STATEMENT OF

GARY L. ABRECHT

CHIEF, UNITED STATES CAPITOL POLICE

BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS

U.S.HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FOR THE U.S. CAPITOL POLICE FY 1996 BUDGET REQUEST

February 15, 1995

Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, I am honored to once again appear before you to discuss the Fiscal Year 1996 Budget Request for the United States Capitol Police.

In preparing the FY '96 budget, we were mindful of our responsibility to the American public and the Congress to remain fiscally conservative while at the same time ensuring we can successfully meet our law enforcement and protective mission. In order to strike this balance, we continually review our staffing requirements to determine if further savings can be achieved without adversely affecting the level of security required to allow the Congress to freely perform its legislative function.

The nature of our duties is labor intensive and requires staffing of numerous police assignments. To provide the current level of police services to the Congressional community and the visiting public, I believe it is essential for the U.S. Capitol Police to maintain its present staffing level of 1281 FTE's. It should be noted that our current staffing level has been reduced from our FY '92 authorized level of 1352 positions.

In the Personnel Expenses Account, the only increase we are requesting is to provide for the projected cost of the FY '96 COLA's and Comparability Pay. This funding will enable the U.S. Capitol Police to continue our goal of maintaining salary parity with other area federal law enforcement agencies.

In the General Expense Account, the only increase we are requesting provides funding for the cost of the biennial promotional process scheduled for FY '96. The requested amount in the General Expense account reflects the maximum increase

permissible under Public Law 103-699, Section 308. Since the entire increase is necessary to fund the biennial promotional process, all other cost increases that have accrued due to inflation and product cost changes must be absorbed within the remaining funds in the account.

With regard to our law enforcement efforts, I am pleased to report that there was a significant decline in criminal activity within the Capitol Complex during FY '94. Within our primary jurisdiction of the Capitol Complex, Crimes Against Persons declined by 10.3% and Property Crimes reflect a 27.6% decrease for a total of 351 criminal offenses. At the same time within the area that comprises the Extended Jurisdiction Zone, 642 crimes against persons and 2,674 property crimes were reported. I feel that this level of criminal activity has not spread into the Capitol Grounds due to our continued ability to undertake active uniformed patrol measures which deter criminals and provide for the safety of the citizenry.

A total of 138 weapons and contraband were recovered by U.S. Capitol Police officers in the performance of their duties in FY '94. Officers recovered a total of fifteen guns, five of which were discovered during administrative inspections of individuals attempting to enter the Capitol or Congressional office buildings.

The Department was also challenged by a significant increase in the number of security-impact events in FY '94 such as demonstrations and official visits. A total of 400 demonstration activities were conducted on Capitol Grounds, 20 of which had over 1,000 participants. Some of these demonstrations resulted in mass arrests for acts of civil disobedience. Police services were also provided for 40 official state visits within the Capitol complex, most of which involved protected individuals.

I am proud of the dedicated performance of duty of our officers and employees to meet the law enforcement and protective requirements of the United States Congress and the visiting public. Recent incidents attest to the fact that there is a constant underlying threat to the security of American facilities and institutions. It is the continued goal of the United States Capitol Police to remain vigilant in our efforts to effectively meet the challenges of our mission.

I have previously submitted a budget overview, schedules of estimates, and budget justification. I would be pleased to answer any questions you may have.

Mr. PACKARD. Thank you very much.

That concludes the statements of each member of the board and the Chief. We will open it up for questions. Perhaps I will start.

ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

If you were to start with a zero base for the Capitol Police, as though the force didn't exist, and then you rebuilt the agency based upon current priorities rather than past experience and past history, how would you build that organization? Probably all three of you and the Chief can respond, if you would like.

How would you rebuild that agency, and would it be significantly different, including the board as well as the operation of the police? Chief ABRECHT. I guess from an organizational standpoint, things like the antiquated split House-Senate payroll would be something I would get rid off. It should be a unified personnel sys

tem.

Mr. PACKARD. You think that could be done?

Chief ABRECHT. I think absolutely it could be done. It is a matter of the will of the Congress to do it. It certainly could be accomplished, and we would be like any other police force.

Mr. PACKARD. Do you sense resistance from the Senate side?

Mr. GREENE. No, I don't. I spoke to Senator Mack's people this morning. They said they would consider it. It would have to run through the Rules Committee and the Appropriations Committee, but Senator Mack is receptive and I think we can make some progress in that area.

Mr. PACKARD. Thank you.

Anyone else want to comment on that point at all?

Mr. LIVINGOOD. It is one of the priorities of the Police Board. Howard and I have both been talking about it, with the Chief, and we will explore all avenues.

Mr. PACKARD. We have had discussions also with the CAO and committee Members and other committees of the House. It certainly is an area that we are anxious to pursue if it is the right direction to go.

Mr. MILLER. Explain to me how that works. There is a separate payroll for the Senate side correct? Who covers the Rotunda?

Chief ABRECHT. It doesn't quite work that way. Approximately half of my employees are on the House payroll and half are on the Senate payroll. However, their assignments are completely without regard to their payroll. It is purely how they are paid. People working in the Senate may be on the House payroll and vice versa.

Mr. PACKARD. What about the National Finance Center? This Committee has asked that you see if the NFC isn't is a reasonable way for the Capitol Police to process its payroll. Do you feel that that is a possibility?

Chief ABRECHT. Absolutely. We have done quite a bit of work towards that end. We took a group of congressional employees down to New Orleans to speak about that, then there was a little glitch where all of a sudden the National Finance Center decided they were not taking any new customers. They have since reversed their position on that recently, and we recently sent them a letter expressing our strong interest in re-opening that discussion.

