mining the method of presentation, contents, data to be included, When land acquisition programs are authorized by Congress, The administrative officer's unit also keeps currently informed on all pending legislation affecting the Architect's Office and maintains a complete file on such legislation, dating back to the 78th Cong. There is much knowledge that the administrative officer has accumulated since 1929, affecting the office activities, history, and background, which it is highly desirable be reduced to writing, and, if an additional assistant is allowed for 1969, effort will be exerted to make a start on this operation. The additional assistant requested would be gradually trained in budget and other work falling under the direction of the administrative officer and would eliminate the need for drawing upon assistance outside his unit. Payment to employees' life insurance fund, increased from $1,770 to $2,300 This item is required to cover the cost of Government's payment This item is required to cover the cost of Government contribu-- Total estimate for 1969___ INCREASE WORKLOAD 530 2,240 +39,000 744, 000 Mr. HENLOCK. As far as the administrative assistant is concerned, that would be an additional employee to assist me as the administrative officer. Since 1954, we have had three employees engaged in our particular field of work-that is myself; Mr. Durkin, who specializes in budget work; and Mrs. Sullivan, who is my secretarial assistant. Since 1954, the architect's organization, that has to be budgeted for annually, has increased from 50 to 60 percent, with five or six buildings or structures added. We are responsible for all functions in connection with the budget work-hearings, justifications, budget preparation, and all other associated matters. I am also responsible to render advice to Mr. Stewart in matters involving the application of laws, rules, regulations and precedents governing the functions and activities of the architect, which requires an overall background knowledge of the organization. I also have to draw up directives for committees, and commissions under whom we work to implement actions authorized or approved by them and, where new laws are passed, implement them with directives. We also appear before standing committees of Congress, as well as this committee, such as the public works committees in defending and preparing justifications for projects. We keep track of all legislation, from the start of the same, right through to the finish. In fact, our legislative records go back to the 78th Congress, covering all items that affect our office. The only way we have been operating in the last year or so is by Mr. Roof, the executive assistant making his assistant available whenever he could. Our workload, however, is so steady and of such a constant flow, that its very difficult to continue under that arrangement. In addition, since I have been here since 1929, I have stored up a great deal of knowledge that should be reduced to writing. I would like to be able to do that, which I could do, I feel, if there was another man_available to me, particularly on the budget work and some of the detail. With respect to the other job, the clerk, we are withdrawing that request in view of the budgetary situation. This position and one other, which we will come to later, are the only jobs asked for in our total appropriations. Senator BARTLETT. Let me ask you this, Mr. Henlock. In the event the House should deny the funds requested this year for remodeling in the Longworth Building, amounting to almost $7 million, and the two bodies of the Congress should postpone further funding for the Madison Library Building for construction for the same reason, would you feel that the need for the new administrative assistant position would be less demanding? Mr. HENLOCK. No, sir. Really the work is so constant and steady in the normal course of operation, that I don't see how our present unit can carry on its normal workload without the additional help requested. TRAVEL LIMITATION Senator BARTLETT. With respect to the limitation on travel expenses, $20,000, please explain for the record the circumstances under which employees of the Architect of the Capitol are authorized to travel. Mr. HENLOCK. Actually, we operate under the general travel laws applicable to the various departments of the Government, subject to the same travel regulations and the same expense allowances. Most of our travel in recent years has been done in connection with the construction projects. In the fiscal year 1967 where there was a total of $12,000 expended for travel, $7,000 of that was in connection with the inspection of marble, granite work and other items in connection with the work being done on the remodeling of the Cannon Building and construction of the House underground garages, and other projects on the House side. But this is not an appropriation, as you appreciate, Mr. Chairman. It is simply a limitation on the amount that can be used under any and all funds available