Mr. ROOF. They are putting the Senate recording studio in there and expanding the whole facility. It takes up over half of the tunnel. That work is in progress at this time. All changes are being made by the Architect under the direction of the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration. Mr. ANDREWS. Let me ask you a question about the contingent fund of $50,000 we discussed a while ago. That fund is available for both the House side and the Senate side, is that correct? Mr. HENLOCK. Yes, sir. ROOMS IN SENATE SIDE, EAST FRONT EXTENSION Mr. ANDREWs. To what uses have the rooms in the new east front section of the Capitol on the Senate side been put? Mr. CLANCY. They are used as Senators' offices there. Mr. ANDREWS. Does each Senator have a private office? Mr. ANDREWS. How many rooms are there? Mr. CLANCY. I cannot answer that offhand. I will check it. Mr. ANDREWS. I wish you would check it and insert the information in the record. (The information follows:) There are 21 rooms in the Senate wing of the east front extension assigned to Senators, we understand. Mr. ANDREWS. Have all the rooms been assigned? Mr. CLANCY. Yes, sir. Mr. ANDREWS. Are there any vacant rooms available for assignment? Mr. CLANCY. No, sir, not to my knowledge. ADDITIONAL NURSE POSITION-UNBUDGETED Mr. STEWART. Mr. Chairman, there is one other item that is not in the budget. Since our budget was prepared last fall, Dr. R. J. Pearson, attending physician to the Congress, has requested that one additional nurse position be allowed for the fiscal year 1969, in order that he may continue in service the Navy laboratory technician assigned to his office and who is due for retirement from the Navy in October 1968. Dr. Pearson believes that it is in the interest of the Congress to continue the policy of hiring naval personnel upon their retirement, when he finds their performance has been outstanding and their services are still required. He advises further that he considers unequivocally that the present laboratory technician falls into that category. Thus it is recommended that one additional position of nurse, grade GS-9, at a salary rate of $9,130 plus $1,370 for overtime work, a total of $10,500, be allowed under the "Capitol buildings" appropriation. Since the position is required to be funded for only 9 months during the fiscal year 1969, the gross cost may be discounted to $7,875. Mr. ANDREWS. Is this technician working at this time in Dr. Pearson's office? Mr. ROOF. Yes, sir. He has been there for a year and a half. His name is Melton, a chief pharmacist mate. Mr. ANDREWS. He retired and Dr. Pearson wants to keep him on? Mr. Roof. Yes, sir; he is to retire next October. You have done that in several cases before. Mr. ANDREWS. I think the doctor is doing a good job for the Members here. Mr. HENLOCK. That would increase our budget by $7,800. Mr. REIFEL. May I ask a question? Mr. ANDREWS. Yes. Mr. REIFEL. If this technician were to be replaced not by a civilian, would the replacement come from Navy personnel? Mr. Roof. Yes. Mr. REIFEL. And would we reimburse the Navy personnel? Mr. ROOF. No; it is just a detail. Mr. REIFEL. What we are doing here, we are funding an individual by this committee which we would not have to do if the replacement was done by the normal procedure? Mr. Roof. That is true to a certain extent. Mr. REIFEL. I know Dr. Pearson says this individual is very capable, but could we not have an equally capable person as a replacement from the Navy? Mr. Roof. I think the idea is, the doctor gets numerous individuals in and he screens them and when he finds one that fits in this particular atmosphere he wants to keep him. Mr. REIFEL. Would this amount of $10,500 for the year's cost of maintaining this technician be comparable to what the Defense Department would be paying that person now? Mr. ROOF. Mr. Reifel, I do not know what these naval technicians receive from the Navy. Mr. REIFEL. The reason I ask this, if this is comparable to what the Navy would be paying out of the Defense appropriation it does not make much difference where it is paid from since it all comes out of the same pocket anyway. Mr. ROOF. The rate we are requesting is comparable to what we are paying our nurses at a premium rate. The starting hiring rate is the fifth step of the grade as established by the Civil Service Commission due to nurses being in short supply. Mr. ANDREWS. If you will yield, I wish you would find out what this technician is getting from the Navy and insert it in the record. (The information follows:) Chief Melton's salary Basic salary per annum. Subsistence, quarters and clothing allowances (per annum)---Additional per annum compensation authorized for military personnel detailed to the Office of the Attending Physician__. Total $5, 580 2,390 11, 800 9, 770 1 Legislative Branch Appropriation Act, 1968, provides for an allowance