Page images
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

Since occupying building 3 in 1940 (Government Printing Office's last expansion) dollar volume has steadily trended upward from approximately $20 million in 1940 to nearly $130 million in 1963.

Pounds of paper used is an even better yardstick with which to measure growth. (See chart below.) For example, in 1940 the Government Printing Office used 111 million pounds of paper. By 1963, however, the Government Printing Office was using more than twice this amount—236 million pounds. Almost every pound of this paper has been printed, cut, folded, bound, or subjected to many hand and machine operations in the same floor space which was Considered only adequate 24 years ago when building 3 was occupied.

[graphic]

LEGE ND

GROWTH OF PAPER USE, EMPLOYEES
AND FLOOR SPACE FROM [86| TO

NUMBER OF EMPLOYE is 1963

M.ILL.IONS OF POUNDS
OF PAPER USED

RENTAL SPACE

At the present time the Government Printing Office rents 171,000 square feet of storage space at the General Services Administration's Parr-Franconia warehouse, located approximately 15 miles from this Office. The annual cost of this operation exceeds $300,000. Warehousing 28 million pounds of paper, 8 million envelopes, and 140,000 cartons at this location is inconvenient, costly, and wasteful, since every pound of paper must be rehandled and transported 15 miles to place it at the point of use. If sufficient space were available at the plant to include this storage, more than four-fifths of the total cost of the Franconia operation would be eliminated. The General Services Administration has been most patient in view of their own pressing need for space which we now occupy in this facility. Recently the Government Printing Office also found it necessary to rent 30,000 square feet of storage space at the Washington Star Warehouse.

DISTRIBUTION

The present system of distributing printed material is both costly and time consuming. Throughout the Federal Establishment in the Washington area a great many individuals are engaged in this-activity—one which is more often than not, accomplished by hand. Using this method, printing is counted, wrapped, packaged, labeled, and delivered by this Office to the ordering agency. They in turn must again handle this material by unwrapping, counting for each distribu-tion point, rewrapping, repackaging, and relabeling for shipment in mail bags or cartons to secondary destinations. The Public I’rinter has been approached repeatedly with requests that the Government Printing Office assume the distribution of Government publications for its customer agencies. The lack of adequate space has prevented the Government I’rinting Office from providing this service. When sufficient space is made available, the Public Printer hopes to concentrate these fragmented distribution activities in a centralized distribution facility within the Government Printing Office. By doing this, it will be possible to automate many of the functions now performed by hand and eliminate the duplication of effort and delay in putting Government publications in user's hands.

[graphic]
[graphic]
[graphic]

RELOCATION PROGRAM

Faced with growing demands for printing, and the attendant need for Warehousing greater paper tonnages, provisions for more space at the present location would only partially ease the situation. The real need is not only for additional Space but Space Which can be used most effectively. In order to fill congressional and agency requirements, meet production schedules, and still maintain a reasonable and competitive price structure, the Office must modernize and streamline production operations along the lines tested and proven by commercial establishments. Basically, costs incurred by the vertical movement of raw stock and printed material, from processing point to processing point, are excessive. The Only practical way to attack these costs is to place printing equipment, using paper and printed stock, close to paper storage points, and in turn these storage points should be placed close to receiving operations. This concept requires that printing presses and bindery machinery be placed on One level. If this idea is carried out paper storage and warehousing facilities would be placed on the same level. In short, to obtain maximum production and Storage effectiveness it is necessary to relocate to a new structure designed and built to meet these criteria. By far the greatest percentage of prime stock is received by rail. Rail shipments must be made to warehouse building No. 4, across North Capitol Street from production installations in buildings 1, 2, and 3. Each pound of paper received must be lowered from storage levels in building 4, power-trucked through the underground tunnel connecting buildings 4 and 3, and then raised to points of use in buildings 1, 2, or 3. These points of use are Vertically Separated by as many as seven floors. (See drawing p. 15). Most of the truck-transported paper stock, while only a fraction of that received by rail, must also be delivered to receiving docks at the building 4 warehouse. Therefore, this paper, too, must be subjected to multiple lifting and transporting to place it at points of use. The advantages to be derived from relocation of the Government Printing Office to a site such as the Bolling-Anacostia Air Base, where vertical movement of materials could be eliminated (see drawing, p. 16), may be summarized as follows: 1. Will permit construction of a functional two-story building engineered to meet the Government Printing Office's specific needs. 2. Will place production equipment in best location, and on same level with storage and shipping areas, assuring the free flow of work in and out. 3. Preferred type of construction will be far less costly than multistory construction. 4. Will significantly lower the costs of moving rail-received paper to production areas, and reduce attendant stock damage. 5. Will enable existing buildings 1, 2, and 3 to be conveyed to General Services Administration, thereby helping to alleviate the Government-Wide shortage of office space in the close-in metropolitan area. 6. Will make warehouse building No. 4 available to the Post Office Department. 7. Will allow for concentration of distribution center activities which will reduce costs and delays presently associated with this activity. 8. Will lower fixed maintenance costs for building and facilities. 9. Will permit logical and simplified expansion should the need arise in the future. 10. Will permit free access by truck, auto, and rail traffic. 11. Will provide for employee parking. 12. Will permit type of construction which will reduce noise levels and vibration associated with high-speed printing machinery. 13. Will allow centralized utility systems to be “built in,” thereby reducing fixed costs and improving reliability. 14. Will improve plant safety. 15. One level for heavy production operations will permit machine grouping for maximum output. 16. Will improve supervisory efficiency and overall communications. 17. Will serve to improve standards of service to the Congress and other customer agencies through simplified work flow and materials handling. With the foregoing advantages in mind estimated costs were developed for production and storage operations in a two-story structure. The two-story plan was selected since it offered sufficient floor area for heavy production and

