Mr. Bow. I am the minority member of the House Committee on Recording Facilities, of which our colleague, Mr. Gary of Virginia, is chairman. The other member is Congressman O'Brien, of New York. The committee held a meeting at the time referred to here and Mr. Roberts, Mr. Campbell, and Mr. Perry came before the committee and gave us their workload charts and the information relating to the recording facilities. The committee came to the conclusion that the position was necessary and was proper to establish. The workload has gone up. The facilities are being used much more than in past years. And may I say, Mr. Chairman, at this point, that investigation, by the General Accounting Office and the House Committee on the Recording Studios, found the operation to be very satisfactory and economically carried out. This position is needed, Mr. Chairman, and I would like to have the record show that the committee feels that the operation is very satisfactory at this time and is being properly operated. Mr. NORRELL. All right; we will accept that statement. ADDITIONAL STOCK CLERK Now, I would like to ask a further question: I note from page 9 of the committee print that since last June you have added a second stock clerk. Please tell us about the need for doing that. Mr. ROBERTS. The way I remember it, Mr. Chairman, is that we have always had a stock clerk over there but he has had other duties. In addition to keeping the stock for the whole operation of the studio, he also ran the projecting machine and helped in the laboratories. Mr. NORRELL. Well, you really do not think you need an additional stock clerk, then? Mr. ROBERTS. Not a stock clerk but an additional technician. Mr. NORRELL. I note, however, you have him on the rolls. Let us keep the record straight. You have him on the rolls now, according to the printed bill. Mr. ROBERTS. We will insert a statement on this item in the record, Mr. Chairman. (The statement referred to follows:) HOUSE RECORDING STUDIOS, Subject: Stock clerk. Hon. RALPH R. ROBERTS, Clerk, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. ROBERTS: The error indicating two stock clerks instead of one in this operation occurred as follows: 1. Mr. James Kesterson resigned as laboratory technician in August 1959, creating a vacancy. 2. Mr. Frederick Pettis, the then stock clerk of this organization, was transferred from that position to the vacancy of laboratory technician, created by the resignation of Mr. Kesterson. The first resultant payroll from the disbursing office retained him (January 1960) under the old title of stock clerk, in error. 3. Mr. Ray Young, a new employee, was appointed to the vacancy of stock clerk, created by the transfer of Mr. Pettis, this appointment made on February 1. 1960. The payroll issued by the disbursing office, indicated two stock clerks during February 1960, in error, Mr. Young being the only stock clerk and Mr. Fred Pettis should have been correctly listed as laboratory technician-processor. As to the two laboratory technician-processors (Mr. Fred Pettis and Mr. Paul Baisch) carried on our payroll, Mr. Baisch was appointed under a temporary appointment and under the authority given by the Recording Committee to appoint an additional laboratory technician-processor pending approval of appropriation by the Appropriations Committee for fiscal year 1961. Mr. Baisch is appointed with the understanding that, if this is not approved as a permanent job, his appointment will terminate on June 30. Respectfully submitted. REVOLVING FUND CHAS. E. CAMPBELL. Mr. NORRELL. What is the status of the studio revolving fund? Mr. ROBERTS. Well, Mr. Chairman, I have a report here from the General Accounting Office which went into that very much in detail and I would be glad to insert all of that report or part of it into the record or let you look at it all and decide which portion should go in. Mr. NORRELL. Should we put all of that report in the record, gentle inen? Mr. Bow. No, sir, I would not put it all in the record, Mr. Chairman. Mr. NORRELL. Let the clerk have that for the committee. Mr. ROBERTS. There are two or three paragraphs which would answer your question I believe, sir. Mr. NORRELL. Very well. Now, we will go on to the balance of the statement, Mr. Roberts. ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT Mr. ROBERTS. In the electrical and mechanical department, funds are included for one additional employee for a person to serve as a repair technician. At the present time, the House of Representatives owns approximately 2,000 electric typewriters and the number is steadily increasing. An actual breakdown as to the number of typewriters on hand is as follows: The House of Representatives operates only a limited and minor repair activity conducted mostly by personnel formerly used on mannal machines. One technician is retained, but he is mostly engaged in the repair of automatic typewriters (Robotyper and Autotypist), Thermofax machines, and Elliott Addresser machines. He does little or no maintenance or repair work on other types of electrical equip ment. A review of the costs of maintenance has steadily risen over the period of the past 2 years as indicated by the tables listing repair charges by the various companies for the period January 1958 through December 31, 1959, as follows: The most recent bill shows a substantial decline, but it is still a substantial sum. A detailed examination of the repair and maintenance problem indicates that there are several approaches to its solution, the principal ones of which are as follows: 1. Set up and operate our own maintenance and repair facility, relying upon the various typewriter companies for the supply of parts and for major overhauls or complicated repairs. 