of $150 per month each for not to exceed eight assistants. Mr. ANDREWS. This technician of the Navy is in the service? Mr. Roof. He is in the service. Mr. ANDREWs. What rank does he have? Mr. Roof. Chief pharmacist mate. Mr. ANDREWS. You say he is retiring from the Navy? Mr. ANDREWS. I would assume he would be eligible for the retirement the Navy pays and under the law as I understand it he could not draw two Government checks? Mr. ROOF. Mr. Chairman, because of the particular conditions under which he is retiring, being an enlisted man, he can draw two Government checks. It is not at all unusual. Mr. ANDREWS. He could get his retirement check and his salary if the committee sees fit to grant your request? Mr. Roof. Yes. We have retired military personnel throughout our organization. They spend 20 years in the service and they are still relatively young men when they retire and we obtain some excellent men through that means. Mr. REIFEL. Mr. Chairman, we must bear in mind that personnel of this type are in short supply and if the position were to be filled by personnel from the Defense Department it means one other individual would have to be recruited from some place else, and here is one leaving the Department and if the salary differential is not too great it would seem to be the best thing to do, especially in view of the fact Dr. Pearson considers this the best thing to do for the welfare of the Members of Congress. Mr. ANDREWs. That is the main thing. REPAIRING DAMAGE TO WORKS OF ART What is the status of repairing the damage to works of art on the House side of the Capitol caused a year ago by a man who ran amuck? Mr. CLANCY. Three of the paintings are already back in place, finished. The large painting of the signing of the Constitution will be finished next month but we cannot do anything about putting it back in place in the Capitol until Congress takes a recess of at least 2 weeks or adjourns. Mr. ANDREWS. As I remember, the cost of repairing the damage to those works of art was $64,000? Mr. CLANCY. Yes, sir. Mr. ANDREWS. How firm was that cost? Are you getting the work done for that amount or for more or less? Mr. HENLOCK. We let a contract for $64,000. It was a personal services contract. Everyone who has seen the three restored paintings thinks a beautiful job of restoration has been done. IMPROVED ILLUMINATION PROGRAM Mr. ANDREWS. On page 84 of the committee print I find there was an unobligated balance brought into the current year from 1967 of $91,000. What was that for? Mr. HENLOCK. You allowed us $100,000 in the 1967 appropriation to improve the illumination and provide the associated electrical wiring in certain public areas of the Capitol Building not done under the extension of the Capitol program. $9,000 was obligated as of the close of the fiscal year 1967 and the balance will be and is being obligated as designs for the new installations are developed and completed by the Architect's staff. If there is any question on the status of the work, Mr. Rubel can tell you. Mr. ANDREWS. All right, Mr. Rubel. Mr. RUBEL. We have installed on the second floor of the House wing, in the east and west corridors, new bronze chandeliers. We have purchased two crystal chandeliers for the Senate side and this expenditure is included in the obligation of $9,000. We have just completed the designs for exterior illumination of the House and Senate wings, at their east entrances. There is presently one bare electric bulb at the main entrance in each of the two wings. At night the steps leading to the entrances are not properly illuminated and persons arriving in taxicabs approach inadequately illuminated areas. This circumstance creates a safety hazard. We have completed the designs of new installation that will give adequate illumination for persons using the entrances and the steps, and also will enhance the appearance of the building. We will soon advertise bids for the manufacture of these ornamental fixtures. We are also experimenting with improved illumination for the interior of the Capitol dome. The existing lighting can be substantially augmented at reasonable cost with the application of recently developed efficient light sources. Additionally, we have made preliminary studies of new installations for the large lobby just south of the Senate Chamber. There are some chandeliers in that area that were installed at the turn of the century. They are grotesque in appearance and provide inadequate lighting. Mr. ANDREWS. How do you stand with reference to the wiring in the Capitol? Mr. RUBEL. The wiring is all adequate. That work has been completed and is adequate for, I would say, 100 years. Mr. ANDREWS. That includes the whole building? Mr. RUBEL. Yes, sir. Mr. ANDREWs. Is it all ac current now? Mr. RUBEL. Yes, sir; from the basement to the attic. This work was accomplished under a project initiated in 