[A question from Chairman Packard and response follow:]

Mr. PACKARD. For the record, we would like to have you explain your total program from the zero base. Describe the statutory underpinning of the Capitol Police, your responsibilities and your jurisdiction. And then relate those duties with your budget and manpower levels.

Response. The United States Capitol Police was created by Congress in 1828 under the provisions of 4 Stat. 265 and 266 to police the United States Capitol Buildings and Grounds. Our authority is defined in 40 U.S. Code 212a and 9 D.C. Code 115.

Our primary jurisdiction are those areas within the District of Columbia controlled by the United States Congess as delineated by Public Law 96-432 passed October 10, 1980. Within these areas, the U.S. Capitol Police has the responsibility of providing comprehensive law enforcement, protective, and security services. In addition, under 40 U.S. Code 212a-2, the United States Capitol Police is authorized to provide personal protection to Members of Congress, Officers of Congress, or their family members anywhere in the United States at the direction of the U.S. Capitol Police Board.

The duties performed by the Capitol Police include screening visitors who enter the Capitol and the Congressional Office Buildings, enforcing traffic regulations, safeguarding the property of the United States, detering and interdicting criminal activity on the streets and within the buildings, investigating crimes, screening deliveries to the buildings, investigating threats against Members of Congress, protecting visiting national and foreign leaders, conducting sweeps for explosives and responding to and rendering safe suspected explosive devices, patrolling the areas under our jurisdiction, responding to emergencies and demonstration activities, and providing guidance and assistance to constitutents visting the Nation's Capitol. All this must be accomplished in order to meet our primary mission of creating a safe and secure environment for the Congress to perform its legislative function.

The multiplicity and importance of our duties, coupled with the open environment of the Capitol complex, makes our mission labor intensive. Therefore, the bulk of our budget, 97%, is driven by the number of people required to support our mission. The vast majority of our personnel, 967, are located within the Uniformed Services Bureau to provide the_primary_law enforcement and security operations for Congress. The Protective Services Bureau, which conducts all investigations and performs protective operations, has 139 personnel. The remaining 124 personnel perform support functions such as Internal Affairs investigations, Recruiting, Training, Personnel, Procurement, Property Management, Data Processing, Financial Management, and other related duties.

ZERO-BASED BUDGET

Mr. PACKARD. Following up with the zero-based concept and rebuilding your agency from scratch, would you have about the same size of force? How would you interplay with the Metropolitan Police force. Hasn't the geographical physical area, the service area now assigned to the Capitol Police expanded from what it was a few years back? What would be your response on some of those areas of rebuilding an agency? I have a general question I would like you to answer for the record, but speak now, if you would, to this specific question.

Mr. PACKARD. For the record, give us an organizational and resource plan that you would create if we were starting from scratch.

Response. The organization and resource requirements of the U.S. Capitol Police have evolved over the years in response to the increased security needs of Congress, which are based upon threat assessments. Therefore, if we were starting from scratch with the same physical environment and employing the same technology, the basic organization of the Department and our resource requirements would remain the same. Due to the open environment within the Capitol complex and the number of pedestrian and vehicular entrances to the buildings, our resources are driven by the physical environment.

However, if substantial infusions of capital were designated for retrofitting the buildings to better accommodate modern security measures (i.e. access control points, security screening) then I would envision a shifting of our resources from personnel to the expanded use of technological assets in order to meet our mission.

Chief ABRECHT. In terms of the size of the force, one would assume if one were designing a Capitol Police force, one would be also designing a Capitol complex. That is really the key that triggers the size of the force. So the first thing I would do is hope that whatever buildings would be built would be built with security in mind, that there would be fewer access points to the building.

As you know, what makes this job incredibly labor intensive is the number of entrance points to the buildings and the fact that there is no control of access to the buildings. Likewise, the garages represent terrible problems for us.

We would hope the buildings would be designed with security in mind. At the time these buildings were built, they were designed with complete access and ventilation and things like that in mind. Now most architecture is designed in a way to control access points. That would clearly be one thing that would make it possible to tremendously reduce the size of the force, to have many fewer access points.

There should certainly be a central entrance point for visitors. Physical barriers, more alarm systems, and other things that would make the job less labor intensive. The use of card readers and other access control devices would make it possible to have a more efficient operation.

Mr. PACKARD. Can there be some retrofitting of the existing entrances that would be electronically controlled or magnetically controlled to remove some of the labor-intensive requirements?

Chief ABRECHT. The security survey that Mr. Livingood mentioned will be one of the things we can do to look at the possibilities of using more technological devices to possibly reduce the manpower constraints under which we operate.

JURISDICTION

In terms of the jurisdictional issue with the Metropolitan Police Department, I would, if I were starting a new force here, give the force city-wide arrest jurisdiction. We do travel quite a bit outside of the area of the Capitol, and our officers are always exposed to being without arrest authority when they are away from the Capitol complex.

The Architect has a facility at Blue Plains, in a difficult part of the District of Columbia, to say the least, and we do protection for Members away from the Capitol, and our officers have no jurisdiction there, so that is a concern.

However, I would not seek, as we have not in our current situation, to become the primary jurisdiction, to assume any major jurisdictional role in either the extended jurisdiction we have now or in the city as a whole.

Mr. PACKARD. Would you recommend a shrinkage of the service area?

Chief ABRECHT. No, I would not. As I say, our service area, our primary jurisdiction is the Capitol complex. If you look at this map showing crimes against persons for the fiscal year, the red line is our primary jurisdiction area. That is the Capitol, the grounds under the jurisdiction of the Architect of the Capitol. We are the primary law enforcement agency within that jurisdiction. We investigate all crimes that occur there.