2. Place all of the electrical typewriters under an annual service contract and leave the entire maintenance and repair the responsibility of the respective typewriter companies. 3. Use a combination of the above and place a selected group of machines under contract and set up a limited maintenance and repair facility to be operated by our own personnel. RECOMMENDED MAINTENANCE PROGRAM I have given very careful study and thought to each of the methods mentioned above, and have concluded that we should gradually enter into service contracts with the various electrical equipment companies to service the machines. It is believed that in the long run economy and efficiency will best be served by a planned maintenance program which the companies offer with their contracts. The obvious and outstanding good features of a contract are: Every electric typewriter serviced at the House will be given a thorough functional machine check in order to correct conditions which would shorten the life of the typewriter. This assures us that all parts are working properly and that the typewriter is adjusted for its specific application. On every maintenance inspection, the covers are cleaned in order to maintain the attractive appearance of the machine. The internal portions of the machine are also cleaned thoroughly during each inspection. All parts, including motors and power rolls, are covered by the maintenance agreement. The platen is not covered. Customer engineers are trained to anticipate possible malfunctions that would reduce the efficiency of our typewriters. Such things as type bars and functional operating parts would be carefully checked for wear and replaced before they cause machine failure. Service rendered between inspections is done at no extra charge. Rather than a general inspection of our electric typewriters, planned preventative maintenance emphasis would be placed on each of our machines throughout the year. This includes: Thorough cleaning of the integral parts with a special power cleaning tool. Special oils and lubricants are used to reduce wear. Planned parts replacement as mentioned above. Each mechanism is carefully checked to insure proper machine adjustments. A maintenance plan at the House of Representatives will protect our substantial capital investment. The majority of typists at the House are women, who normally are not mechanically inclined, and yet they are responsible for the care of their precision-made typewriter. The maintenance agreement places the responsibility with a highly skilled technician. The electric typewriters at the House are subject to more usage, abuse, and dirt than almost any other type of office machine, and, therefore, should be considered first for maintenance service. The maintenance agreement is consistent with sound business practices because it permits exact budgeting of expenses. Preschool, factory, and postschool training would provide us with skilled men who service only electric typewriters. Service contracts would virtually eliminate all confusion in the repair and maintenance field. No voluminous reports would be required, the Electrical and Mechanical Department would be limited to the purchase and accounting for machines. The daily load of calls would be virtually eliminated. They would have time to keep all of their records current. When a Member needs service for a machine he would call direct and all of his requests for maintenance and repairs would be to the company which sold the machine. From my study, the service contract is the best method. While Public Law 10, approved March 25, 1953, 83d Congress, authorizes the Clerk to maintain the electrical equipment, I want to bring this matter to your particular attention because of the substantial sum of money involved in the proper maintenance program. REPAIR TECHNICIAN I believe that by the establishment of the new position as set forth in the budget, coupled with an orderly company service contract program, the House will receive proper maintenance on the substantial amount of electrical equipment which it now owns. The repair technician will be able not only to do limited repairs to electric typewriters, but will also serve as a check against work performed by the various outside companies. It would also be a big help to the Clerk in determining when a machine should be turned in as a trade-in. Mr. NORRELL. As I understand it, this repair technician will be able not only to do limited repairs to the electric typewriters, but will also serve as a check against work performed by the various outside companies. Now, the question is this: As to the repair technician, at $7,062 per annum, is the position authorized by law and has the House Administration Committee looked into the situation as far as the job is concerned? Mr. ROBERTS. No committee has looked into it because I am just bringing it to the attention of you gentlemen at this time. It is authorized by law because we intend that it may well come out of the furniture and repair of the property custodian's office, which would be added on to the Mr. NORRELL. It is authorized by law, is that right? Mr. ROBERTS. I would say so. Mr. NORRELL. But it has not been looked into and approved by the House Administration Committee so far as you know? Mr. ROBERTS. That is right, sir. |