We do not minimize the size of the requested increase. As can be seen above, about one-third of the increase relates to the Y2K problem. We believe that the Senate is well prepared for Year 2000. However, no one can assure us that some still unforeseen problems will not occur. Therefore, we must be prepared to make immediate repairs or replace systems which fail. We have included $7.5 million in the fiscal year 2000 budget request for contingency funding for mission critical systems ($3 million); for funding for the completion of the remediation of non-mission critical systems ($3.5 million); and funding for technical support for these continuing renovations ($1 million).

The Recording Studio has developed plans to convert all operations to digital technology in order to upgrade the quality of our production, to more efficiently provide for the archiving and storage of recordings of Senate proceedings. This initiative is expected to be expensive in terms of the initial equipment and installation costs and will be funded over several years. The initial funding requested in the amount of $2.3 million will enable the studio to begin studying, acquiring and testing the new technology. A major benefit of this advanced technology is that it will allow immediate access to video recording of floor proceedings which will enable staff to view and edit videos from their offices almost instantaneously. Digital technology offers faster access to archived video; greater clarity and resolution; a more efficient transfer mode to the Library of Congress and the National Archives; and reduced physical storage requirements.

The Recording Studio plans to continue its placement of robotic cameras in committee hearing rooms. We currently have requests from seven committees for robotic camera coverage. We have included funding of $2.1 million to equip four committee and control rooms in our request based on the limits of our ability to provide for the installation and testing of these systems during fiscal year 2000.

The Wide Area Network (WAN) Upgrade Project is an integral phase of the Senate's overall five-year network upgrade plan which began in 1997. This upgrade will enable member state offices to efficiently conduct Senate business by maximizing the use of emerging and rapidly growing technologies. The WAN upgrade will enable member state offices to have improved WAN service capacity, capability and quality of service. The goal is to enable the convergence of secured data, voice and video communication services to state offices in order to leverage technologies such as video streaming and multimedia. Our current wide area network infrastructure is severely taxed in many state sites, and with the expanding deployment of Web based and Web enabled applications, we anticipate a corresponding explosion in network capacity demands now and into the future. The Senate's five year data network implementation plan was validated by an independent data network research consulting firm in 1998. This group confirmed the soundness of the strategy of using proven technology while protecting the Senate's current investments. The firm also verified that the proposed data network architecture is sufficiently robust, flexible and adaptable for rapid growth as we continue to introduce new technologies to our base services.

During this fiscal year SAA engineers are engaged in feasibility studies, research, proofs of concept, design and planning activities associated with preparing for implementation of the WAN upgrade during fiscal year 2000. Preparatory network engineering to be completed during fiscal year 1999 includes: Identifying State Office WAN applications, performance requirements and workload categorizing; matching the appropriate WAN technology and services; Data Network Infrastructure Engineering and Cost Study; and Equipment and Service Vendor Procurement and Selection.

Current planning incorporates a combination of frame relay and Internet secured virtual private networks as key underpinnings to the WAN infrastructure. Inclusion of "last mile connectivity" technologies such as DSL/Cable Modem will readily enable high bandwidth multi-media services for the state offices.

We have included $3.5 million in the budget request for fiscal year 2000 for this initiative. About $2 million in costs are for the purchase of higher capacity communications equipment and $1.5 million is for recurring usage charges.

During the past year, the Rules Committee requested that we expand the on-line commercial information services provided to Senate offices to obtain a broader base of "newswire" information on a real time basis, to allow more choice in the news service offerings, and to acquire legislative information not available from LIS. The expansion of these services adds about $1.1 million to our annual operating costs. We are also seeking funding to replace our existing e-mail software. The maker of our current e-mail software has announced that it will not develop its product beyond the current design. We have begun a planning program to develop our email functional and technical requirements and will soon be in position to select a

replacement product capable of meeting our future needs. This adds about $1 million to our budget request.

We have included $2.4 million within our salary accounts for the annual COLA and periodic merit increases. You may recall that last year we had all Sergeant at Arms jobs evaluated and classified into a unified structure. Formal salary ranges were established. Where necessary, we moved staff to the minimum of the new pay scales. We expect that this classification structure with formal salary ranges will help retain our qualified professionals. This funding request allows us to attract and retain the high quality skilled workforce needed to maintain current service levels and to implement the significant programs described above.

