but the bottom line has been that important services are now lacking and there are too few staff to strategically plan for the rapidly increasing demands of its resources in an increasingly digital world. Giving the Library of Congress and its Law Library the support it now needs to, for example, restore depleted reference services, expedite legal analysis and report preparation, and strengthen the Law Library's presence on the Internet would be a significant and timely gift to our nation. As we celebrate the valiant restoration and reopening of the Thomas Jefferson Building and approach the Library's Bicentennial in 2000, we are reminded that the Library of Congress is a tremendous source of pride for the nation and a true symbol of its founding ideals. At a time when nations all over the world are questioning their leaders, their systems of justice, and their very foundations, it is imperative that we support the primary institution that preserves the knowledge and ideas that sustain us as a community and a nation. Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, the American Bar Association appreciates your courtesy in allowing me to submit this testimony. We hope that you will look most favorably upon the budget request of the Library of Congress and its Law Library. The information concerns of the next century demand it. ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS Senator BENNETT. OK. Well, we may have some other questions that we would submit to you in writing, but we thank you for your presentation here today. We thank you for your diligence in presiding over what truly qualifies as a national treasure. There was a time in the rhetoric of this country when those words were somewhat debased with overuse. But the phrase "national treasure" certainly applies here if it applies anywhere. And you have a most significant stewardship, Dr. Billington, and you have discharged it well. And we in the Congress are grateful to you for that. Dr. BILLINGTON. Thank you. I would just like to say that the biggest treasure we have is the people that work at the Library. I mean when you consider that our staff set the world's record of cataloging, with many less people than they have had in the past. Just to take one example of the kind of work of the people that do not get to appear here, but behind me are not only these wonderful people that are leading the different divisions of the Library, but a very, very dedicated staff. And I know that all of them tremendously appreciate the support and the encouragement they get from all of you here in the Congress. So we do thank you. And thank you for this opportunity to be here. Senator BENNETT. Thank you very much. Mr. MULHOLLAN. Thank you. [The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but were submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the hearing:] ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS INTEGRATED LIBRARY SYSTEM Question. Congress provided $5.5 million for an Integrated Library System in fiscal year 1998. Please update the Committee on the progress and status of that project. Please address how requirements identified in the conference report were/ will be met. In addition, please provide an updated time line for the project. Answer. Beginning with management issues, an Integrated Library System (ILS) Project Office has been established, headed by a senior-level staff person reporting directly to the Deputy Librarian and Associate Librarian for Library Services. The Office Director has created a robust project management structure, and has already filled three key ILS management positions. An RFP has been issued and responses have been received. Vendors have presented on-site capability demonstrations to the Library's technical evaluation committee, who are completing their final reports and scores. Vendors' "best and final" offers are scheduled to begin March 30, 1998, and run three to four weeks. The Library plans to award a contract in late April or early May. Regarding the requirements of the conference report, the ILS Program Office is completing the ILS Implementation Plan for presentation to Congress in April. The plan will address all requirements in the Conference Report, including tracking and reporting benefits and costs. The ILS time line follows: -March-April 1998-Form implementation teams -April 1998-Brief Congressional committees -Late April-early May 1998-Award Contract to ILS vendor -May 1998-October 1999-Deliver schedule products (Milestones from Schedule -October 1999-Make all ILS modules operational; turn off legacy systems Question. Please explain how the new Integrated Library System (ILS) schedule slippage affected your Year 2000 program. Answer. The ILS Program remains on schedule for implementation in October 1999, before the Year 2000. The only change in the ILS schedule was a minor adjustment in the date for awarding the contract; and the Library made this change to accommodate requests from vendors. In our opinion, that short extension of time to allow vendors to prepare extensive on-site capability demonstrations was necessary and will shorten the time required for ILS implementation. The Library is devekyung contingency plans for mission-critical automation functions. The Library expects the ILS to be operational in October 1999. LEGISLATIVE INFORMATION SYSTEM howto. Working with Senate staff, the Library and CRS have developed an inglasive information retrieval system to