So noting and taking the point of the uniformity and addressing that, which we will do, we will proceed with the quarterly inspection of the hospital food facilities. Mr. WASSERMAN. Mr. Alexander, the point of uniformity has been stressed. Are you going to apply to hospital food inspections your policy statement relating to the 70 points? Mr. ALEXANDER. Oh, absolutely. As a matter of fact, one of our problems, Mr. Wasserman, is that in the inspections that were made of hospitals, the scores ranged from 80 to 92, the median being 86. I am not a professional sanitarian, but the fact of the matter is that even recognizing that they are in hospitals, this does not seem to me to be a spread that I have anticipated. I expect more change in quality. I think that we are really going to find out what the actual situation is in our first independent inspection of the hospitals. This is our key operation with a new man, new director of inspection. I think we are going to find a greater variance in rating level in the hospital inspection this year. Mr. WASSERMAN. Let us assume, which is not the fact, that an inspection might show a food operation in a hospital, let's say the cafeteria open to the public, coming out below 70 points. What would the sanitarian do then? Who is the supervisor that he calls to agree with him that there is imminent danger under that setup? Mr. ALEXANDER. As I understand, the supervisor he calls to now will be Mr. Clark in this case. Is that correct? Mr. CLARK. I have indicated that I will be available to provide this kind of backup to the institutional hygiene. Mr. WASSERMAN. And who is going to review these reports as a matter of course without regard to whether they are above or below 70 points? Will that also go through Mr. Clark's shop? Is that the idea? Mr. ALEXANDER. You mean as a routine? Mr. WASSERMAN. Yes, just as all the other sanitary reports are looked at by the supervisors. Mr. ROBEY. Yes, I would think that this would be, initially, anyway, inasmuch as we are looking for uniformity, I would think this would be appropriate. Mr. ALEXANDER. For the purposes of the inspection, Mr. Clark's area of authority under this new organization does cover food establishment inspections. Anybody, regardless of what inspection he is in with Environmental Services, with an inspection report, for the purposes of that inspection, will be responsible to Mr. Clark. Last week, we met with 18 people who are working in other areas of Environmental activity. We told them we want them to start looking at restaurants and other food establishments in their area even though it is not part of their regular function and relav reports in on sanitation processes. Those will be going to Mr. Clark, even though those people do not work for Mr. Clark. Mr. WASSERMAN. Does your department, Mr. Alexander, have any type of contracts, research or study, with former officials of the Environmental Health Administration? I do not want to put it in the form of, "Have you stopped beating your wife?" but you are not continuing any of the past contracts? Mr. ALEXANDER. Sir, my department has a rather tremendous array of contracts with consultants, ranging all the way from water pollu tion control to food establishments. I am at this moment personally unaware of any contract with any former member of the Environmental Health Directorate, as it was called then. I know of none. Mr. WASSERMAN. Would you have your fiscal man check your records and report to the chairman what the result of that investigation might be? Mr. ALEXANDER. I believe that former employees have from time to time been used as consultants in the past. I know of none now. Mr. RANDALL. Mr. Alexander, only one or two questions. Our time is almost up. I would hope that when it is printed, and I understand it's only in the form of a preliminary draft at the present time, you would give us this criteria of compliance, this handbook that you referred to, that Mr. Goldwater asked about. Now, the report of the Food Task Force. As we understand it, that is going to be completed sometime in February? Mr. ALEXANDER. Well, sir, it has been submitted to me. I have two problems in connection with it and I want to meet, not on a revision, but I want to make certain I understand the reasons for the recommendation of the task force, because I am presently somewhat inclined to feel counter to their feelings or their expression. So I want to meet with them before I take any firm action on it. That is with Mr. Robey. Mr. RANDALL. Mr. Clark, I am sure you would agree that your records over there were not in the best condition in the latter part of July or first of August. In other words, we are trying to identify deficiencies based on those records. We had three gentlemen on loan from the General Accounting Office, plus two and three staff members from the committee who labored down there all during the month of August trying to come up with some kind of summary. Now, you are pretty close down there. Do you believe you are making some progress in recordkeeping? Let me go ahead one step before you answer that question. It was not only a question of which orderly arrangement. It was also a question of indexes which would not lead to anything. You could look at an index, you could go to this place, there was no record there. There was intermingling of records of different establishments all in the same file. I am speaking not from hearsay but from actual observation. There was just plain confusion in the recordkeeping. Yet it was our observation that there were all manner of clerks around there doing business as usual. But there was very little evidence of what they were doing. Now, can you tell us whether that has been improved? Mr. CLARK. Mr. Chairman, your criticism has been well placed. I think we in Environmental Health are indeed extremely fortunate to have Mr. Robey, who is a professional manager, on the scene at this critical time. Mr. Robey has already undertaken to correct this record situation. I believe, sir, that he is much better versed in what he has done than I. I wonder if he would pick it up. Mr. ROBEY. Mr. Chairman, the initial thing we did was ask for an inventory of the types of record that had been kept and also the types of reports which were required under existing contracts—for instance, the USDA contract-and reports required for the Director and the public that would be required. We have gotten this information back. We have also, and within the Department of Environmental Services, there is a records management capability which we have called upon to help. And because of the special nature of the problem and the tremendous amount of useless and superfluous material that is contained in the file-for instance, records of inspections dating back into the 1950s and the 1940s in some instances as well as programs which have been abandoned such as the milk program-we have asked for and received at no charge to the Department a files expert's services from the Archives. Mr. RANDALL. Good. That is real good. Mr. ROBEY. She was in last week. She reviewed the inventory which I mentioned a minute ago and has taken that back to study. She will be back in this week, give us a firm recommendation on how the files should be set up for quick retrieval. She will also give us some