to request funds for. They are not numerous in number. So I would say that, yes, in answer to your question, we have done quite well and the committee has done well by us. Senator MAGNUSON. And all these are listed for the benefit of the committee, the date approved, the limit of cost, the sites and expenses, the funding, the year the funding was requested, the basic costs, and then the estimated date of contract capability which they run along from 1963 on some of them up to 1965. CONTRACT CAPABILITY FOR FBI BUILDING Now, because there will be a lot of questions asked on I-114, the FBI building was approved April 1962, at the cost of $45,235,000, and sites and expenses of $14,765,000, the total of $60 million, and the contract capability is yet undetermined. Is that due to the difficulty in obtaining all of the site? Mr. BOUTIN. Well, it is due to a couple of factors, that is one of them. The second is we have been working with FBI on the allocation of space by component parts of the FBI. That is now behind us. We have reached agreement on that, and also the Pennsylvania Avenue study. This "undetermined," as printed in this document, can now be changed because we are proceeding with the design of the building. We also have acquired all parcels, even though some of them are before the courts, so that I would say that we would have construction capability with all the factors we have now before us in fiscal 1966, is that correct, Mr. Commissioner? Mr. DALY. We should have final working drawings about September 1965, if everything goes well. Mr. BOUTIN. This is just exactly then what I said, during fiscal 1966. BUILDING FOR REGULATORY AGENCIES Senator MAGNUSON. One other question that I have: As you know, the chairman of this committee has been for years working on the possibility of an independent office building for agencies that are now in other buildings. Mr. BOUTIN. Regulatory agencies. Senator MAGNUSON. You made a study and that study is available? Mr. BOUTIN. That study is available, Mr. Chairman. Senator MAGNUSON. So that would be placed in those coming up in the list, that possibility, is that correct? Mr. BOUTIN. We are extremely in favor of doing this. Some of our regulatory agencies are atrociously housed. We think we can save a great deal of money using common services, common facilities by building a single building to house certain regulatory agencies. Senator MAGNUSON. This is getting worse. PRESENT SPACE USED BY AGENCIES Senator SALTONSTALL. Mr. Chairman, will you yield on that, pertinent to that is how much are you paying in rent today? Mr. BOUTIN. A lot of what we have, Senator, is Government-owned space, but it is obsolete space, and spread all over the District of Columbia and beyond. I have to get the exact rents on it that we are paying for regulatory agencies. Mr. Schmidt may have that available right here, but the big problem is the efficiency of operation. You know rental costs are peanuts compared to what inefficiencies we develop ourselves through dispersal of agencies all over the District of Columbia. Senator MAGNUSON. Well, some of them are really housed Mr. BOUTIN. FCC, the one you named is one of the worst. Mr. BOUTIN. Not now, FÁA is all in one building. Senator MONRONEY. CAB is in an office building. Senator MAGNUSON. CAB. This thing would pay for itself, because their work, as the country grows, they just have more work in all. PRESENT FAA HOUSING Mr. BOUTIN. I would say, Mr. Chairman, speaking of FAA, they are now the best housed agency in Washington. Senator MAGNUSON. Now. They used to be scattered. Mr. BOUTIN. All over the place, but now that has been solved. Senator ALLOTT. I had a man go up to FAA last week and he told me he was tremendously impressed with the lush offices that FAA had, he said the Senators should have offices as good. Mr. BOUTIN. The question of attractiveness, I would agree with. Lushness, they have many of their higher grade people in very, very small cubicles. But they are attractive. They have used a lot of color. They have used a lot of very modern furniture. It is an attractive, very attractive thing. Senator MAGNUSON. Some of these Senator's offices, including mine, some days looks like a junkyard, but that isn't because the space is