NATIONAL GARDEN Ms. KAPTUR. I would be very interested in that for the record. And I just want to let the Architect know one of my good friends was just elected President of the State Garden Society, Lois Shuster of Champion, Pennsylvania at Seven Springs, and they really want to do what they can to help the National Garden, but I think they are not used to working with Washington. I am sure there are other groups out there who could help with planting, whether it is around the Capitol, and they are willing to raise private resources to do it. They raise it for projects all over the country. I would be pleased to provide you a name and a contact. Mr. HANTMAN. We certainly welcome that. As you are aware I am sure, some $14.5 million has been raised through a 501(c)(3) headed by Teresa Heinz and garden clubs are part of that. We welcome whatever help you can get perhaps endowing education programs. Ms. KAPTUR. They are looking for projects so they should have an influence on your thinking. Mr. TAYLOR. Thank you. I have some additional questions for you to respond to for the records. The hearing is now adjourned, on the fiscal year 2002 legislative branch appropriations, subject to the call of the Chair. [The following questions from Chairman Taylor and responses follow:] DESIGN BOOK STORAGE MODULE NUMBER 2, FORT MEADE Question. You have requested $420,000 to design the Second Book Storage Module at Fort Meade. Why do you need additional design funds? Are not the subsequent modules just duplicates of the first module? Response. Additional design funds are required for the following reasons. Design drawings are necessary in order for a contractor to construct the module. The Architect cannot simply request the bidders to "take this building and duplicate it”. The most significant difference is that the second book storage module is 3 bigger than the first (12,000 sf vs 8,000 sf). There are structural considerations for footings in a different location and grading may be somewhat different. The phase one office section does not apply to phase II and the utility connections will be different from that of the first. The HVAC, Electrical and Fire Protection systems may increase over that of the first structure due to the increased size of the module. The structural connection from the second module to the first needs to be detailed. Certainly, there are similarities in the modules, and it is expected that module three will be very close to module two, but it is also probable that the storage requirements themselves (what kind of objects, etc.) could change from module to module. Therefore, the designs will differ again. CAPITOL POLICE PROJECTS Question. Again you have funds in here to begin several Capitol Police Projects (off-site delivery center, training facility, vehicle maintenance). All told these projects are estimated to cost over $30 million. Has every project been designed? Response. No, the designs for the Capitol Police projects have not been completed. However, in the fiscal year 2002 budget there are requests for the land for the OffSite Delivery Center ($6,750,000); land and design for the Vehicle Maintenance Facility ($3,260,000); and design of the Training Facility ($725,000). The capital budget also indicates place holder amounts for construction of the three facilities but the formal requests will not be made until the land is procured and the designs are com POWER PLANT Question. You have submitted a budget amendment $3.3 million related to the Capitol Power Plant's chiller expansion project. Can you tell the committee why these funds are needed at this time? Tell us about the projects and its status. Response. Chilled water for cooling the Capitol complex is generated at two facilities at the Capitol Power Plant. The West Refrigeration Plant that was constructed in the 1970's and the East Refrigeration Plant that houses 1950 vintage equipment that provides approximately 25% of our current cooling capacity. The equipment in the East plant is inefficient, uses R-12 refrigerant which is a chlorofluorocarbon which was banned from production in 1995. The age of the equipment in the East Refrigeration Plant is such that replacement parts are no longer manufactured and consequently unreliable. In addition, current summer cooling needs for the Capitol complex exceeds the plants firm cooling capacity. The initial plan, for which this committee provided $6 million dollars for design and the first phase of construction, was to do an in kind replacement of the equipment in the East plant. During the design development process, it became evident that this was an unacceptable solution for the long term cooling requirements of the Capitol Complex. The East plant could not physical accept the size and type of equipment that would serve the Capitol Complex long-term needs or provide energy deferment opportunities, and additional capacity would be required in the future and necessitate a new chilled water plant. Additional complexities involved in replacing the East Refrigeration Plant equipment is that two large 100-year-old sewer lines run under the East plant that are of questionable integrity. This plan required that heavier machines be installed in the plant which would likely lead to rehabilitation of the sewer line and piles to be driven to support the new equipment loads. Additionally, the four 6,000-ton cooling units in the West plant are nearing the end of their normal life expectancy. In order to maintain cooling capacity during the replacement of the West plant equipment, space will be required to install new equipment and rotate the replacement of the old machines. As a result of these findings, a reprogramming request was made and approved in FY 2000 to use part of the available funding to design an expansion of the West Refrigeration Plant. The location of the extension of the West plant can only be accommodated to the south of the current building. This area is currently used for coal storage and coal handling equipment which must be relocated before any construction can begin on the extension. The initial concept called for temporary modifications to the coal handling equipment at the Plant and using the GSA Coal Yard located to the