advice on storage and pertinent data for maintaining in current files and for record retention purposes based on Federal standards. We feel that once this report is received, then we can address immediately to rid ourselves of many, many pounds of unneeded paper and many square feet occupied by file cabinets at this time. We have made other strides. Mr. Clark has mentioned earlier that reorganization had provided additional staff. Part of the additional staff was pulled in from what is now the milk program. We have also pulled in people from across the organization and hopefully are dealing with our total organizational problems a little differently than heretofore. That is if a need arises in one particular bureau, we do not believe that the views of the employees within a given bureau should be so parochial to think that they cannot go over and help someone else out. We are at this point in the game attempting to work out the backlog. We are still approximately 2 months behind on our filing, but some of the more critical areas we have updated and we are making positive movement in the direction which I indicated. Mr. RANDALL. Thank you very much. Any further questions? Our time is up. Tomorrow we will hear from those who license, the licensing part of the sanitation program. We are going to see if there has been any adjustment of attitude on the question of whether their work is simply ministerial or whether they have some responsibility for enforcement also. We look forward to that testimony tomorrow. Pending that meeting tomorrow, Mr. Alexander, I want to concur and join with the kind comments made concerning you by our colleague from California, Mr. Goldwater, and simply repeat that we are impressed by your sincerity and your determination. You have a lot of other things other than simply food inspection. As you said, you have water pollution, many other things involving environment. You are on the way. I want to emphasize that this is not any suspension or end of this surveillance. There is an obligation, responsibility, of the subcommittee to retain legislation oversight. Though we have no further hear ings contemplated at the present time beyond tomorrow, the staff will certainly be making a review of the situation as we go along. Mr. ALEXANDER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. RANDALL. Thank you very much. (Whereupon, at 11:55 a.m., the subcommittee adjourned, to reconvene at 10 a.m., Tuesday, January 25, 1972.) DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FOOD INSPECTION AND LICENSING (Part 3) TUESDAY, JANUARY 25, 1972 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, OF THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS, Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to adjournment, in room 2203, Rayburn House Office Building, at 10:05 a.m., Hon. Wm. J. Randall (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Present: Representatives Wm. J. Randall, George W. Collins, John W. Wydler, Charles Thone, H. John Heinz III. Staff members present: Erskine Stewart, staff director; Jacob N. Wasserman, counsel; James L. Gyory, staff investigator; and Thomas H. Saunders, minority staff, Committee on Government Operations. Mr. RANDALL. The Special Studies Subcommittee will convene pursuant to recess yesterday. Let the record show that these witnesses were called in the nature of a followup to determine, if possible, what has happened in the interim between the July hearings and subsequent to the one hearing in the middle of September. The record will show that yesterday the witnesses were from the Office of the Director of Environmental Services, having to do with food inspection and the new arrangement which was described for recordkeeping and the system of rating food established. This morning we are over in another department, that of the Department of Economic Development. This is the department of our city government that has to do with the licensing and the oversight of structures. That is to say, the buildings in which our food establishments are housed; that is, construction permits and the issuance of permits for occupancy. We are pleased to have back with us this morning Mr. Julian R. Dugas, Director of the Department of Economic Development, and he has with him several of his people, his deputies and his Chief of the Bureau of Building, Housing and Zoning, and his Deputy Chief and the Administrator and Acting Administrator of the Office of Licenses and Permits Division. If you will proceed with your statement, we will be glad to hear from you again. STATEMENT OF JULIAN R. DUGAS, DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT; ACCOMPANIED BY LORENZO W. JACOBS, JR.; WILLIAM N. DRIPPS; H. WARREN STEWART; S. J. FUSCO; AND JULIAN P. GREEN Mr. DUGAS. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Mr. RANDALL. We welcome you back. This is in a little bit different era, and hopefully a better one for everybody concerned, than the last time you were with us. Please proceed. Mr. DUGAS. Good morning to you and members of your staff. I am Julian Dugas, Director of the Department of Economic Development of the District of Columbia government. I am pleased to appear again, at your request, before this subcommittee to give testimony concerning the effectiveness of operating arrangements between the Department of Economic Development and the Department of Environmental Services with respect to licensing and inspection and construction permit issuance for food establishments. With me are key members of my staff who will be identified at such time as they may be called upon to respond to questions or make statements. At my previous appearance before this subcommittee, Mr. Chairman, there was, in my opinion, full exploration of the functions and responsibilities of the Department of Economic Development in the areas mentioned, and I had an opportunity to read the record and I don't feel it is necessary, since there have been no changes in the Department's functions and responsibilities, I see no need to restate them here. For the purpose of speeding up the annual license approval-disapproval process, the Health Services Administration of the Department of Human Resources-now the Environmental Health Administration of the Department of Environmental Services and the Office of Licenses and Permits of the Department of Economic Development executed an agreement on July 16, 1971, refining the license issuance process, and if the record does not reflect a copy of that, sir, I would like to make a copy of that available and make it part of the record. Mr. RANDALL. I see no reason why that should not be part of the record. I will ask minority counsel if there is an objection. Mr. SAUNDERS. No. Mr. WASSERMAN. Do you want to give that an exhibit number, Mr. Chairman? Mr. RANDALL. Where are we on our exhibits? Mr. WASSERMAN. That would be No. 41. Mr. RANDALL. All right, that will be marked "Exhibit No. 41." (The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 41" for reference and follows:) EXHIBIT No. 41 GOVERNMENT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT RESPECTING APPROVAL ACTION ON LICENSE APPLICATIONS The operation of a proper Food Protection Program in the District of Columbia requires prompt action on referrals for the renewal of food establishment |