Lastly, we have included funding to expand our professional management training program, to better support our human resources program and to greatly improve our contract management capabilities.

Y2K UPDATE

I now would like to update this Committee on our efforts to ensure that the Senate's mission critical systems are capable of operating in the Year 2000. At our hearing last year, we set forth the principles of our work to ensure operating capability in the Year 2000. Conceptually, these principles address problem awareness, system assessment and system renovation, validation and implementation. Today, I would like to focus on the current status of our work.

The Year 2000 compliance project is perhaps the most important and pervasive information technology project ever undertaken by the Senate. The issue facing us is not the complexity of the Y2K technology solutions. Indeed, the solutions are often the least of the problem. Rather, it is the daunting task of assessing each of the Senate's key business functions, determining where we are at risk, and then determining what it takes to implement and validate solutions. This task is made more complex by having to balance our resources to ensure that all this work will be accomplished in time without causing undue disruption to the daily business of the Senate. Simply stated, the real difficulty lies in the size and scope of the overall Year 2000 effort itself.

Efforts to address the Year 2000 issue were initiated within the Sergeant at Arms organization in 1996. However, it was not until the formal establishment of the Year 2000 Compliance Project Office in January, 1998 that a comprehensive approach was put into place specifically to guide Year 2000 related projects and monitor their progress. Our Year 2000 Compliance Project Office has assisted in defining the Senate's overall direction in terms of program guidelines, operating principles, budgeting and reporting. The nature of the Senate environment, however, requires a highly decentralized execution in terms of assessing, renovating, testing, validating, and implementing Year 2000 compliant systems. To assist with the total project, a Year 2000 Master Plan was developed and has enabled us to intensively manage our compliance objectives and assign accountability.

One of the first steps taken by the project office was the adoption of the General Accounting Office's 5-phase approach to Year 2000 project management. As this process was being implemented, we also requested that the General Accounting Office appoint advisors with whom we could consult as necessary. I am happy to report that our GAO advisors are key partners in our success on Year 2000 projects. Using their analytical skills and consulting advice, as well as those of an independent onsite contractor, we have been able to augment Sergeant at Arms resources, determine the specific risks and vulnerabilities for our supported systems, and work to mitigate those risks.

How were we able to get to this point? We looked at each information technology system in use by the Senate, determined whether it was mission-critical, and assigned resources where necessary to develop plans designed to bring it into compliance. From assessment through renovation, validation and implementation, we required each system program manager to provide project plans, schedules and milestones. We set up a system to monitor and report progress centrally. As time went on, it became clear that additional information was required and we instituted a rotating schedule of monthly briefings on each of the mission-critical projects. Because knowledge and cooperation are keys to success in this endeavor, we have opened these meetings not only to Sergeant at Arms employees, but also to the GAO and the Secretary of the Senate. This exchange has paved the way to an open, cooperative forum in which disparate groups function in a fully participative and cohesive

manner.

Finally, I would add that throughout our Y2K efforts, we have used this enormous challenge to make significant progress in the improvement of the Senate's information technology infrastructure. As you will see from the discussion of our mission

critical systems, we have been able to bring the Senate forward in terms of modernizing our computer operations from the mainframe enterprise applications to the individual desktop work stations.

What are our mission-critical systems? How were they determined? Why did we designate these 22 systems and how do they impact Senate offices? The Year 2000 issue is really a business problem more than a technology problem. Therefore, we first defined the primary business functions of the Senate. Then we identified the information technology systems required to support those functions. The top three functions of the United States Senate were defined as: (1) the creation of legislation, (2) financial management, including payroll, procurement, and accounting functions, and (3) constituent services.

In addition to these three functions, we designated telecommunication services, including both our voice and data networks, as also mission-critical. In fact, of the 22 mission-critical systems, nine are specifically related to the transmission of data between offices both in Washington, D.C. and in members' home states.

We also designated desktop computers, including both hardware and software, as mission-critical. These systems support the day-to-day operations of member and committee offices. The remainder of the mission-critical systems are those which specifically support the key business of the Senate, that is, the legislative, financial management and constituent services functions. Thus, the Senate's mainframe computer, which runs important Senate and Capitol Police applications, is mission-critical. Similarly, the Correspondence Management Systems and the local area networks in every office, are mission-critical. We also designated electronic mail as a mission-critical system.