provide better access to informafrom meested for congressional work. The Library is requesting two additional posiThose in the 99 budget to continue development of this system. What is the status or the Tegative Information System and why are two additional positions needed? Answer: The Library absorbed the cost of developing and operating the Legislative Busamation System (LIS) which depends heavily on the design and development wood due to create and maintain THOMAS. There are currently 10 FTE's (in ITS) and another 2.5 FTE's (in CRS) assigned to LIS/THOMAS. The LIS has been operanal xuxe the start of the 105th Congress, and is being steadily expanded with How suumation files and new functionality especially enhanced searching capapal List will replace some of the current House and Senate legacy systems as they are retired over the course of next year. A detailed plan projecting the LIS devedkyument schedule for new capabilities has been reviewed by Senate Rules and will De juvsented to House Oversight soon. Two additional positions are needed to deve thus projected development workload and to absorb the increased maintenance workload which results from new development and the consequent larger base sys***** GLOBAL LEGAL INFORMATION NETWORK The Law Library is developing an automated network to receive the lawa of other nations. Eleven nations are now sending their laws to the Library's Hetwork electronically via the Internet. The Library's request includes $356,000 to anysus the Law Library's automation efforts. What are the Library's plans for expainting the legal network and how will the additional funds be used? Answer A significant expansion of the Global Legal Information Network (GLIN) in proposed by: The Law Library working with the Parlamento Latinoamericano (Latin American Parliament comprising 22 nations of Latin America and the Caribbean) to encourage all their members to join GLIN. These countries would contribute their own current laws, and as that potential is realized, Law Library staff can concentrate on adding retrospective material from the Law Library's collections as part of its overall digitization effort. The Law Library working with the U.S. Department of State to encourage GLIN membership for the 18 economies of APEC. The additional requested funds will be used to establish the minimum level of technical support within the Law Library to sustain and enhance the digital Law Library. The new automation staff will: Maintain and enhance the Law Library's Internet site including the GLIN application which provides for input, update and retrieval of official legal information and digitized documents; and develop capabilities to acquire and to control an increasing number of legal sources that exist only in digital form (currently established at 20 percent of total). YEAR 2000 Question. Has the Library initiated the development of contingency plans to be prepared in the event of systems failure on Jan. 1, 2000. Please explain. Answer. Yes, contingency planning has been initiated at the Library. The Deputy Librarian designated Library_business_unit leaders as responsible for contingency planning associated with each of the Library's mission-critical systems. GAO has just issued, as an exposure draft, their guidance on contingency planning. We are studying that draft and are using that guidance in preparation of our contingency plans. CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE Question. At the Library's hearing before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Legislative, the issue was raised whether CRS is duplicating estimating work done by the Joint Committee on Taxation. Is there a duplication? Answer. CRS complements the work of the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) but does not duplicate it. Official revenue estimates are provided exclusively by the Joint Committee on Taxation. If CRS is asked for revenue estimates, it provides those issued by the Joint Committee. CRS provides economic and legal analysis on tax issues for Members and committees, including the Joint Committee on Taxation, the Ways and Means Committee, and the Finance Committee. It supports the JCT by providing technical or factual information in areas requiring expertise available in CRS but not routinely needed by the committee staffs (e.g. the relationship of tax provisions to campaign financing). CRS also uses tax and subject area expertise to analyze the total Federal commitment and approach to specific public policy areas (e.g., child care). CRS and the Joint Committee have differing and unique roles-as do CBO and GAO. Individual Members of Congress, in placing their requests, make the judgment as to who can best meet their support needs. CRS staff remain in contact with staff of the Joint Committee as well as staff of other committees and agencies in order to provide support and to avoid duplication. When CRS gets questions which clearly fall within another entity's unique mission, CRS refers the requester to that entity to avoid duplication. QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR BYRON DORGAN LIBRARY SECURITY Question. Dr. Billington, two years ago, this subcommittee directed the Library to develop an extensive security plan. My understanding is that you have submitted that plan and that it was recently approved by the Senate Rules Committee. Accordingly, the Library is requesting $2.5 million to improve the security of its staff, collections, and