie in
the constant challenges imposed by the USCP Board, ongoing
threats, and the Chief's proactive desire to enhance safety.
So, while that seems like, ``Why do we keep raising that?'' I
sometimes wish the board could come and testify about all the
angst we go through to try to make this place safe.
Thank you, Sir.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Terrance W. Gainer
INTRODUCTION
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for
inviting me to testify before you today. I am pleased to report on the
progress the Office of the Senate Sergeant at Arms (SAA) has made over
the past year and our plans to enhance our contributions to the Senate
in the coming year.
For fiscal year 2012, the SAA respectfully requests a total budget
of $219,176,000. This is an increase of $214,000 more than the fiscal
year 2011 enacted level, and $20,000,000 (or 9 percent) below the
amount requested in fiscal year 2011. This modest budget request will
allow us to maintain, for now, the level of service we provide to the
Senate community. Mr. Chairman, you have spoken over the past few years
about the importance of tightening our belts amid fiscal turmoil and we
have heard you with unmistakable clarity. This year, we have chosen to
postpone making requests for upgrades to our information technology
(IT) systems and for increased capacity to our data storage networks,
requests we would have made in a better budget environment. Instead, as
the committee previously requested, we are submitting a request to use
prior year unobligated balances for the technology items we removed
from the fiscal year 2012 budget.
I am proud of the efforts my staff has made to reduce costs across
the organization and will continue to look for ways to achieve
additional savings without compromising service to the Senate
community. Mr. Chairman, we have remained flat for 3 years now. We have
exhausted our efforts to eliminate the so-called ``low-hanging fruit''.
I fear that additional cuts to this budget will significantly impact
our service to the Senate community. The appendix accompanying this
testimony elaborates on the specific components of our fiscal year 2012
budget request.
In developing this budget and our operating plans, we are guided by
priorities framed in our Strategic Plan, including ensuring the United
States Senate is as secure and prepared for an emergency as possible,
and providing the Senate with outstanding service and support,
including the enhanced use of technology.
Our preparedness efforts during the past year placed a premium on
our interaction with Senate offices. During 2010, each office was
personally visited or contacted by a member of our emergency
preparedness team multiple times in response to support requests or to
update emergency plans. Each contact was designed to enhance and
upgrade our program and ensure that Senate staff has the essential
tools necessary to respond during an emergency. We leveraged these
interactions to ensure we addressed preparedness planning, emergency
notification protocols, emergency equipment, and accountability of
staff throughout an emergency event.
Our IT successes this year included the continuation of our server
virtualization efforts, where we reduce energy, maintenance, and
support costs by running more than 500 servers in a virtual
environment. Our Help Desk team achieved a customer satisfaction rating
of more than 96 percent at the satisfactory or excellent level. We
deployed new voice messaging and directory update capabilities as part
of our ongoing telecommunications modernization project. We
successfully processed 257 million email messages during calendar year
2010, while protecting our customers from spam and malicious messages.
And we continued to update and expand the tools that Senators and staff
can use to stay connected with each other and their constituents--
supporting iPhones and iPads, adding mobile wireless devices to our
technology catalog, and upgrading our already robust video conferencing
capabilities.
In other services, our cabinet shop designed, built, and installed
177 pieces of furniture, a 43 percent increase from the previous year.
The demand for framing services increased by 6 percent more than the
previous year with a total of 2,764 orders completed. During fiscal
year 2010, our Printing, Graphics, and Direct Mail (PGDM) department
continued to improve operations and respond to the demand for producing
documents from digital files. By utilizing the latest technology in
digital printing, the publishing section produced 7.8 million pages, an
increase of 81 percent more than fiscal year 2009. Another area of high
demand during fiscal year 2010 was the production of charts. By
upgrading software to process files quicker, PGDM produced 9,273 large-
format charts, an increase of 15 percent more than fiscal year 2009.
And Mr. Chairman, in fiscal year 2010, this subcommittee approved
the use of prior year unobligated funding to relocate the Postal Square
printing and mailing operations to a new facility in Landover,
Maryland. This relocation has a projected net positive cash flow of
$2.8 million and 3.6 percent return on investment over 20 years. Design
plans have been approved for the build-out of the facility, and the SAA
has contracts in place to support moving equipment and installing data
communications and a security system. Construction started in January
2011 and PGDM will begin moving equipment in July 2011 and take
occupancy in September 2011. We greatly appreciate your support in this
effort.
My organization continues to be a good steward of taxpayers'
dollars as we continue to elevate our performance. Our productivity
increased to unprecedented levels, exemplified by the Senate Post
Office processing the second-highest volume of mail in the last decade,
surpassed only by 2009. I was pleased to announce in February of this
year that, as an added convenience for our customers, the Senate Post
Office now accepts credit and debit cards. Feedback from our customers
has been extremely positive.
The year 2010 represented another busy period for the Recording
Studio. Last year, we provided 1,078 hours of gavel-to-gavel coverage
of Senate Floor proceedings. We provided broadcast coverage of 723
Senate committee hearings and 1,074 radio productions. Additionally,
our team of seasoned professionals produced 1,066 shows for Senators
from our television studios. In addition, this past year our Recording
Studio broke new ground when we provided the land-based production and
engineering support for an appropriations hearing which included a live
videoconference with astronauts aboard the International Space Station.
To enhance our services to the Senate community, in May, 2010, we
opened a Hart Senate Appointment Desk to assist staff in escorting
guests to the Capitol. Our five Senate Appointment Desks collectively
processed 163,811 guests during 2010. The total number of badges issued
was the second highest in a given year since the appointment desks were
created more than 26 years ago. The past 4 years have been
extraordinary in that the Senate has been in session an average of 181
days from 2007 through 2010. This represents a 21 percent increase to
the 150 average number of days the Senate was in session from 1996
through 2006. Our customer satisfaction and employee morale levels have
never been higher. All of this is to say that the SAA team is working
toward the vision of our Strategic Plan: Exceptional Public Service . .
. Exceeding the Expected.
Assisting with all of the efforts of the SAA is an outstanding
senior management team including Martina Bradford, who serves as my
Deputy; Republican Liaison Mason Wiggins; Assistant Sergeant at Arms
for Capitol Operations Rick Edwards; General Counsel Joseph Haughey;
Legislative Liaison Nancy Olkewicz; Assistant Sergeant at Arms for
Continuity and Emergency Preparedness Operations Rich Majauskas;
Assistant Sergeant at Arms for Intelligence and Protective Services
Mike Stenger; Assistant Sergeant at Arms and Chief Information Officer
Kimball Winn; Chief Financial Officer Chris Dey; and Assistant Sergeant
at Arms for Operations Bret Swanson. The many goals and accomplishments
set forth in this testimony would not have been possible without this
team's leadership and commitment.
We are grateful for our relationship with the U.S. Capitol Police
(USCP). I am honored this year to serve as Chairman of the United
States Capitol Police Board and, in this regard, I value the input of
the other members, House Sergeant at Arms Bill Livingood, Architect of
the Capitol (AOC) Stephen Ayers, and Chief Phillip D. Morse, Sr., who
is an ex officio member of the Board. Working with the Senate Committee
on Rules and Administration and the USCP, we recently implemented a new
Senate door closure policy that establishes clear and concise hours of
operation for the doors in the Senate office buildings and the Senate
side of the Capitol. This initiative will save 8,970 hours of overtime
duty and $553,000 annually.
The SAA also works with other organizations that support the
Senate. I would like to take this opportunity to mention how important
their contributions have been in helping us achieve our objectives. In
particular, we work regularly with the Secretary of the Senate, the
AOC, and the Office of the Attending Physician. When appropriate, we
coordinate our efforts with the United States House of Representatives
and the agencies of the executive and judicial branches. I am impressed
by the people with whom we work and blessed with the quality of the
relationships we have built together.
I am very proud of all the men and women of the SAA team who help
keep the Senate running. While serving as SAA, I have seen their great
work and devotion to this institution. The employees of the SAA are
among the most committed and creative in Government.
As always, my staff and I are grateful for the support and guidance
of your subcommittee, the full committee and the Senate Committee on
Rules and Administration.
saa deg.continuity and emergency preparedness operations
Emergency Planning
Our emergency plans and procedures are designed to ensure the
safety of Senators, staff, and visitors within our facilities and equip
them with the necessary tools to respond to any situation. Each year we
strive to improve these procedures using industry best practices and
lessons learned. We made significant strides to ensure staff
preparedness through enhancing Emergency Action Plans (EAP), mobility-
impaired evacuation procedures, internal relocation actions, and the
annual Chamber Protective Actions exercise.
The central document that reflects our preparedness efforts is the
EAP and I am pleased to inform you that 100 percent of Senate offices
now possess a customized version based on their unique circumstances
and needs. In this past year, 65 percent of all Senate office EAPs were
reviewed and validated using guidelines set forth by the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration and the Congressional Accountability
Act (CAA). Significant areas of improvement included the addition of
office-specific shelter-in-place locations, internal relocation
actions, and AIRCON threat procedures. We collaborated with the Senate
Chief Counsel for Employment to develop EAPs for all Senators'
hideaways. This included confirming evacuation routes for Senators and
deploying additional emergency equipment. We met with new office
managers and established an EAP for each office assigned to a swing
space. We subsequently made appropriate adjustments as offices were
moved to permanent suites. This effort involved collaborating with each
office's Office Emergency Coordinator (OEC), installing and
transferring emergency equipment, and training office staff.
Accommodating staff with accessibility needs is outlined in each
office's EAP and is an integral portion of our training efforts. A
major enhancement to our program this year is the increased capability
to simultaneously evacuate mobility-impaired individuals from both the
primary and alternate emergency staging areas within the Senate office
buildings instead of just one location.
Last year I reported on the implementation of the internal
relocation program. This year I am pleased to announce the completion
of our program rollout. We collaborated with the AOC to install signage
throughout the Senate office buildings indicating internal relocation
sites. In response to numerous office comments, comfort stations have
been deployed to all sites including the Dirksen Senate Office Building
stairwells. Notification messages were developed and displayed in
collaboration with the House of Representatives and USCP. We have also
conducted six individual office exercises to validate our plans and
messages and will execute more in calendar year 2011.
The protection and preparedness of Senators, staff, and visitors
within the Senate Chamber is one of our main focus areas. Each year we
test and validate the Chamber Protective Actions plan by conducting a
full-scale exercise within the Chamber. The 2010 exercise proved to be
the most comprehensive and complex exercise to date. The exercise
linked together Chamber Protective Actions procedures with the
deployment of escape hoods and comfort stations along with the
subsequent execution of the USCP Senate Leadership AIRCON Rally Point
Plan and Briefing Center Plan.
Emergency Communications and Accountability
We continued to improve notification and communication programs
this year to ensure devices and systems are ready to support the Senate
during local or large-scale emergencies. The Accountability and
Emergency Roster System (ALERTS) is the primary alert and notification
system that provides a single interface for delivering emergency email,
PIN, and voice messages to the Senate population. We conduct monthly
tests for staff and biannual tests for Senators in conjunction with the
USCP, Secretary of the Senate, party secretaries, and other
stakeholders. These tests are designed to ensure our emergency
messaging system is reaching all intended recipients. This year we
introduced the ALERTS Dashboard to provide our office and the USCP with
real-time accountability data through a user-friendly graphic
interface. This capability was tested during the summer recess
evacuation drills in the assembly areas and at the USCP Incident
Command Post. We also continue to support USCP assembly area operations
through the deployment of tablets and laptops with faster connections,
greater reliability, and ergonomic features. We consistently reinforce
the importance of accountability with Senate staff by conducting Remote
Check-in drills and training using BlackBerry devices. We trained 406
OECs and achieved a 60 percent successful reporting rate this year,
demonstrating increased participation over the last 2 years.
The SAA provides ``watch standers'' in the USCP Command Center
after normal business hours when the Senate is in session or during
emergency incidents and special events. Watch standers are trained to
use the Senate Dialogic and Chyron systems to assist USCP as necessary
and provide senior SAA leadership with amplifying information regarding
ongoing events. Due to reliance on these two systems, the Dialogic
Communicator System was upgraded to provide better completion
percentages of voice messaging to desk and mobile phones. Additional
capabilities were added to the Chyron Cable TV Alert System to handle
digital and high-definition channels. The system is now fully capable
of sending alert messages via digital channels once they are activated
by the AOC.
We procured and installed WebEOC Mapper Professional, a Geospatial
Information System that provides Senate emergency managers with the
ability to create a dynamic, geographically based common operating
picture. Multilayered mapping has proven to be a highly effective
emergency management technique for government and law enforcement
agencies throughout the country. We also continue to administer
WebFusion to promote collaboration between the Senate, House of
Representatives, GAO, and AOC emergency managers through seamless
information sharing across networks. Additionally, WebFusion has
allowed legislative branch users to connect to local and State
emergency managers throughout the National Capital Region. Information
sharing between legislative and executive branch emergency managers is
further being improved through the installation of a Homeland Secure
Data Network (HSDN) terminal. Our mission requires access to classified
email, messaging, data analysis, and collaboration tools along with law
enforcement, emergency management, and National Capital Region intranet
resources. The use of HSDN will assist in intelligence gathering,
situational awareness, decisionmaking, and event reporting.
Training and Equipment
Training and outreach programs are designed to provide interactive
classroom and personalized instruction to the Senate community. These
valuable programs give staff a variety of preparedness and life-safety
awareness information to enhance personnel and office protection. This
year, 274 training sessions were conducted in which more than 5,600
staff were trained on a variety of preparedness topics. We initiated an
OEC certificate program in 2008 for staff that completed requisite
emergency preparedness courses and were pleased to issue 25
certificates this year. This certificate recognizes an OEC's
willingness and commitment to enhance their professional knowledge in
emergency preparedness and to be ready to support any emergency action
that may occur on Capitol Hill.
The culmination of our emergency preparedness training and outreach
programs is the Senate's National Preparedness Day event held each
September as part of National Preparedness Month. This event invites
members of the emergency management community throughout the National
Capital Region to set up static equipment displays, provide program
capability awareness training, and demonstrate new products. I had the
pleasure of introducing USCP Chief Phillip D. Morse, Sr. and National
Weather Service Director Dr. John Hayes as guest speakers to address
our theme of ``One Minute--One Life: Are You Prepared?'' to more than
100 staff members at this year's event.
Our continued management and support of emergency protective and
communication equipment caches in each Senate office has been a key
preparedness posture. These caches allow offices to receive
notifications from the USCP to shelter-in-place, deploy to their
designated internal relocation site, or use specified equipment to
evacuate the building. Each cache includes escape hoods, emergency
supply kits, and wireless emergency annunciators. Our office ensures
functionality through an annual inventory of assigned equipment and
replacement of expired items. All swing spaces and permanent suites for
freshmen Senators were supplied with equipment prior to occupancy at
the beginning of the 112th Congress. More than 270 offices and more
than 27,000 pieces of equipment were inventoried over the past year
alone. Additions to the equipment program include emergency news radios
for office supply kits, deployment of Victim Rescue Units to primary
and alternate staging elevator caches, installation of portable comfort
stations and lockers at internal relocation sites, and implementation
and activation of an AIRCON warning and notification system for the
fourth floor of the Capitol.
We released an updated version of the Roadmap to Readiness in 2011
and included an Emergency Response Guide, a condensed, portable version
of critical emergency information. The Roadmap to Readiness is a
comprehensive guide designed to equip offices with the necessary tools
to create emergency plans for Washington, DC and State offices. It also
suggests how to educate and train staff to respond appropriately in
emergencies. Additionally, new Web-based training classes have been
developed to provide staff with the means to educate themselves from
the convenience of their desktops.
We are improving audio and visual capabilities in rooms primarily
used for training Senate staff, but are used as EOCs during special
events or emergencies. The ability to display information on multiple
screens is essential for EOC operations and will also greatly improve
the capabilities needed to provide technical training to Senate staff.
SAA is simultaneously working to improve similar capabilities at the
Alternate Computing Facility (ACF) in Manassas in case the primary
location is unavailable, and a briefing room in the CVC that may be
used as a situation room or operations center during a shelter-in-
place. Upgrading capabilities at these locations will ensure senior
staff is equipped to manage special events and emergency incidents
through better information management and improved situational
awareness.
Exercises
A comprehensive exercise program is structured to ensure Senate
plans are practiced and validated regularly. The SAA and Secretary of
the Senate conduct several joint exercises annually with the USCP, AOC,
Office of Attending Physician, party secretaries, and other key
congressional stakeholders. A total of 15 exercises, tabletops, and
guided discussions were completed in 2010, covering all aspects of
emergency response including offsite alternate chamber, emergency
operations center, chamber protective actions, briefing center,
transportation, contingency telecommuting, accountability measures,
internal relocation, mass casualty, and alternate office space. We
successfully exercised a Chamber evacuation leading to Briefing Center
activation to further test our abilities to quickly set up contingency
facilities resulting in the most comprehensive Chamber exercise to
date. A ``no-notice'' exercise was conducted to test the ability to
activate an after-hours contingency site without warning. The general
exercise format included functional capabilities demonstrations and
tabletop scenarios designed to test the Senate's ability to function
during an event that requires relocating to alternate facilities or
contingency sites. After-action reports were generated to document
lessons learned for future plan improvement. More than 15 exercises are
scheduled for 2012 in addition to numerous training events and smaller-
scale tests and drills designed to maintain and strengthen existing
capabilities while addressing emerging needs and solutions.
