Page images
PDF
EPUB

property accounts have been converted to automatic data processing. Parallel operations will be maintained until the end of July, during which time necessary program changes or refinements will be made. After discontinuance of the bookkeeping machine operation, annual savings are estimated at 20 employees with costs approximately $90,000.

Supply procurement and issue procedures: The installation of preprinted issue book for use by FHA field offices in obtaining supplies and the implementation of the Federal standard requisition and issue procedure were included in the report for the second quarter although it was not possible at that time to evaluate the saving. These procedures, together with the establishment of cupboard-type storerooms in the central office, eliminating the preparation of requisitions and the receiving and checking of stock, and simplified warehouse procedures will produce an annual saving of eight employees with costs approximating $40,000. Equipment: Two machines purchased during the past quarter will increase productivity and result in a saving. A collating and stitching machine purchased for the printing plant at a cost of $13,000 will result in an annual saving of three employees with costs of approximately $20,000. The purchase of a Mathatron computer-calculator for the actuarial section at a cost of $5,000 will facilitate the work of the actuarial staff to an extent comparable to that which would result from the addition of a full-time statistical assistant at GS-7.

Filing A procedural change permitting drop filing in the more than 3%1⁄2 million insured case binders will save 14 man-years valued at $5,000.

Public Housing Administration.-One ceiling position was released during the quarter for transfer from the central office to a regional office to aid in handling increased dwelling-unit production. This was made possible by the transfer of only two positions to the Internal Audit Branch in conjunction with the reassignment of duties formerly performed by three employees in the Office of the Deputy Commissioner. The additional workload will be absorbed by other members of the Internal Audit staff.

To provide for long-range planning, maximum expenditure targets for travel, communications, and other expenditures (combined) are now issued to the regional offices for the entire year. Each regional office submits a plan showing a quarterly distribution of the expenditure target, and explains how it proposes to use the funds available.

Approximately 0.1 man-years ($1,000) is being saved annually as the result of programing to PHA's computer the production of individual maturity schedules showing the amounts applicabe to each participating authority for issues of bonds sold under the group financing plan.

Federal National Mortgage Association.-A revision in procedures for processing forebearance and modification agreements in connection with FHA-insured multifamily housing mortgages is expected to shorten the processing time by twothirds and provide savings in administrative expenses. The new procedures center around the adoption of a standard form of FNMA agreement for modifying payment terms, as opposed to the use of special agreement forms and lengthy narrative statements. This feature saves time in dictation and transcription and in review and analysis by field office and Washington office staffs. By providing uniform data, it is expected to reduce considerably the need for requesting additional information. In addition to shortening the average processing time from more than 3 months to slightly over 1 month, this improvement is expected to result in annual savings of approximately 0.4 man-years amounting to $5,500 in salary and other costs.

A major revision in procedures for processing claims against FHA involved decentralization to the Agency offices of a substantial portion of the preparation, resulting in the elimination of approximately 17,000 inter-office accounting documents for transferring accounts between Washington and the field as well as the maintenance and reconciling of those records. This improvement, begun in October of 1964, is now considered to have resulted in annual savings of 9 man-years, with salaries and other costs of approximately $55,800.

Urban Renewal Administration.-A special, simplified procedure has been placed in effect which will facilitate local public agency submission, regional office review and processing, and URA approval of amendatory applications for loan and grant resulting from 1964 legislation authorizing additional relocation payments to occupants displaced from urban renewal areas and providing for expanded relocation assistance. Savings are estimated at two-thirds man

years or $7,000 in fiscal year 1966.

Regional accounting procedures for the urban planning assistance program have been simplified by the revision of Form H-6722: Certificate of Project Completion and of Project Cost, to provide for its use in the cancellation of an undisbursed grant commitment and relation allocation upon project completion, in place of a separate journal voucher. Savings are estimated at 12 man-days starting in fiscal 1966.

