So we get quite a range of suits. I don't think we can put our finger on any particular issue that is argued in all cases.

Mr. STEED. So in one situation in one area they complain about a lack of open space, and then in another area where you have a park, they complain about that.

Mr. CASSELMAN. That was the point I was making, Mr. Chairman. You are correct.

POLLUTION-FREE DESIGN

Mr. STEED. Is there a problem of air pollution in the construction of modern office buildings?

Mr. SAMPSON. No. Our buildings have all been designed to be as pollution-free as possible in that area. We have also, by the way, modernized our existing buildings.

Mr. ROUSH. In addition to that, we have adopted the noise pollution standards.

Mr. SAMPSON. Air pollution standards and noise pollution standards are recognized in our construction specifications.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS

Mr. STEED. The Government has a need for a wide variety of buildings. Usually you think of a typical office building when you think of a Federal building, but when you get into the area of a warehouse-type building, do you have an environmental problem concerning building warehouse facilities in a certain place? Is this a problem?

Mr. SAMPSON. I don't think we've had enough warehouses under construction to answer that too well, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. STEED. I remember one project where the people who were going to work there protested because the proposal location wasn't considered close enough to the homes of some of the people who wanted to work in it. That consideration seemed to be more important than the good the Government is going to get out of the building after it's been built. Is this another type of environmental problem that you have to cope with?

Mr. SAMPSON. Yes. That goes beyond the environmental problem. That's also human nature, probably because people never want to move. Mr. STEED. Are there any further questions on this?

ENERGY CONSERVATION

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Chairman, if I may pursue the energy problem just a little more.

As the chairman said, you being housekeeper for the total Government you have many, many responsibilities.

When you speak of construction of new buildings, and it was brought up to some degree a moment ago, about the amount of glass that would be in a building, or the lack of glass, where it would require additional lighting, and you spoke of heat being used which was generated by the lighting equipment. This would be used to help heat the building, but doesn't that defeat the purpose as far as summertime is concerned, where it requires additional air conditioning in order to absorb that heat?

I wondered how you do balance this out so that there would be some advantage with having glass in the walls to let the sun in, or not having glass.

Mr. ROUSH. Our Deputy Commissioner, Mr. Jack Galuardi.

Mr. GALUARDI. We very carefully evaluate the conditions when we do put glass in. We require the architect to consider both the energy problem and also the solar problem. We require that only solar glass be put in, which is the type which reduces the amount of heat transmission through the glass.

We also provide solar shading wherever it is required, such as on the west and the south side of a building.

We do, of course, want to use the outside light as much as possible to provide for the lighting in the rooms during the day so that we can reduce our artificial illumination as much as possible.

Mr. SAMPSON. There's a system analysis approach which is used in determining alternatives, and which must consider these matters on a life cycle basis, so that we're getting the optimum type of equipment installed for this purpose.

ENERGY TYPES

Mr. MILLER. What type of energy do you normally use for heating, air-conditioning? Is it primarily electrical heat, oil?

Mr. GALUARDI. An analysis is made for each building. Much depends upon what's available in the community.

For instance, in the Washington, D.C. area, we have central heating plants which are presently burning coal. We are converting these plants to oil. In other cities, there are city-supplied steam units. The city itself sells the steam and if it is available, we purchase it. Otherwise, we will use either gas or oil as the main heating fuel.

Mr. MILLER. Those units that are being changed at the present time, is that a requirement by EPA that you change from coal to oil? Mr. GALUARDI. The one in the District of Columbia is a requirement placed upon all the States. The District of Columbia adopted the standards on the limits of sulfur in coal. We could not obtain coal with a sufficient low-sulfur content to use in these plants, so we are converting to oil, since we can obtain low-sulfur oil.

INTERRUPTABLE UTILITY CONTRACTS

Mr. MILLER. I understand in the past that many utilities would sign an interruptable contract, whereby under certain conditions, in the lack of supply, that they would be able to cut off fuel. Are you in any way operating under interruptable contracts?

Mr. GALUARDI. We attempted to do that here in Washington, D.C. We were going to convert to gas with this interruptable type of contract, but by the time that we could convert the units-you're aware of the national gas shortage that occurred-the gas companies would not provide us with gas at all, interruptable or otherwise.

Mr. MILLER. Are you able to get a long-term oil contract?

Mr. GALUARDI. The Department of Defense is responsible for the procurement of oil, and I believe that they do it on a year-to-year basis. Mr. MILLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. ROBISON. Then that means that DOD provides your contracting services for all oil used for Federal buildings?

1

Mr. GALUARDI. Yes.

Mr. SAMPSON. Mr. Robison, it's divided between GSA and other agencies as to which has responsibility for the management and supply of certain commodities for the Government. DSA buys fuel oil for all civilian agencies, in addition to the Department of Defense. Mr. ROBISON. And do you, by and large, use the services of the Engineers?

Mr. SAMPSON. Oh, yes, we use DOD almost exclusively.

BUILDING LOCATIONS

Mr. BEVILL. I noticed recently your location of customs buildings. Using that as an example, who decides where these buildings will be located. For example, if a building is being built on a particular tract of land, do you, GSA, decide, or does the particular agency say "We need it in this particular area"?

Mr. SAMPSON. The agency determines the general geographical area. In many instances they will try to find a particular area where they would like to go. But we insist upon their submitting justification in accordance with President Nixon's Executive Order 11512 to assure these buildings are being put where they're going to help the communities.

In the case of Customs border stations, the needs of the agency may override socioeconomic considerations. Customs buildings and border stations have to be in certain areas.

Mr. BEVILL. You make the final decision as to where the building will be placed?