Continuity and Recovery
This year Continuity and Emergency Preparedness Operations (CEPO)
focused on developing contingency transportation and classified site
plans as well as validating existing plans and procedures. We continued
collaborating with Senate offices and committees to develop internal
continuity of operations plans (COOP) and train staff accordingly. We
acquired new transportation assets and developed accompanying
activation and operations plans by leveraging our external support
organization. We worked with our counterparts in the House to develop
the Personnel Accountability System to enhance accountability during
contingency transportation. The program is now in the final stages of
development.
As part of its plans to refine accommodations at unclassified
continuity sites, CEPO updated the wiring in the Thurgood Marshall
Building Briefing Center. A full-scale exercise at the Postal Square
Briefing Center was conducted to validate movement of Senators to a
safe and secure environment in the aftermath of an incident. We also
improved plans to utilize the Government Accountability Office (GAO)
building as an alternate office in the event the Senate is no longer
able to occupy its regular work space. COOP materials and vital records
were placed at these contingency facilities and on classified networks
for convenient access. Finally, we collaborated with the Committee on
Rules and Administration to develop new Fly Away Kits for committee
hearings during continuity events. These materials are stored at
classified locations and can be rapidly deployed after an incident.
saa deg.intelligence and protective services
State Office Security and Preparedness
State office programs make security and preparedness training
available to Senators and staff in more than 450 State offices
throughout the United States. Almost two-thirds of these offices are
located in commercial buildings with no internal security. The rest are
located in Federal buildings that generally have some level of building
security, but are routinely targeted for disruptive activity. Numerous
high-profile and contentious issues arose in 2010 and several violent
incidents in and around State offices led to increased awareness and
participation in this voluntary, but critical program. Participating
offices are provided with secure reception areas in order to screen
visitors for signs of hostility, aggression, or impairment. Offices are
also outfitted with access controls, duress buttons, burglar alarm
systems, and closed-circuit camera systems. The program covers
installation, maintenance, and alarm monitoring services and also
includes an annual inspection and equipment testing.
During 2010, more than 300 State offices received direct assistance
in completing or updating their Comprehensive Emergency Plan (CEP). The
CEP combines security, emergency preparedness, and continuity of
government processes into one document that meets the requirements of
the CAA. Continuous outreach regarding the importance of establishing
plans was conducted through the development of a streamlined template
to assist small offices with no continuity of operations requirement,
and an online method to enter preliminary plan information. State
office hazard overviews were completed or updated for 218 offices to
identify natural or man-made hazards to be considered during plan
development. Additionally, 13 new State offices received program
briefings and emergency equipment and supplies similar to DC offices.
Pandemic information was promptly disseminated to all State offices and
approval from the Committee on Rules and Administration allowed staff
to procure supplies for combating the H1N1 virus. A monthly OEC
bulletin is now regularly distributed to all State offices and a
certificate path has been established for State OECs. The focus of the
program this year will turn to Web site updates and providing
additional preparedness classes online.
We provided security enhancements in 57 State offices during 2010.
These enhancements included building secure reception areas to screen
visitors, and installing burglar alarms, duress buttons, and closed-
circuit cameras with digital video recorders. To date, the program has
provided security enhancements in 80 percent of offices located in
commercial spaces and 62 percent of offices located in Federal
buildings, bringing the total amount of current offices with security
enhancements to 75 percent. Additionally, more than 300 State office
alarm systems were tested and inspected this year. This year, the focus
will turn to utilizing a new all-hazard risk assessment to survey State
offices and offer security enhancements to nonparticipating offices.
Collaboration with representatives from the USCP, General Services
Administration (GSA), Federal Protective Service, and the U.S. Marshals
Service will continue.
USCP Operations
The Senate Campus Access program that coordinates Member office and
committee requests for vehicle access through the campus security
perimeter processed 586 special requests for vehicle clearances,
deliveries, and bus access during fiscal year 2010, an increase of more
than 130 percent from fiscal year 2009. Additionally, we developed an
electronic request form via Webster for USCP coverage at subcommittee
hearings.
We collaborated with the USCP and external law enforcement agencies
to monitor and secure special events such as the State of the Union
Address, Democratic Senatorial Retreat, various joint sessions of the
Congress, Summer Concert Series, Supreme Court nomination hearing for
Associate Justice Elena Kagan, and memorial services for Senators
Robert C. Byrd and Edward Kennedy.
The Duty Desk in the USCP Command Center continues to ensure SAA
representation and provide communication between the USCP and the
Senate community during special events, critical incidents, and routine
operations. The Duty Desk is manned by SAA personnel during business
hours and while the Senate is in session. SAA staff receives routine
training and updated operating procedures to fulfill the
responsibility.
Our recently hired Assistant Sergeant at Arms for Intelligence and
Protective Services Mike Stenger maintains excellent working
relationships with a multitude of components within the intelligence
and law enforcement communities. Such trusted partnerships allow for
the timely and accurate sharing of all-source intelligence and law
enforcement-sensitive threat information when breaking situations
occur. Furthermore, it provides the opportunity to collect all-source
intelligence from appropriate partners and assess, integrate, and brief
essential information to senior SAA staff that can then make sound,
timely decisions for the safety and security of the U.S. Senate.
Finally, recent events in Arizona led our office to greatly expand
monitoring law enforcement investigations involving threats to Senators
and provide updates to the SAA and affected Senators, from case opening
through adjudication. We receive Senate office requests for local law
enforcement assistance at public events and coordinate evaluation and
assessment through the USCP. We are collaborating with the USCP
Uniformed Services Bureau to develop a consistent and seamless
community outreach program regarding safety and security for Senate
offices.
saa deg.IT
Enhancing Service, Security, and Stewardship
We continue to provide a wide range of effective IT solutions to
facilitate the Senate's ability to perform its legislative, constituent
service, and administrative duties; to safeguard the information and
systems the Senate relies upon; and to be ready to respond to
emergencies and disruptions. As in our other areas, we also emphasize
stewardship--the careful use of all of our resources, including the
funding we are provided, our personnel and the external resources that
we consume--in all aspects of our IT operation.
As we do each year, we have updated, and are performing under, our
2-year Information Technology Strategic Plan. The current version,
under which we will be operating in fiscal year 2012, continues to
emphasize our five strategic IT goals and their supporting objectives
that drive our programmatic and budgetary decisions:
Secure.--A secure Senate information infrastructure;
Customer Service Focused.--A customer service culture top-to-
bottom;
Effective.--IT solutions driven by business requirements;
Accessible, Flexible, and Reliable.--Access to mission-critical
information anywhere, anytime, under any circumstances;
Modern.--A state-of-the-art information infrastructure built on
modern, proven technologies.
Our fourth IT strategic goal--accessible, flexible, and reliable--
may be the most impactful of the five goals. This goal undergirds
everything we do from a technology standpoint. We must ensure that
almost every system and every service we deploy can withstand
disruptions to our operating environment, can be reconfigured if
necessary to cope with disruptions, and can be used regardless of
whether the person trying to use it is located within one of our spaces
or elsewhere. We continuously re-evaluate existing services and systems
to identify areas for improvement and make those improvements as soon
as we can, in an effort to ensure the Senate can continue to do its
work under any circumstances.
From a budgetary standpoint, more than one-half of the Chief
Information Officer organization's fiscal year 2012 request will cover
the installation and support of the equipment acquired by Senate
personal offices through the economic allocation, and for other
programs that benefit offices directly. One-third will be devoted to
providing services at the enterprise level, such as information
security, the Senate data network, electronic mail infrastructure, and
telephone systems. The remainder is almost equally divided between
supporting the office of the Secretary of the Senate with payroll,
financial management, legislative information, and disclosure systems;
and our own administrative and management systems.
saa deg.ENHANCING SERVICE TO THE SENATE
Customer Service, Satisfaction, and Communications
Our Information Technology Strategic Plan stresses customer service
as a top priority, and we actively solicit feedback from all levels and
for all types of services. For instance, we solicit customer feedback
for every help desk ticket opened. In major contracts that affect our
customers, we include strict service levels that are tied to the
contractors' compensation--if they do well, they get paid more; if they
do poorly, they get paid less. For instance, during the past year, the
percentage of on-time arrivals for the IT installation team never
dropped below 99 percent. The percentage of help desk calls that were
resolved during the initial call averaged 56 percent, and 96 percent of
customer surveys rated the IT help desk and installation services as
either ``very satisfactory'' or ``excellent''. We expect this excellent
level of performance to continue through fiscal year 2012.
In fiscal year 2012 we will continue to communicate effectively
with our customers through a well-developed outreach program that
includes IT newsletters, periodic project status reviews, IT working
groups, weekly technology and business process review meetings with
customers, and joint project and policy meetings with the Committee on
Rules and Administration, the Senate Systems Administrators
Association, and the administrative managers steering group.
Robust, Reliable, and Modern Communications
We provide modern, robust, and reliable data network and network-
based services that the Senate relies upon to communicate
electronically within and among offices on Capitol Hill and in the 50
States, to and from other legislative branch agencies, and through the
Internet to the public, other agencies and organizations.
We continue to keep our mobile communications offerings up to date
with the latest technology. Last year, we added the Apple iPhone, the
RIM 9800 Torch BlackBerry, the RIM 9330 Curve BlackBerry, and the RIM
9650 Bold BlackBerry to the technology catalog. Currently, we are
testing Android devices for support. We will continue to offer the
Senate community the latest smartphone technology in fiscal year 2012.
Following a migration to a new contract vehicle for our wide area
network services in fiscal year 2010, we are better poised to realize
the cost savings for this service compared to our previous contract
with AT&T. Our cost for this service has gone from $5.2 million in
fiscal year 2009 to $4.3 million in fiscal year 2010, and is on target
to cost $3.8 million in fiscal year 2011. Given the election cycle and
the additional moves, adds, and changes associated with incoming and
outgoing Senators, the fiscal year 2011 costs could increase, but
should remain less than fiscal year 2010 levels. We have also increased
our service levels to approximately 50 State office locations and
installed network optimization equipment in more than 90 locations
overall. The cost of wide area network services will increase slightly
in fiscal year 2012, to $4 million to allow us to continue our
investments in enhancing network services to more State office
locations.
We are working with the other legislative branch agencies to
improve interagency communication technology by implementing and
securing an upgraded Capnet network that connects all the legislative
branch agencies, with the goal of making this network the preferred
path for all interagency communication.
In addition to our robust messaging infrastructure that processed
approximately 257 million Internet email messages during the past
calendar year, we also support effective communication through the use
of videoconferencing. During the last and current fiscal years, we have
enhanced our videoconferencing infrastructure to allow participation in
a high-definition video conference from virtually anywhere in the world
using an inexpensive Web camera on a desktop or portable computer via
the Internet. We are adding new capabilities, including a Web interface
to allow an outside participant without a standards-based
videoconferencing system to participate via a Web client, as well as
the ability to escalate a point-to-point call to a multipoint call
regardless of bandwidth or whether the system has multipoint capability
installed.
We also delivered a solution to the problem of transferring large
files which allows media-based and other large files to be moved within
the Senate and between the Senate and others in a secure and reliable
fashion. We continue to expand the ways and tools for staff to be
connected. This year we delivered iPhone and iPad email and tools
integration and support. CIO staff worked extensively with a third-
party software provider to develop a secure, reliable, and manageable
iPhone corporate email client which met our requirements.
We continue to make progress toward modernizing the Senate's entire
telecommunications infrastructure to provide improved reliability and
redundancy in support of daily and emergency operations, and to take
advantage of technological advances to provide a more flexible and
robust infrastructure. Toward that end, we will be replacing systems
such as the cloakroom alerts, operational support and directory and
billing systems over the coming year, while we continue to move forward
with the replacement of the main telephone switch.
Web-Based and Customer-Focused Business Applications
As in past years, we continue to add functionality to TranSAAct,
which is our platform for moving business online. Based on the business
requirements of offices and the Committee on Rules and Administration,
we continue to develop TranSAAct to eliminate paper-based manual
processes and move them to the Web. Because it is built on an
extensible modern database framework, TranSAAct allows indefinite
expansion as new requirements are identified and fulfilled. This year
we completed enhancements to TranSAAct including online parking
services (e.g., request a parking assignment, reassign vehicles, add
vehicles, etc.) and a forms depot featuring 117 forms and links to
forms often used by administrative managers and chief clerks. We are
completing work on adding the ability to make telecommunications
service requests online.
We look forward over the coming months and years to moving
additional business processes to the Web, delivering increasing
functionality to administrative staff, and reducing the time, paper,
and errors associated with the current manual processes.
We delivered an enterprise class SharePoint data collaboration site
to provide a common access point for sharing information between
offices that do not have direct access to one another. For example,
subcommittee staff and staff in their Senate offices are using the site
to view, comment on, and edit committee documents.
We enhanced other Web-based applications such as a program that
more than 60 offices use on their Web sites for accepting service
academy nomination requests, intern requests, and other types of
applications and requests. Constituents have submitted more than
500,000 individual requests through this system. We also updated the
committee hearing scheduling application to make it more robust and
useful.
Showcasing and Promoting Modern IT in the Senate
We will continue to highlight new technologies in the Information
Technology Demonstration Center through demo days, which have been
well-attended in the past. After products are tested and validated in
our technology assessment laboratory, they are then available for staff
to try in the Demo Center. The demo days feature live demonstrations of
new and emerging technologies.
In order to perform technology assessments, feasibility analysis,
and proof of concept studies, to ensure we are considering technologies
that will directly support the Senate's mission, we continue to improve
the capabilities in our technology assessment laboratory. Technologies
and solutions are vetted and tested here prior to being announced for
pilot, prototype, or mass deployment to the Senate. To ensure we focus
on the most relevant technologies and solutions, the Technology
Advisory Group, consisting of CIO staff and our customers, performs
high-level requirements analysis and prioritizes new technologies and
solutions for consideration for deployment in the Senate. Among the
technologies that we look forward to supporting over the next few
months is support for additional smartphones based on the Android
operating system as well as Smart Cards. Smart Cards will enable a
range of applications based upon Public Key Infrastructure (PKI)
certificates included on the Smart Cards, including access to GSA-
controlled buildings, encryption and decryption of email and BlackBerry
messages, digital signatures for email and vouchers, and log-on
authentication.
We will continue or intensify these efforts in fiscal year 2012 to
ensure that the Senate is always well equipped to perform its
functions. To keep our customers informed of our efforts, we publish
the results of our studies on the emerging technology page of the CIO's
area on Webster.
saa deg.enhancing security for the senate
Enhancing Security With Accessible, Flexible, and Reliable Systems
As I mentioned earlier, we build security, accessibility,
flexibility, and reliability into every system and service. In addition
to those efforts, there are two projects that I would specifically like
to mention.
This past year our, CIO organization enhanced copier security by
moving beyond the traditional safeguards of buying equipment that
writes data to random, noncontiguous hard disk drive locations, to
completely erasing or removing copier hard disk drives prior to
disposal. We also reconfigured our copier baseline configurations to
include hard disk drive overwrite systems that conform to National
Security Agency security specifications without requiring user
intervention. We continued our BlackBerry scanning program designed to
detect security intrusions on wireless devices used during
international travel. In fiscal year 2010 we scanned more than 300
BlackBerrys, some multiple times. Fortunately, we found no major
discrepancies. In fiscal year 2011 and fiscal year 2012 we will
continue to seek ways to improve and enhance our scanning program.
We have also installed the second and third components of the
secure voice conferencing system to provide Secret-level conferencing
to accommodate 40 additional participants once we obtain additional
phone lines as part of our telephone system upgrade. In fiscal year
2012, we plan to upgrade the system with a Web-based interface, making
it more user-friendly.
Enhancing System and Information Resiliency
We continue to test our technology in scenarios in which our
primary infrastructure and primary work locations have become
inaccessible. This includes the simulated loss of our primary data and
network facilities, as well as simulated loss of staff work spaces. All
mission-essential Senate enterprise information systems continue to be
replicated at our ACF, using our upgraded optical network and storage
area network technology. We conduct a variety of exercises to ensure we
are prepared to cope with events ranging from a burst water pipe, to a
pandemic, to an evacuation of Capitol Hill. These exercises demonstrate
our ability to support mission-essential systems under adverse
conditions, and the ability to support substantial numbers of people
working from home. We continue to exercise the ability to support our
Senate customers in the event of an emergency situation which may limit
our ability to arrive at work. This includes weekly and monthly COOP/
pandemic exercises designed to ensure technical support is available
from the ACF and other remote locations. Our diligence to this
initiative proved worthwhile during the snow events of last year. With
the knowledge that the business of the Senate continued and that State
office locations were not affected by the weather in Washington, DC,
our staff continued to support the Senate community remotely throughout
these events. This included answering the phones from home-based
locations, highlighting the capabilities that our migration to IP
telephony may bring to the rest of the Senate.
We also will continue to invest in and modernize storage systems
that automatically replicate information from our primary site to our
alternate site. These storage systems support our mission-critical
systems as well as individual offices.
Securing our Information Infrastructure
As described in previous testimony, active and aggressive
adversaries continue to target Senate information and technology
assets. These adversaries use increasingly sophisticated tools,
techniques, and procedures; rapidly shift their attack methods in
response to new countermeasures; and continually refine their targeting
of Senate information. Our key strategy to meet this threat has been to
improve our coordination with other Federal agencies to share and adopt
current best practices. We have greatly improved and expanded our
relationships with other agencies, due in large part to the outreach
efforts of IT Security staff over the past year. As a result, we are
now better able to quickly adjust our countermeasures as adversaries
shift their tactics. Our efforts and interactions with our Federal
partners are comparable to DOD's evolving doctrine of ``active computer
network defense'', a framework for defending military networks. We are
working to incorporate five key elements of this doctrine into our IT
Security operating model:
--training and equipping SAA staff and contractors with specialized
cyber security skills;
--employing and continuously monitoring a strong core of layered
defenses;
--communicating current threat information to offices and providing
knowledge and expert advice to help them secure their
information;
--sharing current best practices with our Federal agency partners;
and
--investing in rapid development, testing, and implementation of
additional cyber defense capabilities.