Instructions and forms were issued for the use of a consolidated preliminary loan note. The consolidated note permits a local public agency to combine into a single note what were formerly individual notes for individual projects. In many cases this permits the local public agency to combine relatively small amounts, which formerly were borrowed directly from the Federal Government, into a single note which is large enough to be sold on the private market at much lower interest rates. In addition, the amount of paperwork and the processing time involved in the sale of individual notes, both in the local public agencies and in the HHFA regional offices, are reduced. The use of the consolidated note increased steadily during the year, but it is not possible to estimate annual savings.

URA and the General Services Administration have jointly developed a model form of contract for the sale of land located in an urban renewal area to the United States (acting through GSA) as a redeveloper. Use of this new form will greatly reduce the amount of time required for the local public agency, GSA, and the regional office to develop and agree on the terms of such a contract. It is not possible, however, to estimate the annual savings involved.

6. Special requests.—Positions Abolished During the Quarter-Forty-three positions in the Agency were abolished during the quarter. All of these were type A positions, which had been occupied at some time.

[blocks in formation]

J. GEORGE STEWART, ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL

MARIO E. CAMPIOLI, ASSISTANT ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL PHILIP L. ROOF, EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO THE ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL

CHARLES A. HENLOCK, ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER FOR THE ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL

EXTENSION OF WEST CENTRAL FRONT OF THE CAPITOL

Mr. STEED. The committee meets this morning to consider certain supplemental budget requests for the legislative branch contained in House Document 278, dated August 26, 1965, which Chairman Mahon has referred to this subcommittee. There are several items for the House of Representatives, and an item for the extension of the Capitol project.

We have with us today Mr. Stewart, the Capitol Architect, and his associates, to discuss this request for $300,000 for plans for the extension of the west central front of the Capitol.

Mr. STEWART. If I recall correctly, the heading, "Extension of the Capitol," covered many expenditures on the Capitol Building,

Mr. HENLOCK. It covered not only the east front extension but all other work authorized by the enabling legislation.

Mr. STEED. Although we are actually dealing, in this case, with the work on the west central front of the Capitol.

Mr. HENLOCK. Yes, sir.

Mr. STEED. I understand you have a prepared statement, Mr. Architect, and we will be glad to hear from you at this time.

GENERAL STATEMENT

Mr. STEWART. The Commission for the Extension of the U.S. Capitol, composed of Speaker McCormack, chairman, and Vice President Humphrey, Senator Dirksen, Representative Gerald R. Ford, and the Architect of the Capitol, directed the Architect of the Capitol, June 24, 1965, to submit to the Appropriations Committees, for inclusion in the supplemental appropriation bill, an estimate of

(334)

appropriation in the amount of $300,000 to defray the cost of architectural and engineering services and all related expenses required for the preparation of preliminary plans and estimates of cost for the extension of the west central front of the U.S. Capitol and construction of the extended front in marble, leaving the major portion of the existing exterior sandstone walls as interior walls, as was done in the case of the extension of the east central front of the Capitol.

Prior to this directive, at the direction of the Commission, the Architect of the Capitol, March 13, 1964, entered into a personal service contract with the Thompson & Lichtner Co., Inc., of Brookline, Mass., for making a survey, study, and examination of the structural condition of the west central portion of the Capitol, extending from the House connection to the Senate connection, and of adjacent terrace walls, including examination of test pits, soil borings, and cores of wall construction, together with a report of findings and recommendations for remedial measures deemed necessary.

The Thompson & Lichtner Co. completed its report and submitted its recommendations to the Commission. This company found the west central front of the Capitol in a seriously deteriorated condition and recommended, as the proper solution, that remedial measures be taken through extension of the west central front and construction of such extension in marble.