facilities. The Architect of the Capitol is requesting another $2 million in addition to your request of $2.5 million, to improve Library security. How do the funds requested address the tasks listed in your security plan? What has the Library done to address the recommendations contained in GAO and consultant reports? Answer. The funding addresses three top priorities cited in the Library Security Plan: $982,000 for entry security to bring the Library up to the standard used by other Capitol Hill Buildings which includes the use of x-ray scanners and metal detectors; $993,000 to mark and to apply detection devices on 1.2 million items received through the Copyright Office; and $435,000 to conduct eleven risk assessments of key processing and custodial divisions. The Library responded to GAO recommendations and consultants by implementing over 200 specific recommendations listed in the 1996 Computer Science Corporation security survey and by developing a comprehensive collections security plan. The plan identifies potential threats and vulnerabilities and calls for specific minimal thresholds of security for segments of the collections. While the Library reacts to instances of theft and mutilation of the collections by seeking identification and prosecution of the criminal, the Security Plan is now the basis for comprehensive decision-making. Part of the funds sought by the Library will be used for collection risk assessments. The risk assessments are an intensive examination of all the controls and processes in place to protect the collections. Recommended actions based on the risk assessments will be integrated into the Library Security Plan for implementation. COLLECTIONS SECURITY Question. Last year, a theft of materials from the Library's rare book collection was uncovered when a book dealer in Massachusetts reported that someone was trying to sell items belonging to the Library. How is the Library responding to this theft and what steps are being taken to prevent future thefts? Answer. The Library's policy is to pursue aggressively instances of theft or mutilation of its collection. The specific case was resolved on March 12, 1998, when the court accepted a guilty plea; sentencing is scheduled for July 8, 1998. Within the Rare Book and Special Collections Division, controls have been tightened by changing processing activities. Items are now stamped with Library ownership marks immediately upon accessioning; signature are required as items move through the processing phases. During the past year, 600,000 items have been stamped and a complete inventory of the collection has commenced. The overall security for the collections is outlined in the Library's Security Plan approved by the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration. The Security Plan categorizes the Library's collections into a hierarchy of five risk levels, with the strongest protection accorded the Library's "Treasures" and other rare items. Lesser degrees of security controls are applied to the general collections. The Library is currently applying the minimal standards to all collections on Capitol Hill; the results of the analysis will be used to assess any vulnerabilities and to rank protective remedies. NATIONAL DIGITAL LIBRARY Question. Dr. Billington, the National Digital Library was approved by the Congress in 1996 with the understanding that for every Federal dollar the private sector would contribute three dollars. In total, the $45 million of the estimated $60 million project was to be funded by private contributions. What is the status of the private sector contributions towards this project? Answer. At the close of fiscal 1997, we had raised $28 million. Further, we are proud to report that with recent pledges, we will meet our $45 million goal well ahead of schedule. Just last month, John Kluge, Chairman of our James Madison Council, issued a challenge at our Madison Council meeting in by pledging up to $5 million in a $2 match for every $1 we raise to complete the funding for this phase of the NDL. COPYRIGHT OFFICE Question. Ms. Peters, late last year, the Copyright Office was given new authority to adjust statutory registration fees after the completion of a cost study and final review by the Congress. Higher registration fees would lower the need for appropriations. The Library's fiscal 1999 budget does not include a request for additional authority to spend receipts from registration fees. When does the Copyright Office plan to adjust its registration fees? Answer. I will propose a schedule of statutory fees to Congress in fiscal 1999, to go into effect July 1, 1999 these fees not reflected in the fiscal 1999 budget. We need to evaluate the sensitivity of higher statutory registration fees on the public demand and to consider operational and policy issues. The fiscal 2000 budget submission will reflect these new statutory fees. New discretionary fees will be implemented on July 1, 1998, and are reflected in the fiscal 1999 budget submission. Statutory fees are filing fees for registration of claims and recordation of documents. The legislation permitting the Office to increase statutory fees requires a og study, economic analysis and that consideration be given to the objectives of the oright system. Public hearings will be conducted to solicit comments from the arge community Revised statutory fees may be instituted after the end of 120 water the schedule is submitted to the Congress, unless