We describe each of these elements and provide implementation
examples as follows: As an example of the first element, specialized
skills development, our IT security branch undergoes continual,
rigorous training on newly discovered threats and vulnerabilities.
They attend industry and government conferences, complete online
and classroom courses, host industry experts, conduct in-house classes
and seminars, and share knowledge among their peers on the latest
advances in cyberspace threats and defensive measures. This training
helps us quickly put into operation and benefit from new defensive
technologies. For example, we recently acquired new analysis tools that
enable more precise identification of potential attacks and faster
incident response times. These newly acquired skills were quickly
deployed and put to practical use in our daily operations, producing
demonstrable results and saving taxpayer dollars.
The second element, layered defenses, requires us to develop
multiple capabilities to prevent and detect intrusions at every point
in our network and we have worked this past year to introduce and
encourage widespread adoption of new defensive capabilities. As an
example, our voluntary vulnerability assessment service has grown to
include 43 Member offices and five committees, with more offices
enrolling. The new Systems Management Service (SMS), an automated means
for offices to automatically apply critical security patches to non-
Microsoft software, has also grown rapidly since we introduced it in
December 2010. Fifty-two offices are now using the service, which
provides a significant (up to 68 percent) reduction in software
vulnerability risk as measured by vulnerability assessment results. SMS
serves as an excellent complement to our vulnerability assessment
program and to Windows Server Update Services (WSUS), which
automatically patches Microsoft software. The vulnerability assessment
program, SMS, and WSUS combine well to serve as a ``success enabler''
for offices by giving them the tools they need to continuously assess
and improve their IT security posture.
In addition to our vulnerability assessment and patch management
services, we continue to monitor and improve our other centrally
managed security services. One major initiative is our ongoing effort
to enhance email security by establishing mutual trust mechanisms with
other Federal agencies based on email source validation and encryption
technologies. These trust mechanisms assure us and our participating
Federal partners that messages exchanged are encrypted while traversing
the Internet and are actually coming from an authorized mail server at
each respective agency. As a result, Senate staff can have confidence
that the messages they exchange with one of our trusted partners have
not been read or manipulated by a third party while in transit and have
come from a legitimate contact instead of a malicious actor using a
forged sender address. We expect to continue expanding the number of
agencies involved in this effort.
The third element is reflected in our initiative to provide
improved and varied training and awareness programs for offices. Over
the past year, we have developed and conducted individual threat
briefings for system administrators, office leadership, and other staff
to educate them on the evolving threat environment and recommended
freely available services that we provide to help them reduce their
risk. We have also incorporated current effective practices into our
general awareness materials that we provide through Webster and in-
office presentations. We share our awareness material with other
agencies and adopt useful material they share with us. Furthermore, we
have incorporated an IT security briefing into the new system
administrator training process to inform them of our services and to
help them enroll and make the best use of our offerings soon after they
are hired. Finally, we help system administrators identify critical
systems that our adversaries would consider high-value targets and
facilitate enhanced protection for these systems to assure continuity
of operations.
The fourth element involves sharing new threat information, trends,
and effective practices with other Federal agencies. We do not share
specific information concerning offices or staffs involved, but
coordinate with these agencies to help establish a common information
base and defensive posture. The relationships that we have built, and
continue to build, are mutually beneficial and have paid great
dividends in terms of improved security services for our offices. We
can now provide offices more timely and detailed threat and
vulnerability information, more reliable countermeasures, and more
efficient identification and mitigation of many of our higher-priority
incidents.
The fifth and final element is rapid development, testing, and
implementation of additional cyber defense capabilities. We recently
tested and implemented a new log analysis tool that has reduced the
time required to identify and notify offices of attacks from a matter
of hours to just a matter of minutes. We are also looking forward to
implementing a new monitoring tool in the next few months that will
improve our ability to rate the severity of security incidents, reduce
false positives, and provide offices with better guidance for
recovering from incidents. Finally, we are currently researching
potential solutions that will augment our anti-virus systems by
blocking malicious or compromised Web sites, which are a primary cause
of many of our security incidents.
Adopting the elements of the Department of Defense's Active
Computer Network Defense doctrine helps us work toward our strategic
goal to provide a secure Senate information infrastructure. We will
continue to adopt useful elements of the doctrine to further our
efforts. We are continually changing and improving our tactics and
operational processes to meet the rapidly changing cyber threat
environment while supporting the Senate's mission.
saa deg.ENHANCING STEWARDSHIP
Enhancing Stewardship Through Fiscal and Environmental Responsibility
Stewardship of our resources is intertwined in everything we do, as
well as being a driving force for some of our activities. We are always
looking for ways to improve our processes or technologies so that we
save time, money, electricity, paper, or other resources. Our CIO
organization is a good steward of the fiscal resources of the Senate,
consistently and continuously improving on the services offered to our
customers while seeking only modest increases in funding. Many
initiatives save an office hundreds or thousands of dollars in costs
that would otherwise be borne out of their official accounts. As most
of these initiatives save money due to a reduction in the purchase of
some commodity, they also fit in with our efforts toward environmental
stewardship. Some examples of our efforts to enhance fiscal and
environmental stewardship are:
--Continuation of our virtualization efforts, where we now reduce
energy, maintenance, and support costs by running more than 379
of our servers in a virtual environment. We will continue an
aggressive campaign to virtualize servers until every server
that can be virtualized is virtual.
--Offices, especially those of the new Senators, have taken great
advantage of our virtual machine infrastructure that allows us
to centrally host their file and application servers on shared
hardware at our primary and alternate facilities, which greatly
increases server hardware efficiency, and, through system
duplication and data replication, offers enterprise class data
redundancy and recovery in the event of a critical local
failure or crisis. The virtual solution also relieves offices
of considerable noise, excess heat, and increases usable
working areas for staff. It removes the single point of failure
from existing office servers and meets continuity of operations
and data replication requirements for approximately half the
cost of existing solutions. To date we are hosting 86 Member
and committee office file servers on our virtual
infrastructure. Virtual servers running in the data center
consume only 15 percent of the energy of a comparable number of
physical servers. This means a reduction in power consumption
and air conditioning requirements, saving Senate funds, while
enhancing our ability to provide reliable and redundant
services. Fewer servers used by the Senate also means fewer
servers that need to be manufactured and therefore have to be
disposed of at their end of life, which is greening on a
national scale.
--Work is well under way to offer offices the ability to host their
constituent support systems and SharePoint collaboration
systems in a virtual environment, which will provide offices
the opportunity to operate without any physical servers in
their offices.
--We continue to use our catalog to highlight the energy-efficient
aspects of our supported IT and general office equipment, and
we conducted ``green demo days'' where vendors could answer
questions about their products' environmental friendliness.
--We continue our efforts to dispose of surplus electronic equipment
through such programs as Computers for Schools. Last year we
fulfilled 36 Member office requests and packed and shipped 900
surplus computers to eligible public schools. We send other
surplus equipment to the GSA for redistribution or resale.
--We also ensure that the devices we recommend to the Senate meet the
applicable ENERGYSTAR guidelines, and where feasible, the
guidelines for the responsible manufacture of IT equipment.
saa deg.OPERATIONS
PGDM
The PGDM branch provides high-level, direct customer support to the
Senate community through photocopying, graphic design, printing,
mailing, archiving, logistics, and security.
During fiscal year 2010, PGDM continued to improve operations and
respond to demand for producing documents from digital files. By
utilizing the latest technology in digital printing, the Publishing
Section produced 7.8 million pages, an increase of 81 percent more than
fiscal year 2009. PGDM continued to meet the demand for Constituent
Services System (CSS) imaging by scanning, digitizing, and
electronically transferring 1.1 million pages of constituent mail
responses during fiscal year 2010. Another area of high demand during
fiscal year 2010 was production of charts. By upgrading software to
process files quicker, PGDM produced 9,273 large format charts, an
increase of 15 percent more than fiscal year 2009.
PGDM is customer-focused and achieved high levels of customer
satisfaction. Reliable, user-friendly copiers in convenient satellite
copy centers produced more than 7.6 million copies in fiscal year 2010.
Utilizing traditional offset and digital printing, PGDM met customer
requests for color printing, producing more than 21.8 million color
pages. Combined printing volumes in all sections of PGDM during fiscal
year 2010 totaled 52.4 million, a 6 percent increase more than fiscal
year 2009. PGDM continued to improve services to meet the demand for
archiving Senate office documents during fiscal year 2010.
Through software and hardware upgrades, PGDM produced 511 rolls of
microfilm, a 156 percent increase more than fiscal year 2009, and
scanned and digitized more than 3.2 million pages, a 10 percent
increase more than fiscal year 2009.
As a good steward of its own resources and that of others, PGDM
saved the Senate more than $1.8 million in postage costs by pre-sorting
9.5 million pieces of outgoing Senate franked mail. New software
systems have been integrated in a number of processes to validate,
correct, or remove bad addresses prior to mailing. In fiscal year 2009,
a system was put in place to validate addresses on constituent letters.
The number of offices utilizing this process has grown from 14 in
fiscal year 2009 to 97 in fiscal year 2010. PGDM has also upgraded
software in the mail-sorting process. By implementing the new United
States Postal Service (USPS) mandated intelligent barcode and moving
updated software ahead of schedule, PGDM has ensured that Senate
offices continue to receive maximum postage discounts. PGDM is
continuing to work with a vendor to modify and test a Web-based
application to provide address correction, validation, and delivery
tracking for shipping of constituent flag requests.
PGDM's commitment to teamwork and excellent customer service
extends to our legislative branch partners as well. Our collaborative
work with the AOC fulfilled 82,828 flag requests during fiscal year
2010, and in tandem with GPO, delivered more than 2 million documents
(Pocket Constitutions, Our Flag, Our American Government, etc.) to
requestors. PGDM has also been working with the AOC to relocate the
PGDM Logistics operations from SR-B31F to the Hart loading dock area.
Construction of the Hart location is planned to be completed this
spring which will allow for structural renovation on the lower level of
the southwest corner of the Russell building. In early fiscal year
2010, PGDM provided a tour of our CSS imaging operation to the White
House Office of Presidential Correspondence staff, which was
considering implementation of a similar operation.
Through effective communication and teamwork, PGDM's Senate Support
Facility upheld the SAA mission for operational security in fiscal year
2010 by receiving 1,045,153 items from the USCP off-site inspection
facility and transferring them to the Senate Support Facility. This
process eliminated 561 truck deliveries to the Capitol complex while
reducing traffic and allowing the USCP to focus on other aspects of
safety.
In fiscal year 2010, the subcommittee approved the use of prior
year unobligated funding to relocate the Postal Square printing and
mailing operations to a modern, efficient, secure, and safe facility.
This relocation will ensure PGDM operations continue without
interruptions in service from facility failures which have plagued the
Postal Square building over the years. In collaboration with the AOC, a
facility located in the same complex as the Senate Support Facility and
the Senate Post Office Inspection Facility was selected and put under
contract. The relocation project has a projected net positive cash flow
of $2.8 million and 3.6 percent return on investment over 20 years.
Design plans have been approved for the build-out of the facility, and
the SAA has contracts in place to support moving equipment and
installing data communications and security systems. Construction
started in January 2011, and PGDM will begin moving equipment in July
2011 and take occupancy in September 2011.
saa deg.CENTRAL OPERATIONS
Smart Card Programs--ID Office
The implementation of Homeland Security Presidential Directive
(HSPD) 12--Policy for a Common Identification Standard for Federal
Employees and Contractors will significantly impact Senators and their
staff whose State offices are located in Federal buildings across the
country. While legislative branch adoption of HSPD-12 is optional,
compliance will allow Senators and staff unhindered access to work
freely within these facilities. Staff from the ID Office and Technology
Development Services is currently collaborating with executive branch
counterparts to implement compatible access cards to paid staff within
the 112th Congress.
Although a substantial cost is associated with system architecture,
there are continued efforts to explore advantages of Smart Card
deployment. Sophisticated Smart Card credentials can provide multiple
functions beyond current ``flash pass'' identification badges. While
maintaining proximity technology used in the USCP's current physical
access control system, digital certificates on Smart Cards may in the
future be used for encryption of personally identifiable information
exchanged with executive branch agencies in the processing of
constituent casework. Other future benefits within the Senate community
for digital certificates include digital signatures on financial
documents and secure, single network sign-on.
saa deg.PARKING OPERATIONS
The Parking Operations team continues to update policies and
procedures to better serve the Senate community. For the first time,
all Senate parking spaces were defined producing an accurate count of
3,100 spaces (600 spaces greater than previous estimates). Beginning
with the 112th Congress, Parking Operations streamlined policy and
procedures to allow for greater customer understanding:
--the number of permit types was reduced by 17 percent;
--color was used on the parking map to better communicate parking
area definitions; and
--new signage was installed to clearly label parking areas.
Parking Specialists continued to enjoy amplified visibility to
customers as new kiosks were installed on Lots 12 and 16. Increased
Segway use and wearing of reflective vests and gloves have also
increased recognition of the specialists by customers and visitors.
Employee retention has been superb; there has been only one vacancy in
the last 18 months and that was due to a promotion.
saa deg.TRANSPORTATION AND FLEET OPERATIONS
Transportation and Fleet Operations safely and securely procures,
manages, maintains, and disposes of SAA vehicles; provides
transportation information to offices; and manages the Senate Parking
Shuttle Service. The SAA fleet includes trucks, vans, buses, and SUVs
used to support the Senate community. Senate leadership vehicles are
leased and administered by Fleet Operations under the Executive Lease
Plan on a biannual basis. Transportation and Fleet Operations is
responsible for completing work orders, equipment installations, tag/
registration renewals, and vehicle inspections for all fleet vehicles,
performing more than 448 of these services in fiscal year 2010. Fleet
staff scheduled more than 350 transportation requests and transported
more than 20,000 passengers through the SAA Parking Shuttle Service in
fiscal year 2010.
Transportation and Fleet Operations offers several driver training
programs including an online software training course developed by the
National Safety Council (NSC), an in-house Professional Truck Driver
Safety Certification Course also developed by NSC using a fleet staff
certified instructor, and Segway Certification Training using fleet
certified instructors.
Transportation and Fleet Operations is a leader in ``Go Green''
initiatives with 25 flex E-85 fuel vehicles, 5 hybrids, 2 electric
vehicles, and 2 Diesel Exhaust Fluid-certified trucks. Fleet Operations
will continue to explore the use of alternative fuel vehicles as
replacements for older vehicles as they are rotated out of the fleet.
saa deg.PHOTOGRAPHY STUDIO
The photography studio provides photography and imaging services
for Senate offices, capturing more than 75,000 photo images and
producing more than 95,000 photo prints in fiscal year 2010. The
studio's popular image archiving service was used to scan, organize,
and transfer more than 80,000 photo images for archiving purposes in
fiscal year 2010. The photo browser application provides Senate offices
a secure location to store and organize photos and the ability to
download and upload photos or place orders for photo prints from their
desktop through a Web interface.
saa deg.SENATE HAIR CARE
Senate hair care serves customers by offering the latest trends in
hair styling to Senators and thousands of customers, including staff
and the general public. In fiscal year 2010, revenue increased by
approximately $40,000 (9 percent), the highest in 10 years. Continuing
to build on the diverse customer base and supplying additional retail
products and services, Senate Hair Care will remain a profitable and
indispensable service offered by the SAA.
saa deg.SENATE POST OFFICE
Mail remains a primary medium for constituents to communicate with
Senators and their staff. During 2010, the total volume of mail
addressed to the Senate Washington, DC offices was significant. Our
Senate Post Office received, tested, and delivered 17,710,648 safe
items to Senate offices, including 10,935,830 pieces of USPS mail; more
than 6,234,000 pieces of internal mail routed within the Senate or to
or from other Government agencies; 75,000 packages; and 465,777 courier
items. The total number of mail and packages received and processed in
2010 represented the second largest yearly total this decade, surpassed
only by 2009. Mail received by the Senate has increased substantially
over the past 2 years, bucking the nationwide trend that shows overall
USPS mail volumes declining.
Processing Mail Safely
Protecting the Senate and its staff is my highest priority. We have
worked collaboratively with this subcommittee, the Committee on Rules
and Administration, our science advisors, the USCP, USPS, the White
House Office of Science and Technology Policy, and the Department of
Homeland Security in developing safe and secure mail protocols and in
creating two of the best mail processing facilities of their type in
the world.
All mail and packages addressed to the Senate's Washington, DC
offices are tested and delivered by Senate Post Office employees.
During 2010, our highly trained off-site mail staff intercepted 221
suspicious pieces of mail that were addressed to Senators with the
intent to terrorize and disrupt Senate business. The USCP immediately
responded to these threatening items at our off-site mail processing
facility thereby preventing their delivery to any Senate office.
We also worked with this subcommittee and the Committee on Rules
and Administration to build and operate one of the best facilities
within the Government to process time-sensitive documents that are
delivered to the Senate. Our Congressional Acceptance Site ensures that
all same-day documents are x rayed, opened, tested, and safe for
delivery to Senate offices. The 465,777 items that we processed during
2010 represented the most documents processed at this facility since it
opened in August 2006, which was a 68 percent increase more than 2009's
courier items. We were able to absorb this additional volume through
cross-training our existing staff and by instituting process
improvements rather than increasing our workforce.