bad, but because of the way we keep it. [Laughter.] Mr. DALY. We have the rental figure for agencies to be consolidated, $820,000 annually. Senator MAGNUSON. Senator Saltonstall wanted that. RENTAL COSTS Senator ALLOTT. What do you pay for a square foot annually? For example, you are opening up a new place out in a town in Virginia about 11 miles to take care of some of these people Mr. BOUTIN. Bailey's Crossroads. Senator ALLOTT. What would you pay for that? Mr. BOUTIN. Out there we pay $3.75 serviced a square foot. In town we are averaging about $4.75 a square foot serviced. But this is a marked change. Two years ago space in Washington was costing $5.50 to $5.75 a a square foot for comparable space. This has now dropped down to $5 and less, a marked change in the market. There was an article on this, I understand, in the Washington Post yesterday. We are saving a lot of money in the process, but we still must move ahead to get real economy, with our building program which we are doing. CONSTRUCTION COSTS PER SQUARE FOOT Senator ALLOTT. Now, this building like the one out at Bailey's Crossroads for which you are paying $3.75, what would the cost of construction of a building like that be, somewhere in the neighborhood of $15? Mr. BOUTIN. No; around $22 a square foot would be my judgment, including land costs. Senator ALLOTT. So without interest you are amortizing that at about 5 years for the owner? Mr. BOUTIN. Oh, no. Including his taxes, his insurance costs. This is serviced space, you see. He is including in that the custodial; the Government doesn't have to provide it. He is providing all of that, heat, air conditioning, and so forth. In fact this figure is so low, Senator, that he is going to be a long, long time amortizing that building. Senator ALLOTT. So that includes all these other additional things? Mr. BOUTIN. Yes, sir. He will be lucky if he ends up with a net rental figure of two and a quarter, real lucky; is that correct, Mr. Daly? Mr. DALY. Yes, sir. Senator ALLOTT. Could we come back Senator MAGNUSON. Before you ask that question, Senator Saltonstall, the figure is $820,000. Mr. DALY. $820,000. CAPITALIZATION FIGURE Senator SALTONSTALL. In rent. That would be about an $80 million building, is that correct? Mr. BOUTIN. We would need substantially less than that. You see, some of the space they occupy, for instance, down at the Federal Triangle, we could reassign, so to get the full amount we would have to amortize everything at a value, what do you figure the total amortization period would be on this building, Mr. Schmidt? Mr. SCHMIDT. Well, let me say this Mr. BOUTIN. 26 years? Mr. SCHMIDT. I think about 20 years for a Federal office building amortized with savings in rental for comparable space. Only onethird of these regulatory agencies are now in leased space. Twothirds are in Government-owned buildings which would be reassigned or as in the case of the SEC, they are in temporary buildings. We would dispose of the temporaries. Mr. BOUTIN. Those are World War II tempos that should have come down some years ago. Senator SALTONSTALL. The maintenance costs in those buildings are pretty high anyway? Mr. BOUTIN. Fantastically high. SHELF OF APPROVED PROJECTS, UNFUNDED FOR CONSTRUCTION Senator SALTONSTALL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There is one other question, if I don't interfere with Senator Allott. You mentioned, Mr. Boutin, $106 million worth of authorized projects you had on the shelf, what did you mean by that? Those have been authorized but they had never been funded? Mr. BOUTIN. Those had been authorized for construction by the Public Works Committees of the House and Senate, and they also have been funded for design and acquisition of a site but not funded for improvement costs. Senator SALTONSTALL. So that those are always on the shelf as you put it? Mr. BOUTIN. Yes. Senator SALTONSTALL. But you could shoot forward if we gave you the money? Mr. BOUTIN. We could move ahead immediately. Senator SALTONSTALL. $106 million? Mr. BOUTIN. $106 million in round figures. VA INSURANCE FUNCTIONS TO FORT SNELLING, MINN. Senator ALLOTT. Last year we discussed, Mr. Boutin, you will recall, the problem that arose out of the movement of certain of the insurance