south of the Plant and across the freeway, which was turned over to the A.C. in 1987, for coal deliveries and storage. It was hoped that the old, 1900 vintage, coal unloading equipment at the Coal Yard could be repaired to use on a temporary basis. Upon completion, a permanent coal storage and handling system would be constructed. This plan would have required transporting coal from the Coal Yard to the Plant during the five years of construction at an estimated annual cost of $250,000. It was planned to request a reprogramming to use the balance of the existing funds ($2 million) to make the temporary repairs and modifications to the coal handling equipment. During the design development and the investigation of the Coal Yard equipment it became clear that the cost of repairing the equipment, making equipment modifications, trucking coal for five years and than constructing permanent coal storage and handling systems would be more expensive than constructing a permanent operation at the Coal Yard connected to the Plant by a tunnel under the freeway. This approach also eliminates the impact on the community of having large dump trucks hauling coal on a continual basis from the Coal Yard to the Plant during the five year construction period. An additional $300,000 is included in the amendment to secure a construction management firm for the West Refrigeration Plant (WRP) Expansion, as these funds would not be available until FY03. It is imperative a construction management firm be involved during the procurement phase of the WRP Expansion to help identify design oversights, value engineer the project and assist in the selection of contractor services. The above circumstances led us to amend our FY 2002 budget request for the Capitol Power Plant by $7,675,000. The total cost of the coal handling construction is estimated at $9,675,000 and the funds to start the construction management services of the WRP Expansion is $300,000. It is proposed to use the remaining $2,050,000 that is available to cover part of this cost. In addition, the $250,000 included in the FY 2002 for trucking coal will not be required. The $9,675,000 estimate is based on 50% Construction Documents. Without these funds, this project will not stay on schedule, and therefore will The WRP Expansion Design is currently 65% complete. Funding for the extension and first two 6,000 ton chillers will be included in the FY 2003 budget request and is currently estimated at $69.2 million. Additional chillers including the start of replacing the West plant chillers, all of which will be housed in the extension, are planned for fiscal years 2006 and 2016. FIRE SAFETY REPORT Question. Please briefly update the committee on the progress of Fire and Life Safety initiatives. Response. Safety is the Architect of the Capitol's highest priority. To reflect this priority, in FY 2001, the AOC reorganized the Executive Office for Facilities Management (EOFM), and appointed Susan P. Adams as director of this division. This move will allow increased attention and focus on fire safety, life safety and occupational health and safety programs. FIRE AND LIFE SAFETY PROGRESS The AOC fire and life safety goals are to comply with NFPA_and_BOCA Codes, provide fully sprinklered buildings, provide full coverage fire alarm systems, perform required maintenance & testing, and perform inspections to ensure compliance and identify and self correct deficiencies. Fire protection responsibilities within the AOC have been divided into two Divisions: the Fire Marshal Division (under the EOFM) to focus on fire safety, life safety, and emergency preparedness program policy, coordination, inspection, and oversight; and the Fire Protection Engineering Division (under the Director of Engineering, Scott Birkhead) to focus on fire protection system design, fire alarm system configuration, and fire protection project management. These two organizational structures separate policy, oversight, and inspection from design and implementation. This division provides a necessary check and balance system and allows concentration on project design and execution. Mr. Ken Lauziere, an internally recognized fire protection expert with more than 20 years of AOC experience, was selected as the permanent Fire Marshal Director. Interviews have been conducted for two fire protection engineers (selection pending) and a certificate of eligible candidates has just been received for one fire inspector within the Fire Marshal Division. Two positions remain to be filled. They are the positions of Administrative Assistant and Emergency Preparedness Coordinator. The position of Director, Fire Protection Engineering Division is currently being re-advertised after the first two selectees declined the position. A candidate for the position of Fire Protection technician has been selected, and the fire protection engineers positions are being recruited for the Fire Protection Engineering Division as well as within the larger jurisdictions. The AOC established an indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract with four Fire Protection Engineering Consulting firms-Gage-Babcock & Associates, Schirmer Engineering Corporation, Hughes Associates, Inc., and Rolf Jensen & Associates, Inc. for design and code analysis consultation services. In March 2001, a report entitled Fire Safety Improvements Time Line for the House Office Buildings was completed and submitted to the Committee on House Administration. The report delineates the completed and planned multi-year effort to bring the buildings in the Capitol complex into full compliance with modern safety codes. Summarizing the contents: . . In the Capitol, the existing fire alarm systems are certified, installation in unalarmed areas will continue until FY 2007 (note: schedule may be accelerated based on space accessibility). A task order for sprinkler system design has been issued with completion scheduled for Oct 2002 with construction to begin in FY 2005. Egress schematic designs are to be completed in FY 2002 as part of the US Capitol Master Plan. In the Cannon, Longworth, and Ford House Office Buildings, fire alarm systems are operational in a majority of building areas, with a study underway to identify