The Senate's method for processing mail has become the model for
others. We have been asked to demonstrate our procedures and showcase
our facilities for some of our Nation's allies and for other Government
agencies, including the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security.
The organizations that know the most about mail safety cite our highly
trained staff and the Senate mail facilities as among the most
efficient and secure in existence.
State Office Mail
Additionally, my office has worked collaboratively with our science
advisors to introduce the first device designed to provide Senate staff
who work in State offices with a level of protection when handling
mail. Our science advisors believe that the Postal Sentry, if used
properly, provides the best level of protection to State offices and
their staff should they receive mail containing a potentially harmful
substance. I have requested that all Senate State staff utilize the
Postal Sentry mail processing system whenever mail is opened in their
offices. All newly elected Senators' State offices have been equipped
with the Postal Sentry and many other Senators have opted for the
device as well. Currently, 238 State offices have the Postal Sentry, up
from 66 State offices at the end of 2009. The Senate took the lead in
providing State offices with a level of protection when handling mail.
Recently, the House of Representatives ordered several Postal Sentrys
for use in their district offices.
Improving Services Offered
My office strives to provide exemplary service to the Senate
community. Our Senate Post Office, in conjunction with the USPS,
operates contract retail locations in the Dirksen and Russell Senate
Office Buildings. To the frustration of many, patrons in past years
have been unable to purchase postage stamps, Express and Priority mail
postage, mail supplies, insurance, and money orders with the
convenience of a credit or debit card, only with cash. After lengthy
negotiations with the USPS, I was pleased to announce in February of
this year that as an added convenience for our customers, the Senate
Post Office accepts credit and debit cards. Feedback from our customers
has been extremely positive with the new and additional service.
A Cost-effective Operation
Even with the expansion of our capabilities, outreach efforts and
the significant increases in mail volume, my office continues to be
good stewards of taxpayer dollars. Technology and process improvements
made since 2008 have enabled the Senate Post Office to reduce the
number of its employees by 6 percent. Their achievement is even more
impressive when you consider that the number of mail items received,
tested, and safely delivered has increased by more than 25 percent
annually during that same time period. We have compared our costs to
other agencies and are pleased to report that we have one of the most
efficient and cost-effective operations of its type. Some agencies with
similar processes and mail volume spend millions more than the Senate
in processing mail. A comparative analysis of similar organizations
that contract out mail processing has determined that the Senate
processes its mail for up to 62 percent less cost than others.
saa deg.CAPITOL FACILITIES
SAA Capitol Facilities serves the Senate community by providing a
clean and professional work environment through its Environmental
Services branch. This branch cleans Capitol spaces, moves Capitol
furniture, provides special event setups in the Capitol--including the
10 event spaces in the CVC Senate expansion space--and completes other
service requests. To meet cyclical customer demands during peak event
setups and furniture moves, Capitol Facilities was able to improve
labor cost efficiency by supplementing the full-time work force with
contracted labor in place of additional FTEs. This resulted in a
second-year cost savings of $150,000. Capitol Facilities completed
3,127 special event setups in the CVC Senate expansion space and
Capitol, a 24 percent increase from the previous year. Service requests
from Capitol offices for moving furniture and supplies totaled 6,622,
an increase of 11 percent more than the previous year.
The Furnishings branch provides framing services to all Senators
and committees. Demand for framing services increased by 6 percent more
than the previous year with a total of 2,764 orders completed. The
branch also provides custom cabinets and other high-quality furniture,
carpeting, and draperies to Capitol offices. The Cabinet Shop designed,
built, and installed 177 pieces of furniture, a 43 percent increase
from the previous year. The Furnishings branch worked with the
Committee on Appropriations on design and installation of custom
carpet, construction of turrets for a new sound system, and
installation of custom-built benches around the perimeter of the
committee room (S-127). New furniture, draperies, and upholstery were
provided for the Committee on Foreign Relations room and office (S-116/
117), the Vice President's office (S-212), and the Republican
Secretary's office (S-335). Additionally, 20 new Senate Chamber chairs
were built for incoming Senators.
saa DEG.CVC
My office has been involved with the CVC since its inception. We
have worked collaboratively with others, including representatives of
this subcommittee, to ensure that many of the operational aspects of
the facility achieve desired results. Our participation and the
challenges presented have been vast and varied, including, but not
limited to, security, hours of operation, transitioning the Capitol
Guide Service, emergency preparedness, IT, furnishings for the Senate
side of the CVC, Senate meeting rooms setup and maintenance, bus
routes, Capitol tour routes, coat checks, official appointments,
accommodating visitors to the Senate Gallery, broadcast media
infrastructure, ATM service, telephone service, and other
communications infrastructure. I am pleased to report that all of the
SAA departments involved with the CVC completed all of our tasks on
time and within budget.
More than 5 million visitors have experienced the CVC since its
opening a little more than 2 years ago. Feedback from our guests has
been extremely positive. The long lines of visitors waiting in the
elements that were prevalent prior to the CVC's opening have been
eliminated, as are the congested hallways in the Capitol. Visitor
services professionals from across the country and around the world
view the CVC, and its operation, as models of excellence in the visitor
services arena.
Each of our departments affected by the CVC adjusted its processes,
thereby mitigating additional employees and costs when this magnificent
addition to the Capitol opened. The impacts to their operations were
significant, yet, by maximizing resources, we were able to achieve
desired results.
saa deg.SENATE APPOINTMENT DESKS
Expanding and Improving our Services
An objective of the CVC was to improve security and the flow of
visitors to the Capitol. To facilitate this goal, we expanded the
Senate Appointment Desks 100 percent by adding two desks in the CVC,
one located near the main entrance and the other located outside of the
Senate Meeting Rooms on the lower level. These two desks required four
additional FTEs to staff the desks. Improved technology and process
improvements achieved by the Senate Post Office enabled the transfer of
four employees from the Senate Post Office to the Senate Appointment
Desks in the CVC. This is another example where my office exercised
fiscal responsibility by finding resources within our organization
rather than increasing costs by adding to the complement of employees
assigned to the SAA organization.
To enhance our services to the Senate community, we were tasked
with opening a Hart Senate Appointment Desk in May 2010. Again SAA
staff accomplished this task with minimal expense and without adding
employees. We restructured the duties of our existing appointment desk
team and those of our Doorkeeper team, thereby freeing up the labor
needed to support an appointment desk located in the Hart Senate Office
Building. We worked collaboratively with the Committee on Rules and
Administration, USCP, and the AOC in designing a secure and welcoming
process for staff who escort Senate guests to the Capitol from the Hart
Senate Office Building.
Our five Senate Appointment Desks collectively processed 163,811
guests during 2010. The total number of badges issued was the second
highest in a given year since the appointment desks were created more
than 26 years ago.
A goal for opening the CVC was to improve security by reducing the
number of guests who enter through the Capitol's north door. Last year
47,956 guests entered the Capitol through the CVC with its state-of-
the-art security features and accommodations. Without the CVC, these
guests would have entered through the north door of the Capitol,
waiting in line and bearing the elements. The Capitol Appointment Desk
reduced its number of guests processed through the north door to 37,577
during 2010. The 2010 total number of visitors processed through the
North Door represented a 40 percent reduction in the number of guests
processed as compared to the year before the CVC opened. This reduction
of guests in the Capitol improved safety, reduced wait time for
entrance through the north door of the Capitol, improved visitor flow,
and reduced congestion within the Capitol proper.
Also in 2010, more than 72,000 guests entered the Capitol via the
Russell Appointment Desk, including 60,550 who were destined for the
CVC. This represented the most badges issued by the Russell Appointment
Desk in its history.
saa deg.DOORKEEPERS
Facilitating the Needs of the Senate
Our Doorkeepers play an important role in supporting the Senate.
This group of dedicated professionals remains on call to assist the
Senate when needed. A primary role of our Doorkeepers is to support the
Senate Chamber by providing access to those with Senate Floor
privileges and enforcing the rules of the Senate. Additionally, our
Doorkeeper team facilitates the needs of Senators, Senate Floor staff,
and pages.
The past 4 years have been extraordinary in that the Senate has
been in session an average of 181 days from 2007 through 2010. This
represents a 21 percent increase to the 150 average numbers of days the
Senate was in session from 1996 through 2006.
Our Doorkeepers provided exceptional support for special events
during 2010, including the swearing-in of Senators elected during 2010
and the re-enactment that followed in the Old Senate Chamber; Senator
Byrd's laying in repose in the Senate Chamber; the confirmation of
Supreme Court Justice Kagan; and the impeachment trials of Samuel B.
Kent and G. Thomas Porteous.
Our Doorkeepers facilitate the movement and seating of Senators
during joint sessions of the Congress conducted in the House of
Representatives. During 2010 there were two joint sessions:
--the President's State of the Union Address; and
--the Joint meeting of the Congress with the President of Mexico.
Congressional tributes and Congressional Gold Medal ceremonies also
require the services of Doorkeepers. In the past year, Doorkeepers
facilitated Senators and guests for the 50th Anniversary of the
Inaugural Address of President John F. Kennedy; Days of Remembrance;
moment of silence in the Senate Galleries and on the House of
Representatives steps in honor of the victims of the tragedy in Tucson,
Arizona; Celebration of the Life of Congressman John Murtha;
recognition of contributions of enslaved African Americans to the
construction of the United States Capitol; September 11 Congressional
Remembrance Ceremony; Peace Officers Memorial Day; and Women Service
Pilots Congressional Gold Medal ceremony.
Improving the Senate Gallery Visitor Experience
We improved the visitor experience for those who want to witness
Senate proceedings from the Gallery. We now process these guests
through the CVC, rather than through the Capitol's north door. This
process enhancement improved security, as well as the visitor
experience, by eliminating the long lines and congestion that had been
commonplace throughout the Capitol prior to the opening of the CVC. Our
Senate Doorkeepers manage a staging room in the CVC that facilitates
the collection of prohibited items and the movement of people in a
secure and efficient manner. The staging room and the surrounding areas
offer our guests numerous comforts and educational opportunities.
Last year, 224,925 visitors viewed the Senate Chamber from the
Senate Gallery. 2010 represented the first full year since 2000 that
the Senate Gallery was open for visitors during scheduled Senate
recesses. We reopened the Senate Gallery during scheduled recesses
beginning with the August 2009 recess and, since then, more than 90,000
visitors have viewed the Senate Chamber from the Senate Gallery.
Reopening the Gallery has provided an opportunity for thousands, who
under the previous rule would not have enjoyed the opportunity to see
the ``world's greatest deliberative body.'' Our Gallery remains open
during scheduled recesses for 2011.
The feedback that we have received from Senate Gallery visitors has
been extremely positive. Senate Gallery visitors have complimented our
processes, including the elimination of long lines, waiting in the
elements, the speed of gaining access to the Gallery and the
educational opportunities afforded by the CVC.
Leveraging Existing Resources
The year 2010 proved to be one of the busiest and demanding in the
history of the Senate Doorkeepers. Our Doorkeepers' work is yet another
example where our process improvements and solid management principles
have enabled us to do more with existing resources. Our Doorkeepers
were able to make significant improvements with minimal expense and
without additional employees.
Despite the increases in workload--the 21 percent increase in the
average number of days the Senate has been in session for the past 4
years, the 70 percent increase in the footprint covered by Doorkeeper
staff due to the opening of the CVC, and the increased number of
special events and ceremonies requiring Doorkeeper support--we were
able to improve our performance by utilizing existing resources,
redefining our work processes, and refining our Doorkeepers' job
descriptions.
saa deg.SENATE RECORDING STUDIO
Expanded Broadcast Capability
Our Senate Recording Studio was one of the first departments to
move into the CVC. Our facility has received accolades from guests
since its opening, including Senate leadership, Senators, and Senate
staff. The convenience of the studio's location and proximity to the
Senate Floor and Senate subway system provides convenience to Senators
and staff.
The studio is responsible for providing gavel-to-gavel coverage of
Senate floor proceedings, broadcasting Senate committee hearings, and
providing radio and television production studios and equipment for
Senators' use. In 2010 represented another busy year for the recording
studio. Last year, we provided 1,078 hours of gavel-to-gavel coverage
of Senate Floor proceedings. We provided broadcast coverage of 723
Senate committee hearings and 1,074 radio productions. Additionally,
our team of seasoned professionals produced 1,066 shows for Senators
from our television studios.
The number of studio productions increased by 5 percent due largely
to our Recording Studio producing the Democratic Media Center and
Republican Conference shows while their respective studios were being
renovated.
Groundbreaking Firsts
This past year our recording studio broke new ground when we
provided the land-based production and engineering support for an
Appropriations Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies
Subcommittee hearing which included a live videoconference with
astronauts aboard the International Space Station.
Another first for our recording studio was the Internet simulcast
of a Senate Washington, DC event to all Senate staff who wanted to
participate, including State office personnel. In the aftermath of the
Tucson shooting tragedy, my office conducted a security briefing to
provide an interactive forum for all participants and attendees. This
capability facilitated our ability to answer questions and provide
updated information to Member offices throughout the United States.
Committee Hearing Room Upgrade Project
Demand for additional committee broadcasts has been ever
increasing. In 2003, we began working with this subcommittee and the
Committee on Rules and Administration to upgrade and install multimedia
equipment in Senate committee rooms. The project includes digital
signal processing audio systems and broadcast-quality robotic camera
systems. The Committee Hearing Room Upgrade Project continued during
2010.
To date, we have completed 30 rooms. Room enhancements include
improved speech intelligibility and software-based systems that we can
configure based on individual committee needs. The system is networked,
which gives committee staff the ability to easily and automatically
route audio from one hearing room to another when there are overflow
crowds. Additionally, the system's backup will take over quickly if the
primary electronics fail.
Reducing Costs by Leveraging Technology
As part of the upgrades, we installed technologies in our new
Recording Studio space in the CVC to enhance our ability to provide
broadcast coverage of more hearings simultaneously without adding
staff. For example, the Committee Hearing Room Upgrade Project allows
us to cover a hearing with only one employee. Before the upgrades,
three employees were required to adequately cover a single hearing.
These technology enhancements, coupled with the expansion of the number
of control rooms for committee broadcasts to 12, have enabled us to
increase our simultaneous broadcast coverage of committee hearings from
5 to as many as 12 without increasing our staff.
Our Senate Recording Studio is another shining example of where we
have enhanced our services and increased our productivity by utilizing
process improvements and technology, rather than increasing our staff.
saa deg.MEDIA GALLERIES
The four Senate Media Galleries comprise the Senate Daily Press
Gallery:
--the Senate Periodical Press Gallery;
--the Press Photographers' Gallery; and
--the Senate Radio and Television Gallery.
The unique structure of the four Media Galleries requires them to
work closely with their respective Standing and Executive
Correspondent's Committees, the Senate SAA, the USCP, and the Senate
Committee on Rules and Administration in order to facilitate media
arrangements and credentials for the more than 7,000 credentialed media
who cover Senators, Senate committees, and related media events.
In recent years the media industry has seen historic shifts in
formats and structures of media outlets which appear to have caused a
general decline in revenue and circulation for traditional media.
However, the Media Galleries have seen a burgeoning population of new
and emerging media. The staff of the Media Galleries has diligently
worked to accommodate this new population through the current
credentialing process.
The growth of 24-hour news channels and Web sites has increased the
demand for constant news. As a result, the Congress is being covered in
more detail than ever before. In response to the changing needs of the
reporters covering Capitol Hill, all four Media Galleries worked with
the office of the SAA Chief Information Officer to upgrade their
technical infrastructure including incorporating wi-fi in all four
Media Galleries.
Senate Daily Press Gallery
During 2009, a complete remodeling and rewiring of the Daily Press
Gallery was completed. This was the first such renovation since the
early 1980s. Restoring the suite of rooms that has been occupied by the
press since before the Civil War was a mammoth undertaking that
involved a number of SAA and AOC offices. Furniture was replaced, wires
were completely redone, and the walls, ornate ceilings, Minton-tiled
floors, and historic mirrors were completely restored down to the
smallest detail. The renovation improved the gallery's appearance and
working conditions for reporters.
The past 2 years have been extraordinarily busy for the Daily Press
Gallery. There are more reporters covering the Senate on a daily basis
than ever. Organizations are covering the Senate in more detail than
ever, with a constant demand for new information. As a result, our
gallery is one of the busiest places in the Capitol complex. This year,
the gallery was constantly filled with reporters covering issues.
Our Daily Press Gallery staff keeps busy providing the swelling
ranks of reporters with background information; monitoring Senate floor
activities and schedule changes; preparing for big events and
ceremonies; researching and assessing the flood of new credential
applicants in conjunction with the Standing Committee of
Correspondents; monitoring and assisting with access on the Capitol's
second floor and other places where news is breaking; facilitating
coverage of major hearings, answering press inquiries on legislation,
floor action, parliamentary procedure; and generally assisting the
press in covering the Congress, and assisting Senators and staff in
making information available to the public.
In addition to those basic duties, we implemented a new paperless
credentialing system, updated continuity of operations and emergency
preparedness plans, and put the finishing touches on a very successful
Gallery renovation.
Senate Periodical Press Gallery
While high-profile hearings garner the most attention by staff and
media, the Senate periodical staff always strives to work with all
Senate committees on their media arrangements for typical hearings and
events. Senate Periodical Press Gallery staff worked with new committee
and Senators' press secretaries in order to familiarize them with the
Periodical Gallery's functions at committee hearings. Constant
collaboration occurs allowing various Senate committees to set up media
arrangements for a number of widely viewed hearings, including
confirmation hearings for all Presidential nominations, Senate budget
consideration, and Senate Appropriations Committee events.