functions of the Veterans' Administration to St. Paul-Minneapolis area. That building last year, as I recall it, was set up at $12 million. Now, as I look at your figures on page 111 it would appear that that building is now up to sixteen and a half million, $16,419,000; is that correct? Mr. BOUTIN. There should be no change at all in the figure, Mr. Chairman. We have the prospectus, Mr. Daly. Mr. DALY. I would have to check that. The improvement cost is $15,522,000. Mr. BOUTIN. You see actually we have the limit of costs by the Public Works Committees approved last year of $16,419,000. That is including any land acquisition, and none will be required here that the Government will have to pay for, and design as well as the improvement costs. Now, I don't remember a figure different from that, Senator, but I would be glad to check. Senator ALLOTT. It may be that the $12 million figure came in mind. from the examination of General Gleason last year rather than from you. Mr. BOUTIN. It could be, because this is the prospectus we had before Public Works last year which was approved. Senator ALLOTT. All right; thank you very much. PAYMENTS, PUBLIC BUILDINGS PURCHASE CONTRACTS Then the next item you have is "Payments, public buildings purchase contracts." You are up $5,150,000. Mr. BOUTIN. And the reason for that, Mr. Chairman, is that we are going ahead with acquisition. You see, all of these lease-purchase buildings had a provision where we could acquire at a set time. By moving ahead and acquiring at this time all but, I believe, six of these buildings, we are going to save something like $1,800,000. Senator MAGNUSON. Some of the lease-purchases when we were going through that program were 20 years, weren't they, that we could purchase at the end of 20 years? Mr. BOUTIN. At the end of 10 years. Senator MAGNUSON. 10 years. Mr. BOUTIN. Halfway mark. Senator MAGNUSON. Halfway mark and we are now reaching some of those? Mr. BOUTIN. Yes, sir. Senator MAGNUSON. In some cases, you can acquire prior to that time with the consent of the person, can't you? Mr. BOUTIN. Yes, we can. In fact, we can all of them. Recently, with the consent of this committee, we purchased at Durham, N.H., and Burlington, Vt. But by going ahead and exercising our options here the only ones we will have left still under lease will be Sacramento, Calif.; Atlanta, Ga.; Kansas City, Kans.; Omaha, Nebr.; Albuquerque, N. Mex.; and Huntington, W. Va.; all of the others will be in Government ownership. REDUCTION OF INTEREST AND TAX COSTS Senator SALTONSTALL. Mr. Chairman, the purpose of this increase really is to cut down the interest costs and if you put up this extra $5 million this year, theoretically you are saving x dollars on interest costs. Mr. BOUTIN. Interest, and taxes, both, Senator. Senator SALTONSTALL. Interest and taxes both. Senator MAGNUSON. Why isn't Seattle in there, the terminal post office? Have you acquired that, the terminal post office in Seattle? Mr. BOUTIN. That would be strictly Post Office. Senator MAGNUSON. That wouldn't be any part of ours? Mr. BOUTIN. No, sir. Senator MAGNUSON. These are all combinations of Federal office, of Federal agencies, and a post office might be included. Mr. BOUTIN. That is correct. Senator MAGNUSON. But they are not just purely post office? Mr. BOUTIN. That is correct. Senator MAGNUSON. They are all separate over in that shop. Mr. BOUTIN. That is correct. Senator MAGNUSON. All right. Now, "Expenses, U.S. court facilities," you are up EFFECT OF APPROPRIATIONS BELOW BUDGET ESTIMATES Senator SALTONSTALL. Mr. Chairman, could I ask one question before we get away from that? Senator MAGNUSON. Yes. Senator SALTONSTALL. Mr. Boutin, when you boil it right down on these first five expenses of yours we have right here, particularly the first four, if there is any cutback on those, you have got to choose where you are going to cut back, have you not, unless we specify it? Mr. BOUTIN. That is correct. Senator SALTONSTALL. What it would mean is that you would cut back on your construction costs, and you would have to cut back a certain amount of the improvements and repairs to the buildings? Mr. BOUTIN. That is correct. Senator SALTONSTALL. And we can't judge that, you would have to judge that? |