Not every system in use by the Senate made the mission-critical list. In fact, only 22 of 65 systems were so designated. This is because the determination of missioncriticality was made after we asked the question, "Could the Senate continue to function if a particular system was not available to users after the century changed?" Often, the answer was 'yes' even if it meant that a "work-around" solution would need to be developed. As an example, could the Senate function without an automated human resource system to track applicants and jobs? The answer was yes. Would it be inconvenient? Yes, it would, but these tasks could be completed manually until the system was remediated.

Now, what is the status of our mission-critical systems? Of the 22, three are considered fully renovated, tested and implemented. These are our telephone switches, Frame Relay system and local phone service. A fourth, our long distance service, is awaiting certification pending release of test results from a major telecommunications firm and a fifth, the secure telephones in many Senate offices and several Committees, have been certified by the National Security Agency and we are awaiting their certification by GAO. A sixth system, the Senate's Fiber Network, requires only upgrades of the routers in the states and that is scheduled for completion in April.

Two additional systems have been renovated and are completing their Y2K testing now. These are the Senate's Payroll System and our mainframe computer on which it operates. These systems are far along and we do not anticipate any setbacks. In fact, Senate staff can rest assured that their paychecks will continue to be issued. Thus, of our 22 mission-critical systems, we can confirm that eight are completed or nearly finished and will work in a Year 2000 environment.

The Senate's Legislative Information System, or LIS, and Financial Management Information System, or FMIS-two initiatives managed by the Secretary of the Senate, and for which we provide significant support-are currently being implemented and tested at the same time. Underlying the new LIS are two feeder systems for which the Sergeant at Arms has responsibility. These are the Amendment Tracking System and the Committee Scheduling System. The Amendment Tracking System is already up and running and the Committee Scheduling System is fully developed and will be Y2K tested with LIS.

Correspondence Management Systems, which are heavily used in Member offices, are also under intense scrutiny. Each of our vendors has been tasked to provide documentation on their Year 2000 compliance status and the test plans and test results from their own internal Year 2000 efforts. In addition, we set up a separate laboratory at Postal Square for Sergeant at Arms technical staff to validate and confirm the vendors' test results.

With regard to the computer equipment in Senate offices, 32 percent, or close to 3,000 personal computers, have been installed and certified as Year 2000 compliant. An additional effort is underway now to inventory, test and remediate all upgradable older PC's to Year 2000 compliance. Another initiative, a Special Year 2000 workstation and server replacement project for selected offices, has been approved by this Committee, and is underway.

As a note of interest, renovating computer hardware is relatively simple you either upgrade this equipment or you replace it. The more difficult challenge is the application software loaded on a workstation and whether it has been modified or customized. Vendors can certify software as Year 2000 compliant based on their internal tests. However, many offices may use that software in such a way as to render it non-compliant based on a calculation they may have entered or by changing the manufacturer's intent of use. We are conducting a comprehensive inventory in all Senate offices to give us a better idea of the risks we may face with this type of installed software.

The fifteenth and sixteenth mission-critical systems actually include two similar systems which are the Vote Tally Systems for the Republican and Democratic Policy Committees. These are new products which have been developed and are being implemented and tested now. By the way, these RPC and DPC systems are a logical back up, or contingency plan, for the Senate's Legislative Information System. The last six systems are the Radio System in use by the Capitol Police, the Senate Paging System, the Group Alert, the Senate's Electronic Mail, and two important systems in use by the Senate Recording Studio. The Capitol Police will receive a new Year 2000 compliant radio system which we expect to be installed and operational by the end of July. The current radio system is at the end of its operational life and cannot be made Year 2000 compliant. The Senate's Paging System is in Y2K testing now. We plan to replace components which are not compliant and operate with the same system after December 31st. Additionally, we will take this opportunity to begin to plan for a complete replacement of the paging system to meet future anticipated needs. The Group Alert system, which supports both the Cloakrooms, is being renovated during the next Senate recess. We expect to complete this effort next month. The next mission-critical system, the Senate's E-mail, is actually a number of components which must all be made Year 2000 compliant. Then, each component must be tested and the system as a whole must be tested. The major component of this system is the office mail system or "cc:Mail" which is currently being upgraded to the Year 2000 compliant version in all offices. The last two systems belong to our Recording Studio. These are the "Flexicart" system which enables us to record video tapes in a computerized manner, and the Senate Floor Audio System which provides audio to the TV/Radio rooms and the Galleries. Both systems are under contract with the vendors for Y2K testing. We will validate and certify the test results ourselves.