Press Photographers' Gallery
The primary role of the Press Photographers Gallery is to
credential photographers and to assist at news events at the Senate.
Our staff also has the unique responsibility of assisting at-large news
events and hearings in the House of Representatives.
The demand for news images has increased as Web publications expand
and gain popularity. Also, deadlines for pictures have shifted from
daily to immediate as organizations and publications strive to have the
latest pictures available for online publications. These radical
changes in how events are captured have increased the number of
photographers covering Capitol Hill on a daily basis. The Press
Photographers' Gallery has responded to these challenges by enhancing
the technology infrastructure for gallery members.
Senate Radio and Television Gallery
In an effort to address new requirements for electronic media
coverage of Senate events, improvements were made in upgrading the
technical infrastructure of Senate committee hearing rooms and other
news event locations throughout the Senate campus. For example, in a
collaborative effort with the Senate Committee on Rules and
Administration, gallery staff oversaw the installation of fiber optic
cable in 14 Senate committee rooms. Several meeting rooms in the
Capitol and the Senate wing of the CVC were also outfitted with fiber
optic cable.
In 2009, the backdrop in the Senate Radio-TV Gallery studio was
renovated to accommodate high-definition news broadcasts. The improved
backdrop enhances Senators' appearance by incorporating several
enriching elements such as columns and LED lighting.
We improved this Gallery's work areas during the past year as well.
The Radio-Television Gallery staff worked collaboratively with the
Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, AOC, and media
representatives to upgrade media connectivity in the Russell Rotunda
media area. This team also led the efforts to completely renovate the
Radio-Television Gallery mezzanine workspace which included modern
workstations and updated infrastructure.
saa deg.senate office of education and training
The Senate Office of Education and Training provides training and
development opportunities for Senate staff in Washington, DC and the
States. There are two branches within the office:
--the Education and Training branch; and
--the Health Promotion branch.
The Education and Training branch provides training opportunities
for all Senate staff in areas including management and leadership
development, human resources issues and staff benefits, legislative and
staff information, new staff and intern information, and training
support for approved software packages and equipment used in
Washington, DC and State offices. This branch also coordinates and
provides major training events for State and DC staff.
Training and education is provided through instructor-led classes;
one-on-one coaching sessions; specialized vendor provided training;
Internet and computer-based training; webinars; video teleconferencing;
informal training and support services; documentation, job aides and
quickcards.
The Health Promotion branch provides seminars, classes and
screenings on health and wellness issues. This branch also coordinates
an annual Health Fair for all Senate employees and plans blood drives
every year.
Capitol Hill Training
The Office of Education and Training offered 1,278 classes and
events in 2010, drawing more than 10,000 participants. This office's
registration desk handled more than 25,000 email and phone requests for
training and documentation.
The above total includes 438 customized training sessions for 1,937
staff members. These sessions ranged from in-depth training of Senate
office system administrators to conflict resolution and organizational
development. We provide individual consultation on Web site development
and office systems training. We provided resume and interviewing skills
building after the deaths and retirements of numerous Senators.
The Senate's Intern Program is also a focus of the office. We
provide training for intern coordinators as well as five orientation
and training sessions for approximately 500 interns.
Annually, we provide a Senate Services Expo for Senate office
staff. This year we had 35 presenters from the offices of the Secretary
of the Senate, SAA, AOC, USCP, and the Library of Congress providing an
overview of their services to 250 staff. This is part of the
orientation for new staff and the aides to the Senators-elect. This
past November we held seven orientation sessions which were attended by
30 aides.
State Office Training
The Office of Education and Training provided 85 learning
opportunities to State offices for which 2,813 State staff registered.
Our office continues to offer the State Training Fair Program and video
teleconferencing and webinars as a means to train State staff. In 2010,
two sessions of the State Training Fairs were attended by 63 State
staff. We also conducted the State Directors Forum, which was attended
by 62 State administrative managers and directors and a Constituent
Services Forum attended by 43 State staff. We also provided advanced
all staff meeting facilitation to more than 20 offices that were
attended by more than 650 staff. Additionally, the office offered 33
video teleconferencing classes, for which 1,707 State staff registered
and we offered 28 webinars that were attended by 288.
We provide sources of Internet-based training covering technical,
professional and language skills. This allows staff in both DC and
State offices to take training at their convenience. To date, 692 DC
and State staff have registered and accessed 1,534 different lessons
and publications using this training option. Education and Training
also provides 54 Senate-specific self-paced lessons that have been
accessed more than 3,200 times.
Health Promotion
In the Health Promotion area, 3,070 staff participated in 56 health
promotion activities throughout the year. These activities included
lung function and kidney screenings, eight blood drives, the Health and
Fitness Day and seminars on health-related topics and the Annual Senate
Health Fair. We also coordinate Weight Watchers, Yoga, and Pilates
sessions using the revolving fund for health promotion. There were 11
sessions that had 266 attendees.
saa deg.employee assistance program (eap)
Our EAP offered a variety of services to staff, Pages, interns, and
family members. In 2010, 3.8 percent of Senate employees and/or their
family members met with/spoke to an EAP counselor, 187 employees took a
mental health on-line screening, 2,614 employees attended an EAP
training activity, and 1,416 employees accessed resources for
personalized information and referrals for childcare and parenting,
adult care and aging, education, legal, and financial concerns.
The EAP expanded outreach programs through updating materials on a
wide variety of mental health topics; providing an interactive and
informative Web page that includes confidential mental health
screenings, an increased number of self-paced training modules and
access to mental health, management and trauma response resources; and
offering a variety of time- and community-sensitive training programs,
including video teleconferencing training programs for State offices.
The EAP continued to hone, expand, and utilize the skills of the 29
members of the Senate Peer Support Team through a series of
presentations, trainings, and informational lectures.
saa deg.APPENDIX--FISCAL YEAR 2012 BUDGET REQUEST
FINANCIAL PLAN FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012
Office of the Sergeant at Arms--United States Senate
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
[Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2012 vs. fiscal
year 2011
Fiscal year Fiscal year -------------------------------
2011 budget 2012 request Increase/
Amount decrease
(percentage)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General operations and maintenance:
Salaries.................................... $76,846 $77,588 $742 +1.0
Expenses.................................... 86,067 84,429 (1,638) -1.9
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total, general operations and maintenance. 162,913 162,017 (896) -0.5
===============================================================
Mandated allowances and allotments.............. 50,174 49,663 (511) -1.0
Capital investment.............................. 700 684 (16) -2.3
Nondiscretionary items.......................... 5,175 6,812 1,637 +31.6
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total..................................... 218,962 219,176 214 +0.1
===============================================================
Staffing 956 956 .............. ..............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To ensure that we provide the highest levels and quality of
security, support services, and equipment, we submit a fiscal year 2012
budget request of $219,176,000, an increase of $214,000 or 0.1 percent
compared to fiscal year 2011. The salary budget request is $77,588,000,
an increase of $742,000 or 1 percent, and the expense budget request is
$141,588,000, a decrease of $528,000 or 0.4 percent. The staffing
request remains flat at 956.
We present our budget in four categories:
--general operations and maintenance (salaries and expenses);
--mandated allowances and allotments;
--capital investment; and
--nondiscretionary items.
The general operations and maintenance salaries budget request is
$77,588,000, an increase of $742,000 or 1 percent compared to fiscal
year 2011. The salary budget increase is due to merit funding and other
adjustments.
The general operations and maintenance expenses budget request for
existing and new services is $84,429,000, a decrease of $1,638,000 or
1.9 percent compared to fiscal year 2011.
The mandated allowances and allotments budget request is
$49,663,000, a decrease of $511,000 or 1 percent compared to fiscal
year 2011. This budget supports State office rents, $18,815,000;
purchase of computer and office equipment, $13,894,000; voice and data
communications for Washington, DC and State offices, $12,301,000;
procurement and maintenance of office equipment for Member office
constituent services systems, $4,500,000; State office security
enhancements, $1,913,000; and wireless services and equipment,
$1,500,000.
The capital investment budget request is $684,000, a decrease of
$16,000 or 2.3 percent compared to fiscal year 2011. The fiscal year
2012 budget request includes funds for the Senate Chamber remote
broadcast system replacement, $484,000; and data networking initiatives
and expansions, $200,000.
The nondiscretionary items budget request is $6,812,000, an
increase of $1,637,000 or 31.6 percent compared to fiscal year 2011.
The request funds projects that support the Secretary of the Senate:
contract maintenance for the Financial Management Information System,
$3,770,000; support for the payroll system, $2,182,000; and maintenance
and necessary enhancements to the Legislative Information System,
$860,000.
Senator Nelson. Thank you.
Chief Morse.
UNITED STATES CAPITOL POLICE
STATEMENT OF PHILLIP D. MORSE, SR., CHIEF
Chief Morse. Thank you, Chairman Nelson, Ranking Member
Hoeven, and members of the subcommittee. I'm honored to be here
today, and I appreciate the opportunity to present the USCP
budget for fiscal year 2012.
I would like to request that my written testimony be
entered into the record.
Senator Nelson. It will be entered.
Chief Morse. I would also like to thank the subcommittee
for its sustained and unwavering support for the men and women
of the USCP. Specifically, I would like to express our
appreciation to the subcommittee, and the Congress, for
providing the necessary salaries and general expenses funding
for 2011 to support our personnel and operations.
As I begin my testimony, I would like to emphasize that my
management team and I are keenly aware of the economic
situation our Nation faces today. I understand the
responsibility I have to submit a budget request that is not
only accurate, but is reasonable and based on the critical
requirements necessary to mitigate and address threats and
risks. The department's fiscal year 2012 budget request, after
adjusting the fiscal year 2011 appropriated levels, totals $380
million, and represents an overall increase of 12 percent. The
department's fiscal year 2012 personnel request reflects our
continuous efforts, at all levels of management, to effectively
manage our existing resources to achieve the best possible
balance of staff-to-mission requirements.
With that in mind, our requested fiscal year 2012 personnel
costs support the current authorized staffing levels of 2,243
positions, as well as a request for three new civilian
positions for the Office of Inspector General (IG). We're
requesting an overall increase of 8 percent more than the
fiscal year 2011 enacted funding level, with rescission.
We have been very strategic in our hiring of civilian
positions to best align our resources to our needs. In
particular, we identified, through a position review, 22
existent vacant civilian positions for repurposing to meet our
additional mission requirements, such as the 9 sworn officers
needed for the security of the new Federal Office Building 8
(FOB8) and 13 civilian dispatcher positions needed for the
radio project and mirror site requirements; at current staffing
levels, the department's fiscal year 2012 overtime projection
of approximately $36,500,000, to include support for the fiscal
year 2012 political conventions and pre-Inauguration security
planning, along with support for Library of Congress (LOC)
nonreimbursable events, and overtime necessary to secure
multiyear projects, to include the Capitol Dome skirt and the
utility tunnel projects.
The second area of detail is an overall net increase in our
requested general expenses budget, which is an overall increase
of 29 percent more than the fiscal year 2011 funding levels.
The majority of the increase is attributed to the new
initiatives to address identified threats and risks and for
support of the 2012 political conventions and Presidential
Inauguration planning. The increase in the request, just for
normal annual needs of the Department, excluding the new
initiatives and convention pre-Inauguration support, is about 5
percent.
The seven new initiatives included in our request address
security and law enforcement services for FOB8; security
enhancements for the alternate computer facility; security
designs for utility tunnel systems; design and installation of
security programs for the Capitol Dome skirt rehabilitation;
design and installation of security management systems within
the House and Senate parking garages; software upgrades for the
Department's fixed-asset management; and departmentwide travel
management systems. The total funding request for these
initiatives is $11.8 million.
With the direct assistance of the USCP Board, we provided
advisors to assess financial management risk and to provide
recommended improvements, as well as the oversight
recommendations of the USCP IG. We have the foundation for
sound fiscal practices, to include sound budget formulation
that we are actively implementing and will continuously seek to
improve.
In particular, I'm pleased to report that we recently
closed all eight audit findings related to the U.S. IG's audit
of the Department's budget formulation process. Further, we're
working on the resolution of a number of other recommendations
in order to achieve efficiency and effectiveness in our
administrative programs. The long-term resolution of the
recommendations related to internal controls, business
processes, and material weaknesses remain the highest
importance to our management team.
PREPARED STATEMENT
Finally, I'd like to thank all the men and women of the
USCP, both sworn and civilian, for their dedicated service and
their sacrifice to keep us all safe this past year.
I appreciate the opportunity, today, that you've given me.
And I'd be happy to answer any questions that you may have.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Phillip D. Morse, Sr.
Chairman Nelson, Ranking Member Hoeven and members of the
subcommittee, I am honored to be here today, and I appreciate the
opportunity to present the United States Capitol Police (USCP) budget
request for fiscal year 2012.
First, I would like to thank the subcommittee for its sustained and
unwavering support for the men and women of the USCP. You and your
staffs have continued to generously support both our mission as well as
our personnel--not just in a monetary way, but also in private and
public recognition of our role and responsibilities. The security and
protection of this great institution is not only our job, but we
consider it a sacred duty and privilege to serve you, the congressional
staff, and the millions of visitors from every corner of the world who
come to the United States Capitol Complex every year. Due in large part
to your support and that of the Capitol Police Board, the Department
has had many successes in its continued efforts to become a premier
security and law enforcement agency operating under established
controls and efficiencies.
Specifically, I would like to express our appreciation to the
subcommittee and the Congress for providing the necessary salaries and
general expenses funding for fiscal year 2011 to support our personnel
and operations.
This fiscal year 2011 appropriation level has allowed the
Department to address critical salaries requirements, as well as Radio
Modernization Project (RMP) needs, in fiscal year 2011, which thus
results in a reduction of those items from our fiscal year 2012 budget
request.
As I begin my testimony, I would like to emphasize that my
management team and I are keenly aware of the economic situation our
Nation faces today. I understand the responsibility I have to submit a
budget request that is not only accurate, but that is reasonable, based
on only critical requirements necessary to mitigate and address threats
and risks. Our fiscal year adjusted 2012 budget request provides for
those mission-critical requirements necessary for the Department to
address the security of the Congress, so that it may conduct it's
constitutional responsibilities in an open and safe manner without
disruption from crime or terrorism.
Our mission-focused request is grounded in the USCP strategic goals
that describe our mission and frame our budget planning:
--assessing the threat to the Capitol community;
--taking proactive measures to mitigate the threat so as to prevent
disruption to the legislative process;
--responding in the event of a disruption so that the Congress can
continue to operate; and
--supporting the USCP's mission through constructive internal
business processes and controls that foster effective and
efficient mission delivery.
This budget is strong in support of those goals--with modest
increases and initiatives to address identified risks and threats--yet
it is flexible enough to achieve and maintain solid mission-critical
results with efficient use of resources.
The proposed fiscal year 2012 budget will address and mitigate
identified security challenges that may potentially affect the safety
of the Capitol Complex and our ability to keep up with the changing
security environment and threat level. In addition, it contains
requests for a few new initiatives that provide additional security for
the Capitol Complex and it provides administrative systems to mitigate
audit risks and findings.
The Department's funding levels have grown in recent years, due to
requirements set forth to support an expanding mission load. In the
last several years, we have merged with the Library of Congress (LOC)
police while absorbing the jurisdiction over LOC buildings and grounds,
and upon the opening of the Capitol Visitor Center; we assumed
additional protection responsibilities for the security operations of
this critical addition to the Capitol. We will also be gaining an
additional protective responsibility with the opening of the Federal
Office Building 8 (FOB8) scheduled to reopen in fiscal year 2012. An
additional fiscal dynamic we are managing is our implementation of a
complex RMP.
At this time, I would like to offer the subcommittee an overarching
summary of our fiscal year 2012 request. I will follow this summary
with a discussion of specific budget items of particular significance
to you and the Department.
The Department's fiscal year 2012 request totals $380 million and
represents an overall increase of 12 percent, or $40 million more than
the fiscal year 2011 enacted level with a rescission funding level of
$340 million.
The first subject area that I would like to provide more detail for
is in the area of personnel salaries and overtime.
The Department's fiscal year 2012 personnel request reflects our
continuous efforts at all levels of management to effectively manage
our existing resources to achieve the best possible balance of staff-
to-mission requirements. We are constantly analyzing our workforce to
align job functions, assignments, workload, risk management, and
organizational readiness along with the ever-changing threat
assessments and mandatory mission requirements of a dynamic
Congressional community.
To operate within our current budget, we are currently carrying out
our mission requirements with 1,775 of our 1,800 sworn positions, below
our authorized 443 civilian positions, and with only limited training.
We have received funding in fiscal year 2011 to increase our sworn
levels to 1,800 at the end of the fiscal year, and to bring on an
additional 13 civilians as well, but this partial year funding for
these positions will need to be annualized in fiscal year 2012 in order
to maintain this staffing strength. Much of our overall increase allows
the Department to operate at our current authorized staffing levels.
With regard to our funding request related to personnel, we are
requesting an overall increase of 8 percent more than the fiscal year
2011 enacted funding levels with rescission, which includes funding for
only three new civilian positions for the Office of the Inspector
General (OIG). The increase in 9 new sworn positions to address the
additional operational requirements for FOB8 is offset by a net
reduction of 9 civilian positions from within the Department current
authorized strength of 443.
Additionally, we have been very strategic in the hiring of civilian
positions to best align our resources to our needs. In particular, we
identified 22 existing vacant civilian positions based on a position
review for repurposing to meet additional mission requirements such as,
the 9 sworn officers needed for the security of the new FOB8 and 13
civilian dispatcher positions needed for the RMP mirror site
requirements.