to the Architect for travel. SENATE GARAGE Senator BARTLETT. Now you want $550 for the Senate garage. What is to be done with that money? Mr. HENLOCK. That is an increase under the appropriation of $62,300 requested for the garage. Practically all of this appropriation is for personal services. Under the general annual repairs allotment we are asking an increase from $2,500 to $3,050. We ask that additional amount to replace an air compressor and air pressure tank, which have been in service in the garage since 1932 when the garage was first placed in operation. This equipment supplies air to all the pneumatic control systems, paint spraying equipment and automobile service areas. This replacement is recommended in the interest of safety to personnel and equipment. It is inadequate and worn to the point where it needs replacement. INCREASE REQUESTED UNDER SENATE OFFICE BUILDING APPROPRIATION Senator BARTLETT. Under the nonrecurring items you request $28,000 for work on the Senate Office Building. What is that to consist of? Mr. HENLOCK. Mr. Campioli recommended that item. It is shown on page 64. It begins at the bottom of the page and is a justification for the replacement of the marble balustrades on the terraces at the southeast and southwest corners of the Old Senate Office Building. Mr. CAMPIOLI. Mr. Chairman, the balustrades along the terraces at the southwest and southeast corners of the Old Senate Office Building are in a bad state of deterioration and in need of replacement, as illustrated by these photographs and drawing [pointing]. Senator BARTLETT. All right, Senator Cotton. PLANS FOR LIBRARY OF CONGRESS JAMES MADISON MEMORIAL BUILDING Senator COTTON. Now this $2,800,000 for preparation, I am referring to page 5, preparation contract plans, specifications, Library of Congress, James Madison Memorial Building. That building was already authorized to the tune of what, $75 million? Mr. HENLOCK. Yes, sir. Senator COTTON. Is this the first step in the appropriations process? Mr. HENLOCK. No, sir; in 1966, you gave us $500,000 for preparation of preliminary plans and models and they have been completed. EFFECT OF DEFERRING APPROPRIATION Senator COTTON. I have two questions. I know that whenever a new building is authorized, it's authorized because the committee in Congress has been convinced it's necessary. I know from some of our past experiences that you defer the building of these new buildings, one, you have to continue to rent space, and two, you run the risk of having the same thing happen that happened in the New Senate Office Building, the costs of construction go up, so they have to chop off parts of the building. I am aware of those problems. Nevertheless, I am impelled to ask you in view of the emergency that we are in this particular fiscal year, on the matter of appropriations, what would be the result, and how dire would be the consequences if we defer for another year action by way of appropriations on the Madison Memorial. Mr. HENLOCK. Mr. Campioli can explain the various construction costs. Senator Jordan, incidentally, is expecting to testify on this item, with the Library officials, tomorrow. Senator COTTON. Perhaps I am anticipating this. Mr. HENLOCK. I know the Senator would like to discuss the item when the Librarian is here, tomorrow. The Librarian is prepared to testify on the effect of delay. Senator COTTON. I may not be able to be here. So let the record show my question and you need not bother to answer. Let the record show I raised the point and I hope when the matter is taken up you will answer my question as well as others. Is that all right? Mr. HENLOCK. Yes, sir. PLANS TO ACQUIRE ADDITIONAL PROPERTY Senator COTTON. Thank you. Incidentally, while the Chairman is occupied, this may be out of order, but what is going on in the matter of acquisition of property around the Capitol. There are some pieces that were supposed to be picked up that had not been. Is some more of that being done this year? Mr. HENLOCK. Senators Jordan and Randolph introduced a bill (S. 2484) to acquire more property on the Senate side, last of the New Senate Office building but it has not yet been acted on by the Senate. At present there is no other bill pending for land acquisition on the Senate side. S. 2484 was introduced, September 28, 1967, and reported favorably by the Senate Public Works Commmittee on November 8, 1967. There has been no further action on the bill. There is a bill pending for preparation of comprehensive longrange plans with regard to the Capitol Grounds and adjacent areas, that passed the Senate May 18, 1967. The House Public Works Committee has completed hearings on this legislation but has not yet reported out the bill. LAST LAND ACQUIRED ON SENATE SIDE Senator COTTON. What was the last land acquired on the Senate side? Mr. HENLOCK. In 1959 and 1960. That was land in the square where the Carroll Arms Hotel is located and also certain lots to the east of the New Senate Office Building. Senator COTTON. That is where the