There are eight x-ray package inspection units in regular service. One additional unit is in repair and is used as a spare. The locations of the eight units are as follows: The cost for this type of equipment in 1975 was approximately $45,000 per unit. The present-day cost is $65,000 to $70,000 per unit. The request from Chief Powell relating to this matter follows. UNITED STATES CAPITOL POLICE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF 331 FIRST STREET, NE. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20002 June 28, 1978 Honorable Kenneth R. Harding Chairman, U. S. Capitol Police Board Washington, D. C. Dear Mr. Harding: I have taken a survey of the x-ray units located in the various buildings of our complex to determine their effectiveness and the need for additional units. I have found them to be quite effective and reliable. The measure of their reliability is related directly to the quality of the maintenance, and that has improved by a factor of at least 100% since our own people took it over. This survey showed that we could use at least nine more x-ray units for locations which were not included in the original purchase. In addition, this survey did not address itself to the llart Building which has three sites for which x-ray units have been requested. The sites or entrances which are included in this survey are as follows: 2 Deputy Chief Trollinger and Richard Brandon of the Architect's Staff have consulted in this matter, and since work on the 1980 FY Budget is underway, I respectfully request that every consideration be given to requesting that the Architect include in his budget a request for funds for these nine additional x-ray units. Sincerely, Copy to: Hon. F. Nordy Hoffmann JTT/ wfg James M. Powell /Chief of Police LANGUAGE CHANGE REQUIREMENT Mr. BENJAMIN. You are also requiring a language change and we may as well get into that at this point. Mr. WHITE. The language change was because the authorization for the security system was in an appropriations bill, and anything that adds to the security system as such would require, in effect, a language change to increase the authorization as well as just the funding. That is the purpose of this. Mr. BENJAMIN. The original authorization was $5.772 million. How much will this exceed that authorization by? Mr. WHITE. The original was $3 million and some, Mr. Chairman, and the present limit is $5.7 million. It was added to over the years as the system was added to. Mr. BENJAMIN. How much do you want to add? Mr. WHITE. We would be adding this $893,500, so that on page 5.27 you will see the language which indicates that it is increased by $893,500. In other words, we are increasing it by the amount of this request. If this amount should change, then of course that language would change. LIBRARY OF CONGRESS RESTORATION Mr. BENJAMIN. Explain the $3.5 million for temporary partitions for the main Library of Congress Building. What is the total cost of restoration? Is there a plan? What projections, if any, do you have for the Thomas Jefferson Library Building? Primarily, is there a plan and what are we talking about in total cost, including all the attendant costs that we now learn are associated with any kind of a move? Mr. WHITE. This project was initiated as a result of what appeared to be a desirable goal, which was to take the opportunity of restoring the main Library Building to its original condition upon 4,000 people moving out and leaving only 500 within the building, or numbers of that order of magnitude in any event. TEMPORARY PARTITIONS HIDE ARTISTIC FEATURES The building has, over the years, had a great many temporary partitions installed and ceilings dropped and other changes made to it, really destroying the appearance as well as some partial destruction of some of the art work that is in the building, in addition to its original structural and architectural significance. So we reprogrammed some funds several years ago, two years ago I believe it was, in order to make a preliminary study of what would be involved. This request is a result of a report made on the basis of that study. A UNIQUE NATIONAL TREASURE We are estimating at this point, on a preliminary basis, the amount necessary to bring the building back to its original architectural condition, including repairing the damage that has been made to some highly decorated surfaces-there are various frescoes, mosaics and ornamental plaster in the building. It is a fantastic building, and unique in terms of its decorative art and architec ture. As such, it is a national treasure, and we think it should be preserved. PRESENT ESTIMATE OF RESTORATION COST The total amount that appears to be required to do that is in the neighborhood of $20 million. That is our present guess, and the present request is for an amount of money to perform some initial work as well as to prepare drawings and specifications from which a final determination can be made prior to the appropriation of any funds for that purpose. These funds would enable us to prepare the kinds of drawings and specifications which would lend some credibility to that present estimate. I might say in that regard that that $20 million is based upon the work being done by outside contractors. We think we can probably save $3 or $4 million by doing it in-house. The reason I say that is that this does not include some moneys which will have to be spent for the modernization and upgrading of the life safety characteristics of that building from the fire standpoint. FIRE PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS The Library had a fire protection survey made, which requires the expenditure of a considerable sum of money. We have not finalized on whether we agree with what the report says or not, but it is a number of millions of dollars for that building, something like $4.5 or $5 million. Mr. BENJAMIN. Is that part of this $20 million? Mr. WHITE. That is not part of the $20 million, but as I say, I think if we were to try and do it in-house we probably could do both for the $20 million. I say that from our experience on Annex No. 2. When we provide the information for the record, we are going to provide a comparison on that basis, which we have been recording as the work progresses. [The information appears on pages 1987-1988.] Mr. BENJAMIN. You are talking about $20 million, and conceiv ably you could incorporate about $4.5 million worth of fire safety expenditures, if you agree with the report, which you have? Mr. WHITE. That is correct; we have not yet reviewed the report in detail. Mr. BENJAMIN. What about the Thomas Jefferson Building? Mr. WHITE. This particular request does not include any funds for the Thomas Jefferson Building. This is solely for the main building. Mr. BENJAMIN. But we can visualize that coming down the path" Mr. WHITE. Maybe. I think it is important to consider the Library's intended use. It turns out that the Library's intended use is very compatible with our desire to restore the building to its condition in 1900. Their proposal is described in these justifications There may be someone here now from the Library who could speak to that. [The following additional information was provided for the record:] The Librarian and his staff have advised that the plans for the Thomas Jefferson Building do not anticipate any uses other than those originally appropriate The |