The Department's current authorized sworn strength does not
entirely provide the necessary resources to meet all our mission
requirements within the established sworn officer utility or the number
of work-hours in a year that each officer is available to perform work.
This ``utility'' number is used to determine overall staffing
requirements, and balances the utility of available staff with annual
salary and overtime funding along with known mission requirements such
as postcoverage, projected unscheduled events such as demonstrations,
late sessions, holiday concerts, et cetera, and unfunded requirements
that occur after the budget is enacted, such as unforeseen critical
emergency situations.
Thus, mission requirements in excess of available personnel must be
addressed through the use of overtime, identification of efficiencies
such as postrealignment and/or reductions, technology, and cutbacks
within the utility, such as reductions in the number of hours provided
for training. As a result, our oversight committees are reviewing such
options to offset mission requirements where possible, such as closing
lower-priority doors, which will reduce the total hours at posts and
overtime costs.
With that in mind, our requested fiscal year 2012 personnel costs
support the current authorized staffing levels of 2,243 positions, as
well as a request for 3 new civilian positions for the OIG. This will
result in the increase of 3 personnel (from 2,243 to 2,246), while
absorbing the mission requirements associated with FOB8 security and
the dispatch operations.
At current staffing levels, the Department's fiscal year 2012 basic
overtime projection of approximately $33.9 million reflects an increase
more than the $32 million that was provided for in fiscal year 2011
with rescission.
Other requested increases to overtime include an additional
$215,000 in funding to cover LOC's nonreimbursable events, and $2.4
million for overtime necessary to secure multi-year AOC initiatives, to
include the Capitol Dome skirt, and utility tunnel projects. These
items bring the total fiscal year 2012 overtime request to $36.5
million which is an increase of $4.5 million.
The second area of detail is an overall net increase in our
requested general expenses budget, which includes protective travel;
hiring, outfitting, and training of new sworn personnel; supplies and
equipment; management systems; et cetera. While we are requesting an
overall increase of 29 percent more than the fiscal year 2011 funding
levels, the majority of the increase request is for new initiatives to
address identified threats and risks, and for support of the 2012
political conventions and Presidential Inauguration planning. The
increase in the request, just for the normal annual needs of the
Department, excluding new initiatives, and convention and pre-
Inauguration support, is 5 percent.
These seven new initiatives include:
--security and law enforcement services for FOB8;
--security enhancements for the Alternate Computer Facility;
--security designs for the utility tunnel system;
--design and installation of a security program for the Capitol Dome
Skirt Rehabilitation project;
--design and installation of security management systems within House
and Senate parking garages;
--software upgrades for the Department's fixed asset system; and
--a Department-wide travel management system.
The total funding requested for these new initiatives is $11.8
million.
Finally, we are requesting $3 million in general expense funding to
support the 2012 political conventions and pre-Inauguration planning.
With your support, the Department continues to successfully perform
our operational mission and has achieved several key accomplishments
over the last year that have resulted in greater efficiencies for the
Department, which include addressing several administrative challenges
and improving corresponding business practices.
Operationally, so far this fiscal year, the Department has screened
more than 3 million visitors to the Capitol Complex; affected more than
200 arrests; conducted more than 75,000 K-9 sweeps; and screened nearly
6,500 vehicles. In fiscal year 2010, the Department screened more than
10 million visitors, affected more than 700 arrests; and conducted more
than 160,000 K-9 sweeps. These are just a few examples of the many
operational elements that are conducted daily to ensure the success of
the Department's core mission.
With the direct assistance of the Capitol Police Board, who
provided advisors to assess financial management risks and to provide
recommended improvements, we have the foundation for sound fiscal
practices that we are actively implementing and will continuously seek
to improve upon.
Included in the sound fiscal practices recommended by the OIG
through his budget formulation audit and the Board's financial advisors
through their review of our financial management operations are the
practices and processes we conducted to create the fiscal year 2012
budget.
The Department re-implemented an improved management and budget
planning methodology which we call the ``Force Development Process''.
It provides for a transparent decisionmaking process, including reviews
and approvals by an Investment Review Board made up of key agency
management, and provides a structure that is results-driven and based
on meeting operational needs. We also formalized a process for program
evaluations for selected existing programs, which we plan to expand for
the fiscal year 2013 process. In addition, in order to ensure the
accuracy of our budget request, this fiscal year 2012 budget went
through multiple layers of review and validation by internal and
external parties, and is traceable to supporting documentation for each
budget element.
Additionally, by transitioning our primary vehicle fleet to a
General Services Administration (GSA)-based fleet leasing program, we
now have a consistent 5-year life-cycle replacement plan, which saves
taxpayer dollars over purchasing these primary fleet vehicles, reduces
repair costs, gives us a predictable annual funding requirement and
allows us to maintain a consistent state of operational readiness. In
an effort to take advantage of cross servicing within the legislative
branch, we also successfully migrated our financial management system
to the LOC, which saves the Department not just in annual operational
costs, but in future software upgrade costs through economies of scale
within the legislative branch. Finally, as a result of programmatic
efficiencies that enabled the reduction of 11 Hazardous Materials
Response Team positions, we were able to use those vacant civilian
positions for security control operators to monitor our alarm system
which was previously handled by contractors. As a result, the security
control positions were filled by utilizing USCP employees previously
transferred to the Department of Labor (DOL) due to worker's
compensation issues. Overall, this transformation allowed the
Department to better use available resources to more efficiently
achieve an operational requirement by returning employees to productive
work, which allowed us to eliminate a $1.2 million contract for the
previously contracted-operators and reduce our workers compensation
charge backs to the DOL by returning employees to duty.
Further, we continue our work to close audit recommendations and to
address our material weaknesses from prior audits by working closely
with our OIG and the Government Accountability Office to address issues
which have arisen and by providing the evidence necessary to close
findings. In particular, I am pleased to report that we recently closed
all eight audit findings related to the USCP OIG's audit of the
Department's budget formulation process. Further, we are working on the
resolution of a number of other recommendations in order to achieve
efficiency and effectiveness of our administrative programs. The long-
term resolution of recommendations related to internal controls,
business processes and material weaknesses remain of the highest
importance to our management team.
As I mentioned in the beginning of my testimony, we are well aware
of and understand the economic climate that affects our country, the
legislative branch and the entire Federal Government, and I want to
assure you that the USCP will successfully adapt our resources and
continue to safeguard the Congressional community.
I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today and would
be glad to answer any questions you may have at this time.
Senator Nelson. Thank you, Chief Morse. And thank you all.
If it's okay, we can try 6-minute rounds of questions. And
it looks like we'll--maybe I'll just finish that about the time
the vote is called.
Ms. Erickson, the fiscal year 2011 enacted level of funding
for your office included the $4.2 million associated with the
transfer of the SIS program. Your budget request for fiscal
year 2012 includes the same level of funding for the SIS
program. Can you update the subcommittee on the progress being
made on the transfer of the SIS from the SAA to your office?
And have you identified any improvements or efficiencies that
you can find in the implementation of the system?
Ms. Erickson. Well, the transition has gone very smoothly.
And I think it's important to remind the subcommittee that the
idea behind the SIS program was to make the services more
efficient and cost effective for the Senate. Prior to 2000,
each office was appropriated a sum of money to purchase online
subscriptions. And a decision was made, by this subcommittee
and the Rules Committee, to have one entity be the negotiator
for these subscriptions, which can be quite costly, as you
know.
As part of our education and outreach efforts to Senate
staff, I think it's fair to say that it was a surprise to some
of the office administrators that we provided some of these
services, and that offices were purchasing duplicate
subscriptions. I think that you'll see some Senate offices will
achieve cost savings by canceling these subscriptions and
relying on SIS services.
Last year, we had a surplus of 0.05 percent. And, with the
0.2 percent rescission, it cut that amount roughly by half.
We're currently entering a new procurement stage, and I'm
pleased to report that we had recommended, based on usage
statistics, to the Senate Rules Committee, that we eliminate
one of the service vendors. And they have approved our request.
We'll see some minor cost savings on that front.
So, needless to say, with a flat budget, there's not a lot
of room for error as we enter the procurement negotiations.
But, I'm hopeful that these services will be maintained,
because they're valued and used by Senate staff.
Senator Nelson. Your testimony touches on the fact that
during fiscal year 2010, the Disbursing Office, in tandem with
SAA technical support, began implementing a new payroll system.
What is the status of that Senate payroll replacement project?
You indicated that phase I should be completed during fiscal
year 2012. What are the necessary steps? And is everything
progressing? The status of the replacement projects is what
we're after.
Ms. Erickson. The implementation is going well. I will say,
as you can imagine, anytime you're dealing with payroll, it is
a high- stakes project. We've been having implementation
sessions with the vendor who was selected to help with the
implementation. I've met periodically with the implementation
group. They meet every 2 weeks for what we call ``fit-gap''
sessions. And I think it's fair to say that, so far, everything
looks good. There's a great deal of work ahead of us.
But, one thing that I was struck by in attending these
sessions, is the relatively small number of people, not only
from the Disbursing Office, but from Terry's shop, in payroll,
who assist us every 2 weeks in getting the payroll out--the
small group of people who are working on this project. And
they're doing this job on top of their already very full-time
duties of issuing payroll every 2 weeks. I'm pleased to report
that everything is going well to date. And we will be sure to
keep you and your staffs informed as we progress on the
project.
Senator Nelson. Okay. And what is the cost of the Senate
Office Personnel System (SOPS)? And is that somehow tied to the
payroll system? Is it more cost effective to do the personnel
system in conjunction with the payroll system?
Ms. Erickson. Sure.
Senator Nelson [continuing]. In other words, are there
additional costs associated with adding the personnel system
later, rather than doing so now, as you're in the
implementation phase?
Ms. Erickson. The payroll project will be one that will
take place in three phases. The first phase will be simply the
replication of the current system, which we hope to have
launched by February. The second phase of the project will
include self-service options, which will allow Senate staff to,
from their desktops, change their withholdings, their address.
It will also mean the end of paper paycheck stubs that will be
mailed to your offices. That will all be sent electronically.
The third phase of the project will include the SOPS, or
personnel system, for Senate offices.
The SAA had asked the vendor who's helping us with the
implementation, as well as an outside consultant, to do an
analysis of the risks associated with doing the personnel
system at the same time as the current payroll system. And they
recommended that it was too high risk for us to implement at
this time. So, that will be the third phase of this project.
Senator Nelson. You mentioned what the new personnel system
will offer the offices, among other things, interactive ability
to change certain information would there be some other
services that would come to the various Senate offices from
that change?
Ms. Erickson. Pardon.
Senator Nelson. Would there be some other benefits, other
than services, that will come to the Senate offices from this
changeover?
Ms. Erickson. Yes, there will. It'll be a much more
efficient system. And I'd be happy to follow up with the
subcommittee in more detail on some of the options that would--
--
Senator Nelson. Sure.
Ms. Erickson [continuing]. Will be available.
Senator Nelson. Okay. Thank you. I think that is my time.
Senator Hoeven.
Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Again, thank you for the hard work that you've done on
these budgets. And, as you know, we're in challenging times,
financially, in terms of the Federal budget. So, we're going to
have to continue to work to find savings where we can. And in
that effort, we've got our personnel costs, which, in all your
cases, is obviously a very big part of your budget. It's very
people intensive. And then we have other expenses. Anticipating
that, we're going to have to continue to find savings, just
based on what I expect the overall budget requirements to be,
there's been discussion of even going back to 2008 funding
levels.
So, what I'd like to engage in a little bit is how we would
go about finding some savings and how we would balance that
between people and projects. Now, for both Secretary of the
Senate, SAA, you essentially have flat budgets, and have been
from, basically, 2010, 2011, now looking at 2012; in the case
of the USCP, we need to talk a little bit about the 14 percent
increase you are requesting. I recognize the need for security;
and, of course, with the tragic event that occurred with
Representative Gabrielle Giffords, we know that's not only a
security issue here in Washington, DC, but around the country.
So, we have to be mindful of those security requirements, too.
But, let's start, if we could, with the Secretary of the
Senate. In terms of people and projects now, if we have to hold
these budgets flat, or even compress them further, talk a
little bit in terms of what you're realistically able to do
between people versus some of your other general expenses
versus any kind of projects that you have going now. How would
you start to--and I know it may be a little hard for you to get
into specifics, but that's not what I'm looking for, so much as
to how you would approach this budgeting process in that
balance between people, general expenses, and project type
costs.
Ms. Erickson. Well, in terms of our operational budget,
we'll be in great shape if you hold us to our 2008 level of
funding. Our 2012 budget request is the same level as our 2008
level of funding on the operations front. With respect to
staffing, the Secretary of the Senate, over the years, has been
capped at a level of 253 employees. And I'm pleased to say that
I think that we're well--we're below that cap on purpose
because I'm mindful that there may be statutory requirements
that require me to add full-time equivalents to our budget. An
example of that would be, in the last Congress there were two
bills that were proposed, dealing with earmarks, and one that
would have required us to hire staff who had budgetary
expertise. I would have had to add staff to my budgets to do
that.
Every vacancy that we have, through retirement or
attrition, we scrutinize carefully to make sure that it's
necessary to fill it. And at the top of my head right now, I
can think, in the last few months, that there are four
vacancies that we currently have that we plan to, hopefully, do
without by using existing staff.
Senator Hoeven. Okay.
Terry.
Mr. Gainer. We've done some analysis of what it would take
if we had to reduce the budget by 5, 7, or 10 percent, and then
tried to analyze what we'd do, from a head count and operations
perspective. And we do have plans in our mind, if we had to do
that. I think the head count reduction would come through
eventual attrition as you stop some programs. So, it is really
the program area that we'd have to adjust to.
And I'll give you some ``for-instances''. About 27 percent
of our operational budget goes for the support of the State
offices. So, when we've looked at reducing funding, generally
it's something on the Hill that we change. And if we have to
reduce substantially, I would really respectfully request, of
this subcommittee and others, that we take a look at the 454
offices that we have around the United States, and see if there
isn't some cost-cutting we could do there. That is a
substantial portion of our operational budget.
But, when we look at expenses we've deferred much, as I've
indicated. And at some point, that bill is going to come due
potentially slowing things down. The turnover of getting new
computers or buying new equipment could change dramatically.
While we keep a high level of response to the Senate community
to install a computer, move a computer, change a computer, all
that could change, similar to what we've probably done in our
own homes if it breaks down; we're not able to pick the phone
up and have someone there in 15 minutes. So, if the Members and
the staff could adjust to slower response times, there would be
money to save. But, operating like that would eventually
adversely impact your ability to interact with your
constituents. But, we've at least planned out how we would do
that, if push came to shove.
Senator Hoeven. I think that you're thinking in the right
terms, both of you. You know, we'll see what this number boils
down to. I'm expecting we're going to end up with some top line
number for 2012, at some point, here, maybe even as we go
through these discussions with the administration, in terms of
the whole debt ceiling issue. We may end up with some top line
number. We'll see. And then, out of that top line number, of
course, through the Appropriations Committee, then that puts us
in a position to actually boil down numbers to some of these
different budgets. It's tough, from the standpoint that we
don't have a lot of dollars, obviously, and we're going to have
to find savings. But, the good part is that we may then have a
number to come back to you and say, ``Okay, we're going to have
to try to, you know, live within certain numbers, but then
you've got some ability to make those decisions.'' And we would
do everything we could within that number, then, to try to help
you make it work in the best way possible.
I think some of the things that you talked about and
identified-- whether they're exactly the right things to do, or
not, is something we can work through--but, I think you're
thinking exactly in the right terms, as far as how we would
approach the challenge. And, like I said, I think we'll have a
better idea of what that has to be, as we go forward.
Chief, you know, obviously, with the security situation,
that's a tough proposition. And I referenced Representative
Giffords and the challenge that creates, not only for you, here
in Washington, DC, but then around the country. How do we--with
the need for security, not just for Members, but for the
public--how are you going to approach this? Just start at a
high level----
Chief Morse. Sure.
Senator Hoeven [continuing]. And then get down in some more
specifics.
USCP deg.ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Chief Morse. One thing we do when we formulate our budget
is, we look at threat and risk. So, we do an environmental
assessment, and then we do what's called ``force development.''
We look at those risks and threats, and we look at what we
currently do and what we may need to do.
I'm going to give you one example of where--in the 2012
budget, when you're looking at a program or operation, how we
were able to meet a new mission, with respect to threat and
risk, by not increasing the staffing level of our police
department. What we did for the FOB8, where we needed eight
additional officers, we scrubbed vacant civilian positions that
we had not hired for yet. We reallocated those positions to
fill those vacancies. That's an example of where we scrubbed a
program, we were able to utilize vacant positions to reallocate
for a new mission without asking for an increase in authorized
strength.
Another example of where we look at a program or operation
is with respect to our truck interdiction and monitoring
program. We've taken information technology, camera systems,
and new technology, with respect to the lights and the
intersections, and we will be able to reduce that program by
reducing officers, reducing vehicles, which then becomes less
maintenance, less gas, less overtime, and we're able to
reallocate those officers to other missions.
So, we will continue to do those scrubs of programs and
operations to find savings, both in how we do what we do and
the number of people that we need to do it with.
Senator Hoeven. Okay. I actually was going to try and see
if I could work this so the Chairman was back before I went to
the vote. But, I think, given the time, that I'm going to have
to excuse myself so that I can go vote. And then, I expect both
the Chairman and myself will be back pretty shortly.
Thank you.
Senator Nelson. I think we can reconvene, here.
And this is still to Ms. Erickson. Aside from the SIS
program request, your fiscal year 2012 budget is very
conservative. What measures are you using, internally within
your agency, to control the costs?