The Commission for the Extension of the U.S. Capitol held a public hearing, June 24, 1965, on the Thompson & Lichtner Co.'s report, findings, and recommendations. At this hearing, Dr. Clair, president of the company, advised that he considered existing conditions so hazardous that immediate emergency protective measures, in the nature of shoring, should be taken. The Commission, at a meeting held July 21, 1965, authorized and directed that (1) as an emergency measure, the exterior walls in the lower sections of the original wings of the west central front of the Capitol and the original west terrace walls should be shored with heavy timbers and the displaced architrave on the west central front should be properly supported with heavy beams and shores, as recommended by Dr. Clair; (2) the Thompson & Lichtner Co. should be retained, by personal service contract, to design, plan, and supervise the work of such shoring and bracing: (3) the Architect of the Capitol should negotiate with a wellqualified and reliable contractor to perform the actual emergency shoring work; and (4) the cost of such work should be borne from the appropriations heretofore provided for the extension of the Capitol project, of which sufficient unexpended balance was available to defray such expense.

A contract, as directed, was entered into by the Architect of the Capitol with the Thompson & Lichtner Co. for the engineering serv ices required, July 22, 1965, in the amount of $3,500; and a contract for the shoring work was negotiated with the J. F. Fitzgerald Construction Co., who made the repairs to the dome in 1958-60, on a costplus-a-fixed-fee basis, at an estimated cost, including fee, of $39,875. The shoring work is now in progress and is due for completion by the end of September 1965.

53-537-65- -22

BACKGROUND AND AUTHORITY FOR PROJECT

The extension of the Capitol project was authorized by the act of August 5, 1955 (Public Law 242, 84th Cong.), as amended by the act of February 14, 1956 (Public Law 406, 84th Cong.), and the act of December 30, 1963 (Public Law 88-248, 88th Cong.).

The legislation authorized the Architect of the Capitol, under the direction of the Commission for the Extension of the U.S. Capitol, to provide for the extension, reconstruction, and replacement of the central portion of the U.S. Capitol in substantial accordance with scheme B of the architectural plan submitted by a joint commission of Congress and reported to Congress on March 3, 1905 (H. Doc. 385, 58th Cong.), but with such modifications and additions, including provisions for restaurant facilities, and such other facilities in the Capitol Grounds, together with utilities, equipment, approaches, and other appurtenant or necessary items, as may be approved by the Commission, and authorized the appropriation of such sums as may be necessary therefor.

Scheme B of the architectural plan reported to Congress on March 3, 1905, in House Document 385, 58th Congress, provided for extension of the east central section of the Capitol 32 feet 6 inches and construction of the extension in marble; refacing the west central section of the Capitol in marble; reconstruction of the west front steps in marble; and sculptural treatment of the east pediment of the House wing of the Capitol.

At the direction of the Commission, the Architect of the Capitol engaged by personal service contract, July 10, 1956, the following private-practicing architects to furnish the necessary architectural and engineering services for carrying out the improvements authorized: Roscoe DeWitt and Fred L. Hardison, architects of Dallas, Tex.; Alfred Easton Poor and Albert H. Swanke, architects of New York City; Jesse M. Shelton, architect, and Alan G. Stanford (now deceased), engineer, of Atlanta, Ga. In addition, John Harbeson, architect of Philadelphia, Pa.; Arthur Brown, architect of San Francisco, Calif.; and Henry R. Shepley, architect of Boston, Mass., were engaged, by contract, as architectural consultants for the project. Messrs. Brown and Shepley have since died. Paul Thiry, architect of Seattle, Wash., has since been engaged as an architectural consultant. The architects and consultants submitted preliminary plans and estimates of cost for carrying out the improvements authorized by the enabling legislation, and the Architect of the Capitol submitted a report on these plans and specifications to the Commission in August 1957, and the premliminary plans and estimates were formally approved by the Commission at a meeting, February 21, 1958. The Architect's report was printed, in full, in the Congerssional Record of August 30, 1957.

These plans and estimates, proposed in lieu of a complete refacing of the west central front of the Capitol, that the west central section be extended and the new extension be constructed of marble, leaving the major portion of the old sand stone walls as interior walls..

The central section of the Capitol is constructed of Aquia Creek sandstone, which is not a durable material and has deteriorated through the years, notwithstanding that effort was made to preserve

« PreviousContinue »