[ocr errors]

paper storage and would permit the light production units responsible for Supporting operations, such as composing, platemaking and planning, on the second level. By placing heavy production on the ground floor, high floor loading and wide bay spacing could be obtained without resorting to heavy expensive bearing walls. Most important, however, it places paper receiving and storage areas contiguous to press and bindery equipment. This type of construction also tends to reduce noise and vibration. It is anticipated that administrative offices would also be placed on the second level. A space comparison table showing present and proposed allocations of floor space is located on page 13. The results of this study are shown in the following cost statement which compares present costs with estimated costs in the proposed relocated facility.

Present annual operating costs compared with projected annual operating costs in new structure

Present Personnel Estimated Estimated annual as of June cost in new personnel COstS .30, 1963 Structure reduction 1. Material handling labor in production------ $1,239,000 192 $657,000 78.0 2. Other labor in production------------------ 31, 220,000 3,919 30,320,000 120.0 3. Paper and material handling in stores------ 1,733,000 184 1,077,000 70.0 4. Manning elevators-------------------------- 54,000 9 None 9.0 5. Modernization and depreciation of elevators- 150,000 ||-------------- 10,000 -------------6. Elevator and conveyor maintenance (including escalators)------------------------ 177,000 25 18,000 23.0 7. Incinerator Operation and maintenance----- ,000 4.5 7,000 3.0 8. Window maintenance----------------------- 36,000 7.25 16,000 4.0 9. Door maintenance-------------------------- ,000 3 5,000 2.5 10. Building structure maintenance------------ 149,000 20 100,000 7.0 11. Driveways, sidewalks and lawns----------- 3,000 0.25 30,000 –6.0 12. Plumbing maintenance--------------------- 47,000 6 32,000 2.0 13. Air-conditioning, heating and ventilation maintenance------------------------------ 139,000 16 116,000 3.0 14. Electric truck maintenance----------------- 103,000 12 64,000 5.0 15. Other costs, including administration and documents 10,722,000 1,843 10,377,000 70. 0 (a) Field service 3, 118,000 496 3, 118,000 0 (b) Detai 996,000 125 996,000 0 (c) WAE, Superintendent of Documents---------------------------- 469,000 329 469,000 0 (d) WAE, disbursing office------------- * 43 63,000 0 Total----------------------------- 50,459,000 7, 234 47,475,000 390. 5 Note: Net annual savings, $2,984,000. ESTIMATED COST OF RELOCATION Design, engineering, supervision, etc.------------------------------ $3,055, 000

Improvements--------------------------------------------------- 43,028,000

Fallout shelter-------------------------------------------------- 80,000 Costs incident to moving----------------------------------------- 3,000, 000 Total estimated cost-------------------------------------- 49, 163,000