Ms. Erickson. Well, with a relatively small budget of $2
million, I have to say that we're vigilant, on a daily basis,
of watching our budget.
Just a few examples. Our Senate library staff, every year,
review the subscriptions and the database of subscriptions that
we have. And this year, they were able to find $38,000 in
savings over the next 3 years. Another example, our Senate
chief employment counsel staff have eliminated the purchase of
hardbound legal books, and have achieved $6,000 in annual
savings. Our Senate Stationery Room tackled a project, at the
request of Senate office administrators, to provide online
ordering services to offices. Initially, we thought we would
contract that out, and then, looking at the costs, we decided
we'd do it internally, using the resources we have here,
relying heavily on our Senate Webmaster to achieve some cost
savings. Now, it may not have all the bells and whistles that
an outside contractor would have provided us, but I'm confident
it'll get the job done for Senate offices.
Other small things we do: Not every staff member has a cell
phone and BlackBerry. We limit those to individuals who are
department directors or those who have emergency operation
responsibilities. In the last 2 years, we've limited staff
travel to attend training and conferences. So, those are just
small ways that we try to achieve cost savings for our
operational budget.
With respect to salaries, as I mentioned to Senator Hoeven
earlier, every time we have a vacancy, we scrutinize it to make
sure that it's one that we really need to fill. And, in
recognizing the tight economic times that we're in, I can think
of, off the top of my head, four vacancies that we currently
have had, in the last few months, that we plan to keep open and
rely on existing staff to assume those duties.
Senator Nelson. Well, thank you. And I commend you for the
steps that you've taken to control costs, and submitting such a
lean budget. And after giving you all those compliments, I
guess it might come as a shock that I will ask the question: If
you had to submit a 5-percent reduction from fiscal year 2011,
do you have any thoughts about where you might make those kinds
of reductions?
Ms. Erickson. Well, we have a lean budget, so it would be
tough. And many of the services that we provide are ones that
we have statutory mandates to provide. But, we would do our
best to scrutinize the budget to come up with those savings. We
would do as directed by the Appropriations Committee.
With respect to the SIS program, I have to say that, if we
took a 5-percent cut, it would bring the level of funding for
that program back to 2008 levels. And it would require us to
make drastic cuts in the services provided to Senate offices.
Senator Nelson. And the Senate offices don't want those
drastic cuts in their service, do they?
Ms. Erickson. They do not.
Senator Nelson. I know.
Ms. Erickson. In fact, recently, the leadership
directories, which is one of the services under the SIS
program, went dark for a few hours, and the phones in our
Senate library were ringing off the hook with complaints from
Senate staff. We like to keep them happy.
Senator Nelson. Well, thank you. I appreciate it very much.
As we look at the Senate SAA budget, your request, Mr.
Gainer, is only slightly above 2011 enacted level. And I note
that you would have been below, except for the 2.2 percent
across-the-board cut that was applied to that bill. And once
again, I'd like to commend you for submitting a budget that
basically reflects a freeze in spending. And I have a couple of
questions about your request and the current funding levels.
Number one, does your increase in salary funding for fiscal
year 2012 include a request for additional staff?
Mr. Gainer. No, Sir, there are no additional staff
requests.
Senator Nelson. How much do you currently have in remaining
prior year unobligated balances, which you have said you would
like to see applied?
Mr. Gainer. There is approximately $10 million of
unobligated balances, Senator. And we have a plan for that
money. Part of it goes to completing the work that we're doing
with the Secretary of the Senate on the payroll system. We
don't know if we have allocated enough to complete the project,
so we are reserving some funds, in case there are additional
requirements. We're reserving some funds that are related to
the question you had about the personnel system, one large item
that benefits the entire Senate community. And then, we'd have
to prioritize those projects that we've deferred over these
last couple years, and see how we would best use the funds.
Senator Nelson. Right. And how much of those unobligated
balances would expire at the end of fiscal year 2011 if not
used?
Mr. Gainer. Approximately $5 million will expire.
Senator Nelson. All right. Unfortunately, if we're going to
get our fiscal house in order, it's going to take a bit more
than a freeze. So, I'd like to ask you the same question that I
asked Ms. Erickson, just a minute ago. Do you have any areas
that you might identify if you were looking at a 5-percent
reduction from the previous number?
Mr. Gainer. Five percent would be about $11 million for us,
and we have considered that. Again, I believe we've deferred
all that we should defer. And what we would do, Senator, is
look to the State offices. Twenty-seven percent our operational
costs go to support the 454 State offices, including computers,
installation, network storage, etc. I think we'd have to go
back to you and the other respective committees to say, ``Is it
time to take another look at the number of statewide offices we
have--454--and how they're staffed?'' That would be one way to
spread the reductions.
Then, I did mention to Senator Hoeven, if we can change the
expectations of the Senators and their staff, and
concomitantly, what your constituents want, we could the slow
process down. We have a rapid response time on service
requests. And, like people who have computers at home, it may
be 3 or 4 years between the time I replace computers. We update
and replace equipment more quickly here, so our movement toward
virtual computers and cloud computing would look different.
Every time a vendor comes out with a new device, we put it in
our catalog. You pay for it out of your funds, but we have to
have the systems to support it. We'd have to rethink all that.
Senator Nelson. And, as a result of preparing for the
threat in the Government shutdown last month, were you able to
identify any efficiencies in services that, if implemented now,
could potentially lead to future savings? I know we all had to
take a look, internally, at the offices, and ask the basic
questions about what was essential--not what was unnecessary,
but what was essential. Did you find anything, in that
exercise?
Mr. Gainer. Well, one thing I found is we lost a lot of
productivity preparing for the shutdown: the cost of about
$200,000. But, I do not think that we had the ah-ha moment to
say, ``We can do without that'', because the demand slows down.
Senator Nelson. Yes. You're subject to whatever demand
there is out there.
And that is the same thing for you, Ms. Erickson. Did you
find the same thing, the slowdown in demand, because everybody
was busy doing their own thing internally in their own office?
Ms. Erickson. Well, I'll chime in with Terry, that a lot of
lost productivity was----
Senator Nelson. Absolutely.
Ms. Erickson [continuing]. Lost, that week, prior to the
potential Government shutdown.
We took the Antideficiency Act requirements very seriously
in our operation. And we simply planned to keep open the small
staff, in the Disbursing Office, that would have to issue the
payroll during that period. And then, we planned, of course, to
have our legislative staff here to maintain floor operations.
But, the rest of our departments were closed, as required by
the Antideficiency Act.
Mr. Gainer. Senator, can I have make one remark----
Senator Nelson. Sure.
Mr. Gainer [continuing]. On that question?
Senator Nelson. Sure.
Mr. Gainer. It did dawn on me that during that whole shut
down evolution, Christy Prietsch, who runs the Senate-wide
Employee Assistance Program, saw the work in her office
magnified 10 times. So, there was no small amount of angst on
everyone's part. But, I'd also like, when we have an
opportunity, to talk about some things that might make us all
more efficient as we go through some of these exercises.
Senator Nelson. Thank you.
Terry, can you update us on the progress of the telecom
modernization project?
Mr. Gainer. Senator, I can. The good news is, we anticipate
that the pilot project will be out not much later than the end
of September. And the pilot project to roll out the new phone
system that will continue to build on the Watson Program will
involve a couple of the Senate offices, a portion of my own
office, and some of the committees.
It has taken us longer than expected. There have been some
knockdown drag-out meetings, in my own office, about us being
behind schedule on that. It's not because of a lack of will,
but it's due to the evolving and complex nature of the project.
So, we are now on track to get the pilot up that will have
some of the other savings that go along with putting in that
new system, the ease with moving around a phone, changing
phones, and people being able to get their messages on their
BlackBerrys. There are all sorts of enhancements that are
efficiency-oriented. So, by the end of this calendar year, and
into the beginning of the next calendar year, we'll move
steadily through the Senate community, replacing all the
phones.
Senator Nelson. Do you anticipate the need for any
additional funding for the project, or do you think we have it
adequately funded, at the moment?
Mr. Gainer. I do believe the funding is sufficient now,
Senator.
Senator Nelson. Good. Okay.
Has the Senate community been receptive to the new Watson
voice messaging system that was necessary that you got put in
place?
Mr. Gainer. Very much so. There were the initial hiccups as
with any new system, but I think we quickly responded to those.
We've worked with the Rules Committee and others. The response
to that has been very good. It's helped with call waiting and
call volume. The other real unique feature is the ability to
get voicemail messages on your BlackBerry, or from your phone
to your BlackBerry and your computer.
Senator Nelson. I understand you're going to be issuing
smart identification cards. What will the benefit be to that?
And is there any unusual cost associated with it?
Mr. Gainer. About one-third of those 454 statewide offices
are in Federal buildings. And the Federal buildings are rapidly
moving toward those ID cards. So, to make it more efficient for
State staff members to get in and out of their offices, it will
be very important. We've been after smart ID cards since my
days as the Chief of the USCP. If we all had them, it would be
a lot easier and more efficient for people to get in and out of
the building. So, we have spent about $1.4 million on the
project, so far. I think the annualized cost is somewhere in
the range of $110,000-a-year; but, as the executive branch
moves to these, we need to keep up.
USCP deg.VALIDATING THE USCP FISCAL YEAR 2012 REQUEST
Senator Nelson. Thank you.
Chief Morse, your agency and the CBO were the only two
accounts that received an increased funding from fiscal year
2010 level in the fiscal year 2011 continuing resolution. And
it was done to annualize that funding correction due to the
salary miscalculation at the Department in fiscal year 2010.
Now, based on the work done by the outside contractors which
were hired by the USCP Board last year, what steps have you
taken to validate the accuracy of your fiscal year 2012 budget
request? And how confident are you that we won't see, or have
to adjust for, another shortfall at some point in the future?
Chief Morse. With working with the Board's contractors,
we've done a number of things. One is, as reported in my
opening remarks, we have closed all eight recommendations
associated with the audit of the budget formulation process.
That enabled us to do several things. One is to go back to what
had worked very well for us in implementing our Force
Development Program, our environmental assessment, where we
have a very responsible and reasonable approach, with respect
to threats and risks. And that's what our budget is designed
around.
We also have implemented a top-down review of our budget to
include the Investment Review Board, that we have done in the
past, which includes our managers in the review of the process.
We have started writing all standard operation procedures (SOP)
related to the budget formulation process.
And as an example, what we did, with respect to the
formulation process itself, was have the people who actually
work in those positions be a part of the formulation of those
SOPs so that we would not only know the exact steps to take,
but we would be a part of writing those SOPs for anyone in the
future who may come in.
Another step that we took was to ensure that we reviewed
our positions there, our position descriptions, and then filled
the most critical positions within that organization. And, as I
said, I'm happy to report, we closed all those recommendations.
The SOPs have been formulated for the process. They continue to
be done as we move through the execution of our budget. We are
very confident that we have produced a very solid and accurate
budget, and one that we will continue to do into the future.
Senator Nelson. Did the outside contractors coordinate with
the GAO on the previous work done by the GAO on your budget? In
other words, was there cooperation, corroboration back and
forth?
Chief Morse. We've had very good cooperation, not only with
the GAO, but with the IG, with respect to the audit findings,
previous recommendations that have been made. One of the things
that we wanted to do, and they have been very helpful in doing,
is ensuring that we're not duplicating any recommendations,
that we're all on the same page, and that we're doing the most
important things first, and that were ensuring that the things
we do are the most efficient and effective for the formulation
of our budget and the execution of it.
USCP deg.BUDGET REQUEST AND ITS IMPACT ON THE LEGISLATIVE
BRANCH
Senator Nelson. In addition to the increased funding that I
just mentioned, your department's asking for an additional
$47.5 million, or 14 percent, in fiscal year 2012. To put it in
further perspective, this $47.5 million increase is the
equivalent to 1 percent of the legislative branch bill, as a
whole. If this bill were held at a freeze, we'd need to cut
every other agency by 1 percent, which I'm sure makes them very
pleased, to make up for the increase in funding for the USCP.
However, it's my goal that we reduce the funding by an
additional 5 percent, if we can. But, if we fully fund the
USCP, it means a 6-percent cut to everybody else. So, what do
you say to your colleagues sitting at the table?
Chief Morse. Well, you left me in a pretty bad position,
didn't you? What I would say is, you're safe, and we intend to
keep it that way.
Senator Nelson. And you're packing, too.
Chief Morse. Yes. There you go.
Well, I would say that--look, I'm very humble, and I took
responsibility for the miscalculations of 2010. And I take
responsibility for anything that the USCP, unless it's good;
and that's where I give the credit to the people that support
me, like the USCP Board, this subcommittee, and the people that
are sitting behind me today that work for me.
I think it's important to say that a lot of our budget
increases--you know, we have an explanation behind it that's
very important to get out. One of the things I wanted to say
was and with Senator Hoeven, I mentioned, too is that, we're
not all about increases. We're also about, really, effectively
and efficiently running our police department. We've worked
with the Senate Sergeant at Arms Rules Committee, as the
example was given in Mr. Gainer's opening remarks, where we
saved well more than a half a million dollars. We are working
with technology, in one of our programs currently, that will
reduce the number of vehicles, people, gas, and maintenance. We
scrubbed our open civilian vacancies and were able to
reallocate those to other mission requirements that were placed
on us so that we wouldn't have to raise the cost of or, raise
the size of our police department. We've done a fleet vehicle
leasing program that this subcommittee reviewed and approved,
and, over a course of time, saved several million dollars, over
the next 10 years, with regard to purchasing, which enables us
to have a refreshed fleet, it enables us to do our mission more
carefully. We've scrubbed programs within our police
department, where we have improved the efficiency and
effectiveness. We were able to save 11 positions. We were then
able to get rid of a multimillion-dollar contract for alarm
monitoring, bring that in-house. We looked at USCP employees
previously transferred to the Department of Labor, and brought
them back and gave them positions.
So, we have worked very, very hard to save money, be
creative in saving money. But, the mission comes first for us,
and sometimes the mission continues to grow.
And with respect to the question I heard earlier, with
respect to a 5-percent cut from the 2011 to the 2008 levels, as
an example, after the 2008 budget, we incurred two very large
mission requirements. One was the merger with the LOC, and the
other was the opening of the Capitol Visitor Center.
So, all those types of things have to be considered, with
respect to our budget. And I appreciate all my partners in the
room, and their contribution and support to our police
department. But, I also wanted them to know that we work very,
very hard not to increase our costs, but to find ways to save
money.
Senator Nelson. Thank you.
Senator Hoeven.
Senator Hoeven. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
You know, I think you may be covering the same point that I
want to explore for just a minute. I thought both Nancy and
Terry did a very good job of expressing how they would approach
any further reductions that we may need to make, and I agree
with that approach.
In the security area, it's challenging, to say the least,
because, on the one hand, we can tell Members of Congress and
the Senators, ``Look, if we have to compress some budgets,
you're going to have to do without some services. I mean, just
understand that's what this means. So, that means you may not
have as many constituent offices in your State, and the
associated personnel, and so forth, that goes with them.'' But,
I think, in a very direct way, we can go back to the Members
and say--and obviously, on the House side, they do it, and, on
the Senate side, we do it--but, go back to our Members and say,
``Look, these are the kinds of changes we're going to have to
make. What do you want? What don't you want? And there's an
associated cost or reduction that goes with it.'' And I think
that's how we would, in all likelihood, have to approach most
of it, other than to the extent we can defer projects or defer
maintenance, which, as you rightfully said, catches up with
you. But, I think that's how we'll have to approach these
things.
In the security area, it seems to me that is a particularly
challenging proposition, just given the nature of both the
additional projects you've been asked to take on and just the
nature of security, in general, both for elected individuals,
but also for the public that's here and in these facilities and
around the country.
So, we started to get into it a little bit before I left
for the vote, but I just want you, Chief, to explore for me for
a minute what realistic possibilities does that give us? Now, I
notice, right now, it appears that you have a number of vacancy
positions, relative to your full-time authorized, and you are
asking for nine more positions for 2012. So, maybe just, if you
haven't already touched on both your roughly 25 or so vacant
positions now, and the 9 additional. But then, if you would,
really touch on--how would I go back to the Members, or how
would the chairman go back to his Members and say, ``If you
want some reductions these are the things that are going to
have to happen?'' What would that dialogue look like?
USCP deg.FISCAL YEAR 2012 REDUCTIONS
Chief Morse. Okay, well, with respect to the authorized
strength, we did take--we have an authorized strength of 443,
with our civilians. We scrubbed 22 of those positions that are
currently vacant and said, ``Let's reallocate those instead of
growing the sworn--or, growing the overall strength of the
department, let's just reallocate those--nine of those
positions to the sworn positions, and ask for the funding for
those, in order to accomplish that new mission of opening a new
building.'' So, that is where we reallocated, from within, to
not grow, overall.
But, with respect to security, it's ever-evolving. The
threat continuously changes. They're trying to stay one step
ahead of us, and it's important for us to stay ahead of them.
Therefore, it's sometimes hard to predict, you know, what the
next type of emerging threat may be, so we have to, obviously,
maintain the highest level of technology. So, when you look at
cutting general expenses, and you look at the agency trying to
stay within the budget constraints provided, we get into
deferring life-cycle replacement. You can do that for a time,
but then it does start to adversely affect security, because
now you're behind in technology, or the technology you have
starts to break down on you. So, deferring those costs is not
something that you want to do to--for too many cycles. You have
to constantly, as I said, think ahead of the adversary.
Sometimes that means the responsibility of securing things that
may be temporary, like some of these projects. These are not
permanent increases, they're temporary increases, but they're
needed in order to reduce the risk and threat that those can
pose while those projects are ongoing.