1958. This project provided improved illumination in offices and other areas, exclusive of public areas. The work was done as a part of the extension of the Capitol program. Mr. ANDREWS. How much did that job cost in total? Mr. RUBEL. I will have to supply that. Mr. ANDREWS. Supply it for the record. (The information follows:) CONVERSION OF ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS IN THE CAPITOL FROM 25-CYCLE AND DIRECT CURRENT TO 60-CYCLE ALTERNATING CURRENT This work was done under authority of Public Law 415, 81st Congress, during the period 1961-63, at a total cost of $1,479,600. IMPROVED ILLUMINATION PROJECT This work was accomplished in the Capitol during the period 1959-66 as a part of the extension-of-the-Capitol program. The following detail is presented: The Commission for the Extension of the Capitol, acting under authority of the act authorizing the extension-of-the-Capitol project authorized and directed the Architect of the Capitol to replace the lighting fixtures and related wiring in the Capitol building as a part of the extension-of-the-Capitol program. At the direction of the Commission, the Architect of the Capitol engaged, by personal service contract, a lighting consultant to furnish the necessary professional services for the preparation of designs, final working drawings, and construction specifications for improving the illumination and rehabilitating the related wiring systems in the Capitol. These services were rendered and the work required to carry the approved plans into effect was performed under seven succes. sive cost-plus-a-fixed-fee contracts covering the procurement and installation of electrical materials, devices, and lighting fixtures; and also through direct purchases by the Government of chandeliers, lamps, and miscellaneous supplies, and through direct labor operations performed by masons, plasterers, painters, and interior decorators engaged on a temporary per diem basis by the Architect of the Capitol. All of this work, including the procurement and installation of electronically controlled clocks and legislative call signals throughout the Capitol building, was accomplished at a total cost of approximately $2,900,000. As indicated, the overall program was fractionized into seven successive stages or areas of work. Each stage included floor areas distributed equally between the House and Senate sides of the Capitol so as to provide a reasonable degree of progression throughout the building. This procedure was of necessity adopted by the Architect of the Capitol because physical operations generating noise, dirt, and a general disruption of the affected areas obviously could not be tolerated during congressional sessions. The situation was further complicated by circumstances such as unpredictable adjournment dates and the absolute need for complete functional readiness of rehabilitated areas prior to the opening of the succeeding session. Consequently, the majority of the spaces in which the physical operations were to be performed by the contractor and others could be made available for renovation only during successive congressional recesses, none of which was longer than 3 months. In 1963 when Congress did not adjourn until about December 15, all operations scheduled for performance in offices, committee rooms, and other functional areas had to be postponed until the following year. These unique circumstances prolonged the program of operations beyond all expectations, injected premium time work not originally contemplated in the budget and otherwise increased the overall cost beyond the budget estimate prepared in 1956 because of inflationary pressures imposed on the Nation's economy during the life of this program. Under this program, all but two offices on the House side and three offices on the Senate side were completed-or a total of 154 offices, hearing rooms and dining rooms out of an originally planned total of 159. In addition, many of the public areas, such as the Brumidi corridors on the first floor of the Senate wing, the Hall of Columns on the first floor of the House wing, the crypt directly under the rotunda, the connecting corridors on the first and second floors and the corridors on all floors in the central portion of the building were completed. Mr. ANDREWS. We did that in increments, didn't we? POSITIONS AND VACANCIES Mr. ANDREWS. I note that you ask for no additional personnel under this appropriation. Can you tell us how many vacancies you have? Mr. HENLOCK. A W-5 helper vacancy occurred on February 25, 1968, but I understand that job has since been filled; so that we have no vacancies, as of today. Mr. ANDREWS. And how many employees are employed under this chapter? Mr. HENLOCK. 184. Mr. ANDREWS. And only one vacancy? Mr. HENLOCK. We did have one vacancy when our justification was prepared, but, as indicated, that is now filled. |