apartments are. Mr. HENLOCK. The land adjacent to it. We acquired some land east of the new building. The land is now used as a parking lot in the rear of that building. CONTINGENT EXPENSES Senator PROXMIRE. (Acting Chairman). Proceed on the next part. That is contingent expenses for which you are requesting $50,000, the same as the current year. Pages 16 to 18 of the justifications will be placed in the record at this point. (The justifications follow :) Contingent expenses. $50,000 This is the same amount as allowed for 1968. This is an item allowed annually since the fiscal year 1956, and is required in order to facilitate the work performed by the Architect of the Capitol in behalf of the Congress. Its purpose is to enable the Architect of the Capitol to make surveys and studies and to meet unforeseen expenses in connection with activities under the care of the Architect. As stated in previous Hearings, it is considered desirable as problems arise in connection with the needs of the Congress that there be available, annually, a limited fund which the Architect may draw to employ necessary assistance and to incur such other expenses as may be necessary to make surveys and studies required to ascertain facts, solutions, and estimates of cost to meet such problems. As also stated in previous Hearings, it is likewise considered desirable when the work of Committees and Commissions of the Congress might be expedited, such as by the extension of a rostrum, rearrangement of lighting, erection of partitions, installation of a public address system, or emergency repairs to mechanical equipment, that the Architect of the Capitol be in a position to meet these conditions promptly, without waiting the delay necessarily incident to the securing of a supplemental appropriation for items costing only a few thousand dollars. During the fiscal year 1968, allocations totaling $22,570 have been made against this fund, of which $7,500 has been for construction of a mezzanine floor with circular stair access in Rooms ST-1 and ST-5, located in the West Senate Terrace of the Capitol occupied by the Capitol Police, as an emergency measure to provide space for 74 additional lockers required by expansion of the Capitol Police force-approved by the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Appropriations; $3,000 for installation of a temporary sound and dust-proof enclosure in the Telephone Exchange area of the New Senate Office Building in September 1967, in order to permit the installation in that area of a new "Centrex" telephone system for the use of the Congress, for which funds were provided in the Supplemental Appropriation Act, 1968, approved January 2, 1968-approved by the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Appropriations; $5,000 for engagement of the services of acoustical engineering consultants to make a survey of the practicalities involved in introducing an appropriate voice reinforcement system in the Senate Chamber, recommended by the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration and approved by the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Appropriations; $6,070 for emergency repairs to the engine which drives the emergency electric generator in the Library of Congress Annex, which is the sole source of emergency electric power for the fire detection systems, exit lighting, and other vital emergency services in that building; $1,000 for settlement of a claim against the Government which arose under the Federal Tort Claims Act-this being a compromise settlement by the United States Attorney in connection with a claim resulting from injuries sustained in 1959 by two construction employees engaged in connection with repairs made to the Capitol Dome at that time, which involved a prime contractor, three subcontractors, and the Government. Under the compromise negotiated by the United States Attorney, the prime contractor and three subcontractors were required to pay a total of $64,000 and the Government $1,000. VOICE REINFORCEMENT SYSTEM FOR SENATE CHAMBER Senator PROXMIRE. You stated on page 17 that during fiscal 1968, $5,000 had been allocated for "engagement of the services of acoustical engineering consultants to make a survey of the practicalities involved in introducing an appropriate voice reinforcement system in the Senate Chamber." What has been the result of that study? Mr. HENLOCK. Mr. Rubel will speak on that item, if he may. Mr. RUBEL. We now are in the process of concluding a personal service contract with the firm of Bolt, Beranek & Newman, in Cambridge, Mass., to make this study. In the interim we have made arrangements with the Canadian Government to visit their parliament buildings where they reputedly have a very excellent speech reinforcement system in operation when their parliamentary body is in session. We recently received a response from Ottawa saying that any time after April 23, 1968 our representatives would be welcome to visit the buildings to examine their system and listen to its operation. |