So, the only other way, without cutting security, is to cut
mission. And cut mission is one thing that we worked on, with
respect to the door-closure plan.
Senator Hoeven. All right.
Chief Morse. We simply looked at hours of operation, the
number of people that are screened through those locations, and
we looked at the impact that may have on the institution's
responsibility to be able to work freely. So, we measured that,
and we were able to find savings. I think we have to continue
to do that.
Senator Hoeven. Yes.
Chief Morse. And I would not recommend that we cut
security, but that we look at mission, and find other
innovative ways to reduce the amount of mission that we have,
which then results in a reduction in overtime, a reduction in
people; and you are not sacrificing security for that.
Senator Hoeven. Right. But--and I think that--with your
indulgence, Mr. Chairman--that does make sense, both in terms
of timelines--how long facilities are open, the number of
facilities that are open--that makes sense.
Chief Morse. Yes. Yes, Sir.
Mr. Gainer. One of the things that the USCP Board--the
House SAA, myself, and the AOC--is doing under the Chief's
leadership, is to reach out to Homeland Security and the Secret
Service. For instance, we each have an entire operation that
does screening of vehicles and trucks. So, we said, ``Is there
efficiency in trying to do something together?'' And the
Chief's staff have been working very hard with Director
Sullivan's staff to see how we can merge the systems. We're
nearing completion. The Congress has given the USCP Board and
the AOC property where we plan to build the model offsite
delivery facility. We've entered into discussions with Homeland
Security and the Secret Service to make that a joint project.
So, while it doesn't help your numbers here, if the Office of
Management and Budget were giving credit for something being
done, this is a way we're trying to minimize stovepipes here in
the District.
Senator Hoeven. I think that's right on. I mean, I would
have to see your reaction across the board. I think it is right
on. And there may be some opportunities here. And, of course,
we would give some credit for those savings that we help
generate with others in any kind of joint endeavor. But, I do
have to say that I appreciate, very much, your responses to my
questions. And I agree, I think you're looking at things the
right way. And so, thank you, again, for the good work that you
do.
USCP deg.CONVENTION AND PRE-INAUGURAL SUPPORT COSTS
Senator Nelson. Thank you, Senator Hoeven.
Chief, you have $3 million, I think it is, for the coverage
of conventions and pre-Inaugural support planning. How did you
arrive at that $3 million? Is it based on prior experience,
within--that in mind? Or, how did you do that?
Chief Morse. Yes, we use historical data, and also, site
location drives the cost. But, in those costs, obviously, are,
you know, travel, transportation, rental, per diem, et cetera.
And those costs are derived from previous conventions and,
obviously, Inauguration support.
USCP deg.IG INCREASES
Senator Nelson. I noticed, on the IG increase, that you
asked for three additional FTEs for the IG's staff. How many
staff does the IG currently have, at the present time?
Chief Morse. Including the IG, four.
Senator Nelson. Four? Now, you're almost doubling the IG
staff there. What is the basis for determining that you need to
add three additional to the current staffing?
Chief Morse. The request for increase comes from the IG and
his justifications to the USCP Board. And with their approval,
those numbers were derived. So, it's not based on my
justification for increase.
Senator Nelson. And you'd rather not make him mad.
Mr. Gainer. Senator, from a USCP Board perspective, of
which I am the chairman this year--Bill Livingood, the House
SAA, and I rotate that each year--the Inspector General has
steadily asked for additional staff over the years, and we've
steadily said no, except we now see that we're missing some
opportunities to conduct audits. With the help of those audits
and investigations, Phil's operation could be more efficient.
Senator Nelson. So, we could realize some savings,
ultimately, with more efficiency being pointed out through the
IG's audits? Is that part of our justification?
Chief Morse. Yes. I welcome help----
Senator Nelson. Sure.
Chief Morse [continuing]. And assistance and
recommendations. And the ones that I've been getting from the
USCP Board, obviously, the IGs and the GAO, all have led to
productive, efficient outcomes.
USCP deg.RADIO MODERNIZATION PROJECT
Senator Nelson. How's the radio modernization project
working out for us?
Chief Morse. Well, currently--there are five phases in the
radio modernization project--currently, we're in a combined
phase 3 and 4. That phase is the acquisition, procurement, and
testing, and some installation and construction that's ongoing.
We have two mirror sites. The one mirror site is about 97
percent complete and on target for its completion date. The
second mirror site is about 18 percent complete and on target
for its completion date.
There are requests for proposals associated with this with
the money that's been obligated. Those RFPs, a total of five.
One was released and awarded. The other two have been released
and are in a phase of either closure or technical inspection.
And then, the other two are pending release either this month
or next month.
Senator Nelson. Do you think that the $7.2 million being
requested in fiscal year 2012 represents the last installment
for the project?
Chief Morse. In the 2011 appropriation that you provided
us, we were on a diet in our general expenses. By enabling us
to not change the enacted general expense from the previous
year, we'll be able to derive the $7.2 million from that
general expense and, therefore, will rescind that from our 2012
budget request.
Senator Nelson. All right.
I believe that's all the questions that I have.
Senator Hoeven.
Senator Hoeven. I don't have any additional questions,
unless there's any other comment, as a result of this hearing,
that anybody would like to make.
Mr. Gainer. Would you mind if I just opined two things?
We would hope you might consider a single salary and
expense appropriation for us, as the majority of executive
branch agencies do, and some of the legislative branch. We have
about 10 accounts that my Chief Financial Officer says, ``If I
were dreaming, it would be nice to reduce the number of funds,
and have the flexibility in the movement of funds, with all the
appropriate oversight.'' But, maybe take another look at that.
This one may be more of a stretch. I've long thought, as I
did in State government, that I wish we could do biennial
appropriations so that we could do a little better planning on
the purchase and replacement of equipment and securing
contracts. In 10 years in State government, I never had any
success to do that, but, it's a dream, from an agency
perspective. I don't know how much more of a headache it gives
your staff, but it makes our job a little bit easier.
Senator Hoeven. Well, we'll ask the budget analysts to look
into the salary line.
And again, Mr. Chairman, as long as it is with your
agreement.
Senator Nelson. Sure.
Senator Hoeven. I agree on the 2-year--matter of fact, I'm
cosponsoring legislation to go to a 2-year budget cycle. So, I
absolutely agree with you. And anything we can do, in the
interim, without legislation, to look at that, I agree. I think
they're both good ideas. We'll see what we can do.
Mr. Gainer. Thank you.
Senator Nelson. I would agree. And I'm looking at perhaps
sponsoring that legislation, myself. We're looking at it
internally. But, having gone through biennial budgeting in the
past, it certainly would avoid having us make a pie a piece at
a time around here, the way we have to. We would have a more
comprehensive approach. I think you're absolutely on target.
And I hope many of my colleagues will feel the same way.
Mr. Gainer. Thank you, Sir.
CONCLUSION OF HEARINGS
Senator Nelson. Thank you.
Well, thanks, all of you. I appreciate it very much.
And we're recessed. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 3 p.m., Thursday, May 12, the hearings were
concluded, and the subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene
subject to the call of the Chair.]7
LIST OF WITNESSES, COMMUNICATIONS, AND PREPARED STATEMENTS
----------
Page
Ayers, Stephen T., Architect of the Capitol...................... 1
Prepared Statement of........................................ 5
Summary Statement of......................................... 3
Billington, Hon. James H., Librarian of Congress, Library of
Congress....................................................... 87
Prepared Statement of........................................ 90
Questions Submitted to....................................... 115
Summary Statement of......................................... 88
Boarman, William J., Public Printer, Government Printing Office.. 54
Prepared Statement of........................................ 56
Questions Submitted to....................................... 82
Chrisler, Tamara E., Esq., Executive Director, Office of
Compliance..................................................... 18
Prepared Statement of........................................ 20
Questions Submitted to....................................... 40
Dizard Jr., Robert, Chief of Staff, Library of Congress.......... 87
Doby, Chris, Financial Clerk, Office of the Secretary, U.S.
Senate......................................................... 121
Dodaro, Gene L., Comptroller General, Government Accountability
Office......................................................... 45
Prepared Statement of........................................ 48
Questions Submitted to....................................... 77
Summary Statement of......................................... 46
Dwyer, Sheila, Assistant Secretary, Office of the Secretary, U.S.
Senate......................................................... 121
Elmendorf, Douglas W., Ph.D., Director, Congressional Budget
Office......................................................... 61
Prepared Statement of........................................ 63
Questions Submitted to....................................... 84
Erickson, Hon. Nancy, Secretary of the Senate, Office of the
Secretary, U.S. Senate......................................... 121
Prepared Statement of........................................ 125
Summary Statement of......................................... 123
Gainer, Hon. Terrance W., Senate Sergeant at Arms, Sergeant at
Arms and Doorkeeper............................................ 192
Prepared Statement of........................................ 194
Hoeven, Senator John, U.S. Senator From North Dakota:
Prepared Statement of........................................ 190
Questions Submitted by..........................40, 77, 82, 84, 115
Statement of................................................. 2
Morse, Phillip D., Sr., Chief, United States Capitol Police...... 217
Prepared Statement........................................... 218
Mulhollan, Daniel P., Director, Congressional Research Service,
Library of Congress............................................ 87
Prepared Statement of........................................ 92
Nelson, Senator Ben, U.S. Senator From Nebraska, Opening
Statements of..........................................1, 45, 87, 121
O'Keefe, Ambassador John, Executive Director, Open World
Leadership Center.............................................. 101
Prepared Statement of........................................ 102
Pallante, Maria, Acting Register of Copyrights, Copyright Office,
Library of Congress............................................ 87
Prepared Statement of........................................ 95
SUBJECT INDEX
----------
ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL
Page
AOC Accomplishments.............................................. 15
AOC's Commitment and Staff....................................... 4
Additional Committee Questions................................... 40
Addressing Deferred Projects Within Budget Constraints........... 25
Annual Operating Budget Request.................................. 14
Blue Ribbon Panel................................................ 26
Budget:
Challenges................................................... 39
Cuts and Impact.............................................. 22
Capitol:
Budget Request and Project Prioritization.................... 8
Dome Project................................................. 29
Deferred Maintenance vs. New Projects............................ 37
Energy Reduction Requirements.................................... 36
Fiscal Year 2012 Capitol Budget Request.......................... 7
Gap Analysis..................................................... 35
House Historic Buildings Revitalization Trust Fund............... 38
Integrating Financial Management Systems......................... 35
Life-Safety Enhancements and Energy Efficiency Improvements...... 12
Operations Budget Personnel Costs................................ 38
Prioritized Projects............................................. 4
Project Prioritization Process................................... 24
Reducing Costs/Services.......................................... 30
Utility Tunnel Repairs--Radio Project............................ 29
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE
Additional Committee Questions................................... 77
CBO Budget....................................................... 61
Cost Estimates................................................... 71
Current Fiscal Year Funding...................................... 62
Decrease Funding................................................. 84
Entitlement Analyses............................................. 73
Impact on Analyses............................................... 84
IT Resources..................................................... 71
Recent Funding History........................................... 64
Request for Studies.............................................. 72
Some Details of the CBO's Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request........ 65
Staffing:
Level........................................................ 71
And Hiring................................................... 73
Supplemental Funds............................................... 62
GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE
Additional Committee Questions................................... 77
Appendix:
IV--Serving the Congress and the Nation: The GAO's Strategic
Plan Framework............................................. 53
I--The GAO's 2011 High-Risk List............................. 50
III--How the GAO Assisted the Nation, Fiscal Year 2010....... 52
II--Selected Testimony Topics, Fiscal Year 2010.............. 51
Constrained Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request...................... 50
Duplication Report............................................... 78
GAO:
Assistance Helps the Congress Make Informed Decisions........ 76
Balances Resources with Priorities........................... 74
Field Offices................................................ 80
Resources Used To Oversee the Troubled Asset Relief Program.. 68
General Budget................................................... 77
Methodology Behind GAO's Report on Program Duplication--GAO-11-
318SP.......................................................... 69
The:
GAO Maintains Effective Workforce Relations.................. 50
GAO's:
Efforts Help the Congress Address Domestic and
International Challenges............................... 49
Mission.................................................. 53
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
Additional Committee Questions................................... 77
Congressional Printing and Binding............................... 82
Fiscal Year 2012 Appropriations Request.......................... 59
GPO.............................................................. 56
Estimates of Work............................................ 75
Staffing..................................................... 74
GPO's Support for Congress....................................... 55
Inaugural Printing............................................... 67
Investment Funds................................................. 68
150th Anniversary of the Government Printing Office.............. 60
Printing Costs................................................... 66
Revolving Fund................................................... 83
Salaries and Expenses of the Superintendent of Documents......... 83
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
Acknowledgement of Dan Mulhollan................................. 88
Additional Committee Questions................................... 114
Addressing Fiscal Challenges..................................... 89
Broad:
Perspective of Multiple Disciplines.......................... 112
Scope of the LOC Mission..................................... 108
CRS:
Request...................................................... 110
Pooled Staff for the Congress................................ 92
Cloud Computing.................................................. 118
Considered Programs for the Cloud................................ 118
Consolidation of Data Center Assets.............................. 117
Content Management............................................... 116
Copyright Records Digitization Project........................... 97
Cost of Protecting Electronic Information........................ 118
Customer Satisfaction............................................ 94
Electronic Serials Project....................................... 98
Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request.................................. 95
Fort Meade Module 5.............................................. 115
IT Security Funding.............................................. 116
Impact of:
Fiscal Year 2011 Continuing Resolution....................... 106
Not Funding IT Security...................................... 116
Personnel Cuts............................................... 108
Reduced Funding.............................................. 115
Infrastructure for the Information Age........................... 110
Legal and Policy Activities...................................... 98
Licensing Division Re-Engineering................................ 98
Limited Flexibility To Absorb Cuts............................... 109
Minimal Increase in Fiscal 2012 Request.......................... 107
Opportunities To Defer Requirements.............................. 108
Permanent Damage of Reducing Acquisitions........................ 107
Program:
Funding...................................................... 97
Overview..................................................... 96
Registration of Copyright Claims................................. 97
Restoring Information............................................ 116
Sensitive Data Controls.......................................... 118
Specifics of CRS Request......................................... 110
Support for the Congress......................................... 93
OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE
Additional Committee Questions................................... 40
Budget Cuts...................................................... 40
And Impact................................................... 22
Changes to the CAA............................................... 42
Impact of Budget Cuts............................................ 19
Need for Inspectors.............................................. 19
Project Prioritization Process................................... 24
Risk-Based Approach to Investigations............................ 18
Safety and Health Amendments That Will Result in Cost Savings.... 42
What:
Happens With Cuts Below Current Levels....................... 22
We:
Can Do With Fiscal Year 2011 and Fiscal Year 2012 Funding 21
Cannot Do Even With What We Requested.................... 21
Workplace Rights Amendments That Will Result in Cost Savings..... 43
OPEN WORLD LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE
Additional Committee Questions................................... 114
Effectiveness of OWLC............................................ 101
In-Kind Giving and Support....................................... 113
Investment for the Congress and Asset for Constituents........... 101
Open World Strategic Plan Objectives and Costs................... 113
OWLC and the Congress............................................ 103
OWLC's 2011 Activities and Plans for 2012........................ 105
Ramifications of Funding at Fiscal Year 2010 Level............... 113
Recent Program Highlights and Results............................ 104
UNITED STATES CAPITOL POLICE
Budget Request and its Impact on the Legislative Branch.......... 231
Convention and Pre-Inaugural Support Costs....................... 234
Environmental Assessment......................................... 225
Fiscal Year 2012 Reductions...................................... 233
IG Increases..................................................... 234
Radio Modernization Project...................................... 235
Validating the USCP Fiscal Year 2012 Request..................... 230
U.S. SENATE
Office of the Secretary
Administrative Offices........................................... 149
Bill Clerk....................................................... 128
Captioning Services.............................................. 129
Conservation and Preservation.................................... 151
Curator.......................................................... 151
Daily Digest..................................................... 129
Education and Training........................................... 157
Enrolling Clerk.................................................. 133
Executive Clerk.................................................. 133
Financial Operations............................................. 136
Gift Shop........................................................ 158
Historical Office................................................ 159
Human Resources.................................................. 164
Implementing Mandated Systems.................................... 125
Information Systems.............................................. 165
Interparliamentary Services...................................... 167
Journal Clerk.................................................... 134
Legislative Offices.............................................. 127
Library.......................................................... 169
LIS Project...................................................... 168
Official Reporters of Debates.................................... 135
Page School...................................................... 179
Parliamentarian.................................................. 135
Presenting the Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request................... 125
Printing and Document Services................................... 180
Public Records................................................... 182
Stationery Room.................................................. 183
Web Technology................................................... 183
Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper
Capitol Facilities............................................... 209
Central Operations............................................... 207
Continuity and Emergency Preparedness Operations................. 196
CVC.............................................................. 209
Doorkeepers...................................................... 210
Employee Assistance Program...................................... 215
Enhancing:
Security for the Senate...................................... 203
Service to the Senate........................................ 201
Stewardship.................................................. 205
Financial Plan for Fiscal Year 2012.............................. 215
Intelligence and Protective Services............................. 199
IT............................................................... 200
Media Galleries.................................................. 212
Operations....................................................... 206
Parking Operations............................................... 207
Photography Studio............................................... 208
Senate:
Appointment Desks............................................ 210
Hair Care.................................................... 208
Office of Education and Training............................. 214
Post Office.................................................. 208
Recording Studio............................................. 211
Transportation and Fleet Operations.............................. 207
-