Mr. SAMPSON. Yes, within an area. But, for example, the Social Security Administration may decide they want a computer center in Alabama. Within Alabama, we will make a determination, and then decide; but it will be in Alabama.

Mr. BEVILL. But you decide exactly to get the best location?
Mr. SAMPSON. Yes, within that general area.

Mr. BEVILL. Of course I realize you work closely with the agencies, but you actually have to make the final decision as to whether it's technically feasible, and so forth?

Mr. SAMPSON. Yes. I have the ultimate legal authority. But we work with the agencies, and very seldom have to resort to that extreme. By working with the agencies, most of the time we can get them to agree as to what is best.

Mr. BEVILL. If the Treasury Department wanted a site which obviously was not feasible, you would be reluctant to approve that site? Mr. SAMPSON. That is correct, quite true.

LOCATION OF BUILDINGS OUTSIDE THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Mr. BEVILL. Is there any tendency among the agencies to locate more of their buildings outside of the Washington area, where they have adequate parking, better facilities?

Mr. SAMPSON. They want this all the time, and I can understand their desires, but we've established a very strong policy that we will stay in the District with new buildings. We are not going to move people out of the District. We work very closely with Mayor Washington

to assure that we are keeping employment in the District wherever possible.

Mr. BEVILL. Keeping it within the District wherever possible?
Mr. SAMPSON. Yes, that is right.

Mr. BEVILL. Mr. Chairman, I don't want to belabor the point, but I think, for example, you built the war bond section of the Treasury Department in Wheeling, W. Va.

Mr. SAMPSON. In Parkersburg, W. Va., yes.

Mr. BEVILL. I understand, from testimony that has been before this committee, that they have very little turnover in personnel; they have adequate parking; they don't have this congestion in traffic that we have here in Washington.

The point that I'm getting at is, is there any evidence on the part of the agency, would you say, that they are always wanting to move out, to get out of Washington?

Mr. SAMPSON. Yes, they would like to. Our position with respect to Federal employment in the District is that to move out a large amount would have an adverse impact on the economy of the District, and we have agreed with the Mayor that we would keep the employment here. We would not move out.

There are exceptions to this. If an agency is deciding to decentralize and that's their overall policy, we go along then with this. But there is a general principle of keeping agencies within the District mainly to maintain the economic structure of the District.

Mr. BEVILL. Thank you.

POSTAL SERVICE CONSTRUCTION

Mr. STEED. Last year we had some conversation concerning construction of postal buildings. As you know, when the Postal Service was established, they elected not to use the General Services Administration for their construction and entered instead into a contract with the U.S. Army Engineers. I understand from the Office of Management and Budget that that contract has been canceled.

Some discussion was held as to whether the Postal Service would come back to the GSA with the idea of using your services. I'm not aware at the moment that the Postal Service has made any arrangements for handling their construction problems. Are you in any negotiations with them?

Mr. SAMPSON. They have not approached us whatsoever. It is my understanding that they intend to contract outside for construction expertise in their program.

There was a story in a recent trade magazine saying that they would choose five construction managers around the country from the private sector to do their construction instead of coming to GSA, or using some other method.

Mr. STEED. Since you have the experience and the ability it would seem to me that it would be to their advantage to come to you. It might be something they ought to look at, because if you solve the problem of how to get something built for the Federal Government in a reasonable amount of time, it is something that the Postal Service certainly could use. Any savings in time that can be accomplished really is a big bonus to them. You've apparently solved the time ele

ment with your program to a large extent. It ought to help other agencies.

Mr. SAMPSON. We would welcome an invitation from them to at least make a presentation of what we could do. I have talked very informally with some of the leaders in the Postal Service and have told them that we are ready, willing, and able to help them. I think we have the capability in GSA for building quality construction in a short time period.

MANPOWER SAVINGS

Mr. STEED. Does the new program permit you to reduce your manpower needs?

Mr. SAMPSON. Yes, sir.

Mr. STEED. Do you have any studies on what you figure your manpower savings have been in the purchase contract program as against the previous method?

Mr. SAMPSON. I don't believe we have information with us, but we can provide a statement for the record, if you would like us to do so. Mr. STEED. Yes, I think that would be helpful.

[The information follows:]

PBS WORK FORCE INCIDENT TO THE PURCHASE CONTRACT PROGRAM Although no formal study hase been conducted to determine precise manpower savings, the following pertinent information is available. A small task force was formed consisting of four professional employees supported by two clerical personnel. This task force managed the program itself and provided guidance to GSA employees in the regional design and construction divisions nationwide. Thus, even though the projects placed under contract under the purchase contract program added to the design and construction workload and resulted in the largest workload in this function in a number of years, it was not necessary to hire additional personnel to carry out this specific program as well as the ongoing functions, programs, and projects.

TRANSFER REQUEST

Mr. STEED. I would like to go back now to House document 93-99 concerning this transfer request from OMB from $1,500,000 to $2,900,000. It says: "To provide full-year funding for reassignment of certain policy development functions from the Office of Management and Budget." Could you give us an explanation of what you mean by policy and development functions?

Mr. SAMPSON. Let me use "Procurement management" as an example. Implementation of the Procurement Commission's report now resides with OMB. With the transfer of the "Policy procurement" to GSA we'll be responsible for spearheading the implementation of the Procurement Commission's report, strictly on a policy basis area, not operations, saying procurement should be done in a certain way, or should be consolidated in a certain way.

The same is true of Automatic computers, financial management and management systems. But it is strictly policy. We are not going to do any operating at all.

For example, we might define within GSA the possibility of what might be the accounting system for most agencies and, as you know, we have great differences in accounting systems throughout the country.