unalarmed areas. Testing of existing alarms was completed and new installations are being tested as they are installed. Sprinkler system construction in most areas is complete with the remaining unsprinklered areas in design. Egress evaluations are complete, schematic designs will be completed in FY 2001 with design completion expected in FY 2002 and construction to begin in FY 2004. In the Rayburn Building, the fire alarm system is complete. Sprinkler system designs for unsprinklered areas are complete and installation schematic designs will be completed in FY 2001 with design completion expected in FY 2002 and construction to begin in FY 2004. In the O'Neill Building, the fire alarm and sprinkler system installations are complete. Egress evaluations and interim designs are completed, construction will be completed in July 2001. Across the Capitol Complex: ADA fire alarm system upgrades designs have been completed except in the Capitol building. Lighted exit signs have been installed in public areas of all buildings. Fire pull stations and alarm speakers are operational. A complex-wide Central Fire Protection Monitoring System is in design. Regularly, the District of Columbia Fire & Emergency Management Services Department conducts pre-planning tours of the Capitol complex facilities to help them prepare in case of emergency. The FY 2000 Emergency Fire Supplemental authorized 58 specific projects in the total amount of $17,480,000. The AOC obligation plan ($ have been rounded) is: FY01: $8.5M; FY02: $5.2M; FY03: $1.2M; FY04: $0.8M; FY05: $1.5M; & beyond. As of June 22, 2001 the AOC has obligated 55% of the FY 2001 plan funding and expects to obligate the entire amount by the end of the FY 2005. The table below shows the status of obligations of funds against the FY 2000 Emergency Fire Supplemental by appropriation. The Congressional Accountability Act of 1996 requires the AOC to comply with Occupational Safety and Health Act regulations. There is much work to do to comply with OSHA and reduce our unacceptably high injury/illness rate. In the past year: A safety policy statement was approved and distributed to employees. The Architect issued memos outlining supervisory and employee responsibilities for safety. Working with the Public Health Service, the first 3 of 41 safety program policies were approved and distributed: Hazard Communication, Confined Space, and PPE. Three more program policies are under development and scheduled for final approval in FY 2001: Bloodborne Pathogens, Fall Protection, and Respiratory Protection. Four programs scheduled for FY 2002 are drafted and are in the initial review process: Lead, Asbestos, Electrical Safety, and Lock out/Tag out. Policies for the Safety, Health, and Environmental Council and Jurisdictional Occupational Safety & Health Committees were approved. Safety Committees were established in all jurisdictions and are meeting monthly to discuss safety matters and review injury/illness reports. The Architect established a goal to reduce total injury/illness rate by 10% per year for the next 5 years from the FY 2000 baseline of 17.9 per 100 employees. A high level 5 year Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) Plan was developed to meet the injury reduction goal and established as priorities: Hiring required staff (central and jurisdictional-underway), Development of job hazards analysis process and policy (underway) and performance of job hazards analysis for all work (to be completed FY 2002), so that hazards can be identified, eliminated or controlled, Improvement of the injury/illness investigation process (underway) to include root cause analysis and implementation of corrective actions across the Agency to prevent recurrence, Development and inspection and audit process such that we critically evalu Development, approval, and implementation of 41 safety programs (implementation will be completed in FY 2005). The Architect has initiated periodic shop walk arounds, visiting work sites, emphasizing PPE usage and discussing safety concerns with employees. The Architect recently met with the General Counsel for the Office of Compliance to discuss the fire and occupational safety program and review the 5 year OHS plan. The Architect of the Capitol recognizes that progress has been made but there is much left yet to do. Agency management remains committed to applying the necessary resources and talent to achieve our goals of modern fire code compliant buildings and improving the safety and well being of our employees. SECURITY BOLLARDS Question. What is the status of the construction of Security Bollards throughout the Capitol Hill Complex? Response. The following information is provided on Security Bollard and Perimeter Installations: Capitol Square: Initial installation commenced Mid June, completion estimated 3/03 Sequence of installations: 1. Vehicle barrier at end of NW Drive 4. Vehicle barrier at end of SE Drive 5. South USCG entrance from Independence Ave 6. Bollards along SE & NE Drives 7. Bollards along NW & SW Drives Item numbers 1 through 4 should be completed in August, 2001. These are stand alone barriers to relieve the U.S. Capitol Police of manual raising & lowering of difficult or defective barriers. Adjustments to the sequence for item numbers 6 & 7 may be required based on coordination with the Capitol Visitors Center project. Senate Perimeter: Project has 4 phases. The work was initiated February, 2001; completion is scheduled in early Spring, 2002 Sequence of installations: 1. Intersection of C Street and New Jersey Ave. NW 2. Delaware Ave & D Street NW 3. Delaware Ave & Constitution Ave, 2nd & C Streets NE 4. Delaware Ave & C Street, 1st Ave & C Street East & West Phase 1 has been substantially completed; Phase 2 is in progress. Project design is completed Approval for the project has not been received. The appointment of Members to the Joint Committee on the Library have not been finalized, therefore unable to approve project Original completion projections and budget estimates could require adjustment, based on actual date of project initiation REPROGRAMMINGS Question. For the record, insert all reprogramming actions or their documents that required committee approval. |