Appropriated, Public Law 88–454, for the site selections and general plans and designs of buildings--------------------------------- –2, 500,000

To be appropriated.---------------------------------------- 46, 663, 000 Annual gross savings-------------------------------------------- 2, 984, 000 Annual rental value of Space to be conveyed to GSA (based on GSA estimates) : Office space at $3 per square foot—107,209 square feet---------- 322,000 Industrial space at $1.50 per square foot—594,933 square feet——— 892, 000 Storage space at $1 per square foot—322,874 feet-------------- 322, 000 Total rental value----------------------------------------- 1, 537,000 Total savings--------------------- ----- ---- - * 4, 521, 000 Amortization period-------------------------------------- years—— 10.8

1 This total savings figure does not include the savings which are anticipated through assumption of distribution responsibilities by the Government Printing Office.

NotE.-This reestimate dated June 1965 is based on the assignment of a specific site at the National Training School area and on studies of this particular site made by GSA and Charles T. Main, Inc. These figures are the best possible estimates as of this date.

[graphic]

REESTIMATE SCHEDULE

Original esti-
mate, based Estimate Estimate
On GSA's for site No. 7 | for site No. 1
prospectus

Demolition---------------------------------------------------|-------------- $400,000 ||--------------
Construction-------------------------------------------------|-------------- 28, 203,000 $28,203,000
Air conditioning----------------------------------------------|-------------- 7,300,000 7,300,000
Elevators-----------------------------------------------------|-------------- 500,000 500,000
Built-in equipment--------------------------------- ------------------------ 950, 000 950, 000
Site development----------------------------------- ----------|-------------- 569,000 3,627,000
Utilities—Water, electric, etc.------------------------ +---------|-------------- 80,000 323,000
Relocating sewer------------------------------------ ----------|-------------- 1, 750,000 |--------------
Extra foundations---------------------------------- ----------|-------------- 2,811,000 --------------
Roof parking-------------------------------------------------|-------------- 600,000 |--------------
Reservations---------------------------------------------------------------- 80,000 80,000
Contingencies-------------------------------------------------|-------------- 2, 157,000 2,045,000

Basic improvements.------------------------------------ $40,926,000 45,400,000 43,028,000 Design, engineering, Supervision, etc.---------------- ---------- 3, 257,000 3,660,000 3,055,000 Fallout shelter-------------------------------------- ---------- o n ,000 Costs incident to moving--------------------------- ---------- 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000

Total estimated cost------------------------------------ 47,287,000 52, 140,000 49, 163,000

The encouraging results of the preceding cost comparisons, the relatively short period of amortization and the marginal advantages Of making the present site available to meet other governmental space needs serves to strongly recommend relocation as a sound and practicable course of action. After the cost of this proposal has been recovered this action will continue to serve the public interest through reduced operating and fixed expenditures, and the rental value of the released office, industrial, and storage space.

On September 23, 1963, the Public Printer presented this relocation proposal to the Joint Committee on Printing. It was favorably endorsed by the Joint Committee on Printing and the Public Printer was authorized to present this proposal to the appropriate congressional committees.

Space comparison

NOW Proposed

Square feet Square feet Production------------------------------------------------------------------ 475,000 615,000 Delivery and shipping------------------------------------------------------ 20,000 72,000 Receiving and storage------------------------------- ------------------------ 380,000 440,000 Administration-------------------------------------- ------------------------ 95,000 120,000 Documents.----------------------------------------- ------------------------ 151,000 210,000 Distribution----------------------------------------- ------------------------ 15,000 100,000 Maintenance and buildings equipment-------------- ------------------------ 95,000 110,000 Cafeteria, recreation, and miscellaneous------------- ------------------------ 175,000 233,000 Total net floor space--------------------------- ------------------------ 1,396,000 1,900,000 Utility and service area (halls, stairways, shafts, toilets, elevators, etc.)------ 232,000 285,000 Gross floor space------------------------------ ------------------------ 1,628,000 2, 185,000

1 Estimated.

Estimated minimum acreage requirements at site such as Bolling-Anacostia

Airbase Acres Buildings–1,092,000 square feet----------------------------------------- 25 Parking–1,000 cars, at 100 per acre------------------------------------- 10 Roads, docks, and railroad spur––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 6 Future expansion, landscaping, and miscellaneous------------------------ 33

« PreviousContinue »