Mr. BENJAMIN. Would you summarize for the record, if you will, the factors necessitating the construction of a new plant? I think you have alluded to them in some detail in our previous discussion. [The information follows:]

SUMMARY OF FACTORS NECESSITATING A NEW PLANT

The requirement for improved operational facilities for the GPO has been recognized by the Congress and Public Printer for over 20 years.

The interior configuration and construction of the existing facilities which have ages ranging from 40 to 70 years do not efficiently lend themselves to the utilization of modern printing technologies. The basic deficiencies in the existing plant include: Documents areas costing about $1.6 million annually in leased locations, separated by the city from one another and removed from central user agencies and the general public; a paper storage warehouse located 16 miles from the printing plant; a materials handling system that relies wholly on freight elevators and industrial trucks for product distribution; lack of space to accommodate straight-line arrangement of production equipment; limited floor load capacity and low ceilings resulting in inability to use large, faster and more efficient press equipment; and the lack of area required to utilize the efficiencies of mechanization, automation and the latest advances in printing technologies. These inefficiencies annually accrue to more than $17 million in unnecessary taxpayer expenses.

Additionally, there would be one-time avoidance expenditures of at least $7 million in order to bring the current facilities in line with OSHA, EPA and the current life safety codes and regulation.

NEW PLANT SAVINGS FORECAST

Mr. BENJAMIN. Would you tell us what savings and other benefits you expect to result from the new plant?

Mr. BOYLE. Yes, sir. We feel that we have a lot of agreement in the industry, the commercial printing industry association, the Printing Industry of America agrees that we need a new building. The justification for the new building is that, first of all we are in a complex that is totally obsolete as far as running an in-line manufacturing operation. It is eight stories high with another story in the basement. It is in a complex of four different inter-connected buildings. All of the savings that we see to amortize this $188 million building-and that includes the cost of moving our equipment; it does not include the cost of any new equipment-we can amortize that building in savings just in manpower and reduction of damage to paper in 10 to 11 years. We believe that we can do it even faster than that. We can eliminate a number of positions that are needed just to move materials around and move materials to the press. We can automate much of that in a new building. The savings in manpower and the savings in not having to spend money that we would have to if we stay in this building amount to about $17 million a year.

I don't know of any other government building, and not many commercial buildings, that can be totally paid off by reduction of costs to the benefit of the government in 10 years.

Mr. BENJAMIN. How much of that $188 million is moving cost?

BREAKDOWN OF BUILDING COSTS

Mr. BOYLE. $62 million has been set aside for moving heavy equipment.

Mr. BENJAMIN. So that would leave $1811⁄2 million for the building?

Mr. BOYLE. I have it right here.

Site purchase and relocation of present occupants, that is, the relocation of the present occupants on the site, $11,654,000. This is the 1979 figures.

Architectural engineering construction documents, $7,742,000.

These figures have been furnished by GSA. Those two together make up the request that we have right now and that is-Mr. BENJAMIN. What two?

Mr. BOYLE. The A&E construction, preliminary plans and the site acquisition.

Now construction management and consultant contracts-this is a GSA figure-$2,133,000; review of the contract, $748,000; site preparation and construction, $151 million, so the site preparation and the actual construction of the building is $151 million; construction management and inspection, again by GSA, $8,270,000; equipment moving cost, $6,534,000; which totals up this year to $188 million. And for each year that we do not build, or there is further delay, there is an anticipated 10 percent increase in the cost of the building. So next year, if we don't receive approval this year, we will be back for $204 million, and following that, $220 million, and then we will be back for $235 million, and then for $251 million, and this building could have been built 10 years ago for about $70 million.

SIZE OF NEW BUILDING

Mr. BENJAMIN. What is the square footage of the building? Mr. BOYLE. 1.8 million, which is less space than we have now. Mr. BENJAMIN. That is about the size of the James Madison Library Building, isn't it? How much of that is usable?

Mr. BOYLE. That is all usable.

Mr. BENJAMIN. How much is the total space then?

Mr. BOYLE. I am sorry. Total net floor space usable is 1.5 million square feet; total floor space, 1.8 million; that is compared to 2.4 million total now, counting our leased space we use for warehousing and Documents.

Mr. BENJAMIN. But if I understand, everything is going to be moved into that building.

Mr. BOYLE. Everything would move into the new building. Part of our cost savings are the termination of the leases on the rental space.

Mr. BENJAMIN. What is the location?

Mr. BOYLE. It is in a triangle, bounded by the railroad yard on New York Avenue, Brentwood Road and Rhode Island Avenue. It is part of a large acre site that the National Capital Planning Commission hopes can be developed into a complex of light industry and light commercial of which we would like to acquire about 30 acres. It would abut the Rhode Island Avenue Metro Subway Terminal.

DOUBLE CHECK COSTS

Mr. BENJAMIN. There are two glaring things that stand out as you describe this, and I would appreciate your submitting that table that you are looking at, for the record. I would advise you to

have it updated for any inflation that may have occurred since then so it would be entirely accurate.

But the thing that occurs to me is, one, the House of Representatives turned down the $140 million Hart Building in a vote which was supposed to supply the final funding for that. And the second thing is that we are looking at the Library of Congress Building, which is also a memorial. It is an elaborate edifice, about the same space that you have, with nine floors and parking at sublevels, and its cost is considerably less than the one you are looking at, about $133 million. That strikes me as being grossly out of proportion. Mr. BOYLE. I am dependent upon the GSA people furnishing me the figures.

Mr. BENJAMIN. From what I read about the GSA, that should be the last place to get accurate figures.

Can you have that looked at again?

Mr. BOYLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. BENJAMIN. You know it is one thing to ask us for consideration and give us the details on it and another thing to be an advocate on the floor, and I think you are well aware of what the feeling of the Nation and the Congress is at this time, regarding any of us in government.

Mr. BOYLE. I understand.

There is one thing I would like to say at this point.

How long is it going to take the government to amortize that Madison Library?

Mr. BENJAMIN. With the Library of Congress expenses, it won't be in the lifetime of anybody here.

Mr. BOYLE. I don't know of any building project in the government that would recover the cost by paying for itself.

Mr. BENJAMIN. I am aware of that. And I assume that is why the Public Works Committee and the very prudent Mr. Johnson agreed to it. Of course, you still have to do the same thing on the Senate side.

But my point to you is to be sure that we can justify, even though we can amortize this over a very short period. Quite frankly, we had better be able to justify all the costs involved, and, secondly, in terms of final figures, make sure that we are looking at the same figure a couple years down the line.

Mr. BOYLE. We will submit this updated table. It has built-in inflation in it. But I will double check it.

[The information follows:]

AMPLIFY NEW BUILDING JUSTIFICATION

Mr. BENJAMIN. If you want to amplify that for the record, inasmuch as it is printed by your agency, do that, because I don't know how many Members of the Congress are aware of the action of the House Public Works Committee. They may have printed a report on their approval, but I have not seen it.

Mr. BOYLE. The report was not printed.

Mr. BENJAMIN. We will give you the opportunity, if you want to take it, to justify this so that when these hearings are printed, those who are interested can see it. I am sure that if it is a part of the appropriation bill, it will be not only the members of the Appropriation Committee looking at it, but a lot of budget cutters looking at it also.

Mr. BOYLE. I appreciate the opportunity.

[The information follows:]