was just a matter of trying to, frankly, get rid of the things that we had in many instances. We have had some of the people write back. and say, "For goodness sake, please stop it." Mr. LANGEN. Was there any coordination between what you were doing and the regular system as conducted by the Library of Congress for the movement of documents through the depository libraries? Mr. JENNINGS. No, sir; other than the fact that we notified the Library of Congress. They sent two people from their staff over to discuss it with us. They went over and looked through all the records themselves. There was no coordination saying: "Do you have this volume? Are you going to distribute it?" I didn't have the personnel to do that. You realize that the personnel I used in this were some that might have been surplus in other departments for the most part. Mr. LANGEN. I beileve that you stated you were going to wind this up with the 90th Congress? Mr. JENNINGS. When I went before the House Administration Committee after discovering this situation and asked for these people and asked for the authorization to set up the Records Classification and Disposition Center, I didn't ask for it to continue beyond the 90th Congress. I have not asked for an appropriation based past the 90th Congress for it. Mr. LANGEN. Supposedly the job will be completed at the end of that time? Mr. JENNINGS. I hope that it can. Mr. LANGEN. With the job completed I am sure that this will serve a good purpose in getting out of the way a lot of stuff that was serving no benefit. Mr. JENNINGS. We feel it has. We know what we have now. Mr. LANGEN. Now that you know what you have, it is cataloged and put in order on shelves, and so on. What purpose will it serve from here on? Mr. JENNINGS. What purpose? Mr. LANGEN. These documents that are left now put on shelves, are they for loan? Mr. JENNINGS. Yes, sir; they are for loan. Under the statute we are required to keep two copies. They will serve as references. Somewhat as history. Mr. LANGEN. Serve as a preservation for a record of what went on? Mr. JENNINGS. Yes, sir. Mr. LANGEN. That is their sole purpose? DUPLICATION OF EFFORT, DOCUMENT STORAGE Mr. JENNINGS. Yes, sir. This is where we have some overlapping between my document room, between the library, and between the document room that is under the doorkeeper. I don't know this but I am satisfied that there are some of the records that we are keeping because we are required to keep two copies. There are also some of the records that he is keeping also. Mr. LANGEN. Someone else is keeping? Mr. JENNINGS. Yes, sir. The Library of Congress is keeping, too. I am satisfied that we have some records in our document room that are duplicated in the Library, that are duplicated in the Doorkeeper's document room, that are duplicated over in the Library of Congress. Until such time as there is some common denominator that can look over all these things we are required to keep, and I am sure they are required by statute also to do these things Mr. LANGEN. You mean the Archives could do that? Mr. JENNINGS. In the Archives, they are not available. These things are not available in the Archives, only under the direction of the House of Representatives. That has been vested in the Clerk. It is only with his authorization that anyone can go into the Archives and actually look at these. In most cases they are the originals. These others that we have oftentimes are copies. Mr. LANGEN. That is all, Mr. Chairman. Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Reifel? Mr. REIFEL. No questions. Mr. ANDREWs. Mr. Andrews? Mr. ANDREWS of North Dakota. No questions. Mr. ANDREWS. The next item is on page 18 of the statement. OFFICE OF THE CLERK Mr. JENNINGS. For the Office of the Clerk, $2,009,945, compared with $1.872,000 appropriated for 1968, or an increase of $137,945. We are requesting this increase to carry out the provisions of the House Employees Position Classification Act, which allowed for the creation of new positions, longevity increases, and pay raises for the House wage schedule employees. We are also providing funds to carry out the provisions of the Pay Act of 1967. Mr. ANDREWS. How much of the increase under this appropriation is related to the Pay Act annualization? Mr. JENNINGS. As I say, Mr. Chairman, we are only asking here for that portion which will carry us up to the July 1 date and we don't know what is going to be authorized after that time. NEW POSITIONS Mr. ANDREWS. Are you asking for new positions? Mr. JENNINGS. No, sir. There is no new position asked for at all in this bill. There are some appropriations for the positions that have already been authorized by resolution and by the House Administration Committee. As a matter of fact, Mr. Chairman, if you will look on page 12, in 1967, the total was 258 employees and we are asking for 243 employees at this time. We have abolished a total of nine positions. At this time we have a vacancy list of 14 positions. As I pointed out, the entire Record Classification will be abolished at the end of the 90th Congress. NEW POSITIONS NOT INCLUDED IN 1968 BUDGET Mr. ANDREWS. What does this mean on the bottom of page 18 of your statement, "New positions not included in 1968 budget"? Mr. JENNINGS. These are positions authorized by the House Administration Committee or have been added since the last budget. These are positions that are annualized, so to speak. Mr. ANDREWS. Are these new positions reflected in the total number on page 12 of the committee print, which is 243? Mr. JENNINGS. Yes, sir. TOTAL NUMBER OF POSITIONS Mr. ANDREWS. According to your office, in 1967 you had 258 employees as of June 30, 1967? Mr. JENNINGS. That is correct. Mr. ANDREWS. The number projected for 1969 is 243? Mr. JENNINGS. Yes, sir. Mr. ANDREWS. That is a reduction of 15 from 1967? Mr. JENNINGS. Yes, sir. Mr. ANDREWS. You have authorized for 1968, 243? Mr. JENNINGS. Yes, sir. Mr. ANDREWS. How many vacancies? Mr. JENNINGS. At this time we have 14 vacancies. Mr. ANDREWS. You actually have on the payroll as of some recent date, 229 people? Mr. JENNINGS. Yes, sir. Mr. ANDREWS. Are these positions shown on page 18 of your statement not listed as such in your 1968 budget? Mr. JENNINGS. No, sir. They were not. Mr. ANDREWS. They were temporarily a part of the 243? Mr. JENNINGS. That is correct. Mr. ANDREWS. Will they be permanently a part of the 243 that you are asking for in 1969? Mr. JENNINGS. That is correct. Mr. ANDREWS. From where are they being financed now? Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Jennings, you earlier said that the appropriation increase requested under this heading is $137,945? Mr. JENNINGS. That is correct. Mr. ANDREWS. Some portion of that would represent annualization of the Pay Act increase which has been in effect or will be in effect for 9 months of the current fiscal year. I don't know what portion of it it will be, but some portion of the $137,000. Mr. JENNINGS. That is right. Mr. ANDREWS. What I am not clear on is how can you, with an increase of only $137,000, which includes annualization, squeeze in new positions of $157,000? Mr. JENNINGS. Because we had other jobs abolished. Mr. ANDREWS. During the current fiscal year? Mr. JENNINGS. Yes, sir. We have abolished a total of $67,463 for jobs. Mr. ANDREWS. How many jobs does that involve? Mr. JENNINGS. Eight. Mr. ANDREWS. Those were appropriated in the 1968 appropriation? Mr. JENNINGS. That is correct. Mr. ANDREWS. How long have these jobs, shown on the bottom of page 18 as new positions, been on the payroll? Did they go back as far as 1967? Mr. JENNINGS. No. They did not go back to 1967. Mr. ANDREWS. They were on the payroll in 1968 ? Mr. JENNINGS. Sometime in 1968 but not the whole time. They represent different times that they came on. By the same token, those that went off represented different times. Mr. ANDREWS. Again, you have an authorized strength for 1968 of 243, and 229 of those are on the payroll? Mr. JENNINGS. That is correct. As of a recent date. That was as of March 31. UNEXPENDED BALANCES Mr. ANDREWS. On page 19, you show that in fiscal year 1967 you had about $207,000 unexpended under this appropriation. Mr. JENNINGS. Yes, sir. Mr. ANDREWS. As of the 1st of March of this year you show $692.000 unexpended. What is the outlook for this coming June 30? I assume that the appropriation figure you show for the current year, $1,872,000, was to include the pending Pay Act; is that correct? Mr. JENNINGS. That is correct. Mr. ANDREWs. How much is in there? Mr. JENNINGS. Mr. Chairman, we have asked for $63,180 in the pending supplemental. We have paid from the contingency fund a total of $73,641. Mr. ANDREWS. How much for the Pay Act? Mr. JENNINGS. $63,180. Mr. ANDREWS. What is the outlook for this coming June 30? Mr. JENNINGS. The outlook is going to depend, Mr. Chairman, on the request that we have for the supplemental. Mr. ANDREWS. Any money unexpended under this title will revert to the Treasury? Mr. JENNINGS. Yes, sir. If we get the supplemental, a projected balance of June 30, 1968, would be $156,927.40. Mr. ANDREWs. You might have that on June 30? Mr. JENNINGS. Yes, sir. Mr. ANDREWS. Why did you have the substantial unexpended balance last year? Mr. JENNINGS. That was for jobs that were not filled and just general savings that we were able to make. Had we filled all the jobs that were authorized and asked for, we would have utilized the majority of that amount. Mr. ANDREWS. It shows you are not trying to fill jobs because you have money available? Mr. JENNINGS. No, sir. We are surely not. Mr. ANDREWS. Congratulations. Mr. JENNINGS. Thank you. It is pretty hard to do. Mr. ANDREWS. Are there any questions about the Clerk's Office? ELECTRICAL OFFICE EQUIPMENT SERVICE, POSITION SAVINGS Mr. LANGEN. Mr. Chairman, just a few. In going through the documentation of the various assignments on pages 10 and 11, and using one category as an example on page 11, electrical office equipment service, if I read that correctly, there is eliminated for 1968 and 1969 one office equipment repairman, one serviceman, and one messenger-serviceman? Mr. JENNINGS. That is correct. Mr. LANGEN. Then there is added a messenger-serviceman at a little increased salary? Mr. JENNINGS. Yes, sir. That is $6,985. Mr. LANGEN. Actually what you are doing there is eliminating three to be replaced by one at a little higher salary, is that correct? Mr. JENNINGS. Yes, sir. That is probably a proper analysis. It could be also that it is the same man that might have been upgraded or given another assignment, plus the fact that it could represent the pay increase. In other words, had these other messengers that we eliminated stayed on, they would not have stayed on at the same amount. You are correct in your assumption, that we are relieving three and we are picking up one. Mr. LANGEN. It might be the same person? Mr. JENNINGS. It could be the same person or a person from some other department with more longevity and comes in under a different classification. Mr. LANGEN. The same reasoning would follow through on each of the other instances where we see someone that was on the payroll in 1967 but is not on there in 1968 or 1969, that position has been vacated for reasons of reorganization or efficiency? Mr. JENNINGS. Right. Mr. LANGEN. Then probably someone was added where the workload was heavier or where there was need for them? Mr. JENNINGS. That is correct. Generally speaking, you will find that the new people that come aboard will come aboard at a lower salary than those that are released. Actually, what is happening here, some of these people are being transferred to the Records Classification and Distribution Center. They will work for the rest of the 90th Congress |