within that 120-day * was enacted stating the Congress does not approve the schedule. Due a de aserty of this process, the Copyright Office does not plan to implement *** until July 1, 1999. Discretionary fees are service fees for special led bending that account for approximately 10 percent of fee revenue. Save public hearings, economic analyses or mandatory congreswww per dey will de implemented in July 1998. YEAR 2000 Question. Dr. Billington, I know the Library is taking steps to ensure that its automated systems will work after the Year 2000 century change. GAO has reported that a number of agencies are not fixing their mission critical systems fast enough which may result in program failures in the year 2000. Please provide the subcommittee with a description of the steps that the Library is taking to ensure that the Library's systems will be working in the Year 2000? Answer. The Library is devoting maximum available resources to its Year 2000 effort, and has tasked its Information Technology Services group with leading this initiative and performing the central coordination function. In addition, Library managers in each of the other service and support units have also been assigned responsibility for Year 2000 planning and results specific to their units. The steps being taken to ensure that the Library's systems will be working in the Year 2000 follow GAO guidance, and are: inventory; analysis; modification or upgrade; testing; and implementation. Each step involves a series of tasks with target completion dates. Dependencies have been identified as part of the inventory and analysis phases, so that tasks associated with subsequent steps can be accomplished in parallel, as much as possible. GAO guidance indicates that all agencies should complete all phases or steps several months before Library plans indicate will be possible. While the Library would like nothing better than to plan for completion of all Year 2000 renovation work earlier, it is simply not realistic to do so. Some Library systems are already Year 2000 compliant, some will be completed well within GAO's suggested targets, and some will be completed several months later than GAO suggests. Because we have made every effort to prepare realistic plans, we cannot honestly report that we will meet the GAO targets in every case. However, we fully expect to complete all renovation, upgrade, or replacement of all Library mission-critical systems, before Year 2000 program failures become a problem. CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE Question. Mr. Mulhollan, last year the Congress did not fund your proposal to hire additional staff for a succession initiative. CRS is again requesting funding of the succession initiative which would overlap critical analytical staff slated for retirement. Why do you believe the succession initiative is a critical budget item? Since last year's budget, do you have additional information that would further support your request? Answer. We resubmitted the succession initiative for a number of reasons. We understood that Congress' decision not to fund the succession initiative last year did not necessarily speak to the merits of the proposal but rather reflected the severe budgetary constraints on the fiscal 1998 Legislative Branch budget. By 2006, half of CRS's current staff will be eligible to retire. Nearly two-thirds of those eligible, about 250 people, plan to leave during that time frame. These losses pose a major challenge to our ability to ensure the continuation of our analytic services to the Congress. In many dozens of meetings I have had with Members over the last year, I have heard great concern over the impending loss of CRS experts on whom Members rely. Many Members have expressed their support for the initiative the Service has shown to deal with this serious problem, as well as for the specifics of the plan. While we recognize that budget constraints are still a concern, as we move a year closer to those retirements, it is our responsibility to address such concern of Members, and to avoid, if at all possible, a significant reduction in our analytic support to Members. The CRS staff eligible to retire in the next six years are our most senior, independent, and authoritative analysts and specialists. Unless we can get a "head start" on replacing them, we will have to wait until the year they retire, and hire their replacements without sufficient lead-time to bring those replacements up to the level of competence necessary to sustain our current analytic and research services. Under this scenario we would have to hire replacement staff at the mid- or senior-levels to minimize service disruptions which raised concerns that we would be less likely to find a sufficient degree of diversity in the applicant pool than would be the case with entry-level hires. In addition, mid- and senior-level experts may not have all of the quantitative skills that are now standard requirements in public policy graduate schools and which are needed as we analyze research and information and formulate methodologies to analyze alternative methods for approaching public policy issues like health, social security, transportation, and tax. Question. As you are aware, Senator McCain has introduced a bill, S. 1578, which would make certain information available for access and retrieval by the publicon the Internet-through the Congressional Research Service web site. Please pro 46-108 99-7 |