We also oversee a continuous and comprehensive Year 2000 awareness effort to keep Senate staff informed. To assist Senate offices with their own internal Year 2000 plans, a Senate-only Year 2000 web site has been created. This site contains information on such items as how to test a PC for Year 2000 compliancy, which noncompliant PC's can be upgraded to compliancy, and how to do the upgrade. The Web Site also contains a software database with information on the compliance of software packages used on a regular basis within the Senate. In addition, a business continuity plan template was recently added to allow Senate offices to develop a plan for continuity of operations specific to their own environment.

In addition to the systems under the specific responsibility of the Sergeant at Arms office, our interaction and interface with other Capitol Hill offices and other federal agencies also are being investigated. We have conducted Year 2000 Vulnerability assessments for the Secretary of the Senate, the United States Capitol Police, and this Committee. We have ongoing assessments in both the Architect of the Capitol and the Government Printing Office. We are conducting these assessments to highlight risks from the Sergeant at Arms point of view as opposed to compliancy reports on any of these entities.

These assessments have been invaluable. For example, the formal assessment of the United States Capitol Police was completed in September. The summary briefing provided several recommendations for further USCP actions to minimize the risk of Year 2000 failures and to prepare for recovery from failures should any

occur.

As of today, the Capitol Police are reporting ten of their 19 mission-critical systems as renovated, validated and implemented. These include their local area network, application servers, file servers, database servers, workstations, off site delivery application, reports processing application, physical security systems such as the Metorex 200 metal detectors and PDS LAN, and the Intoxilyzer 5000. Other systems still under renovation include outside agency applications such as the National Finance Center and CJIS/WALES/NCIC; the SafeNet System Software for physical security, and applications which reside on the Sergeant at Arms mainframe. These cannot be tested until our new mainframe upgrade is installed. Additionally, there are the police communications systems which include radios, the central dispatch

console, and alarm and video monitoring systems. The Capitol Police have made great strides towards completing their compliancy efforts.

The issue we are most concerned with is the replacement of the Capitol Police radio dispatch console, which is being planned now. We intend to ensure that the Capitol Police will continue to be able to communicate and dispatch officers on a Year 2000 compliant console and provide the life-safety protection for which they are responsible.

We are also concerned about the Senate's paging system, also provided by the same vendor. We are involved in intensive negotiations with the vendor to provide the Senate with current and accurate documentation on this system.

I would like to say that every system used in the Senate will work and work well in the Year 2000. However, that is unrealistic. Given the time frame and the number of systems and variables we face, it was prudent to concentrate efforts on those areas deemed most critical to the Senate and that, in fact, is the hard decision that was made. I am confident, however, in my ability to say that the Senate will be able to conduct its business when the clock rolls over to January 1, 2000. This will require a continuous and concerted effort on our part and will require cooperation from the entire Senate, not just Sergeant at Arms employees. The effect of these combined efforts will indeed enable the United States Senate to weather the approaching Year 2000 computing crisis.

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my formal testimony. I want to express my thanks to the Committee for its continuing support of the Sergeant at Arms and I stand ready to respond to any questions you may have.

Y2K ISSUES

Senator BENNETT. Thank you very much. We appreciate the comprehensive analysis of where you are. You have obviously gotten a good start and taken hold of an office that is very important to all of us.

I am a little concerned about the late date on some of these Y2K issues. The reason that I will accept your assurance that it is all going to work is that in the greater scheme of things you are a relatively small operation. If I were getting these kinds of dates out of the Defense Department or the IRS or some of the others I would be very nervous.

The General Accounting Office has begun a program of leasing their computers. This is a capital budget. Do you want to talk about the possibility of leasing for the Senate offices rather than purchasing?

Mr. ZIGLAR. It is interesting that you raise that question. I have not yet raised the specter of that at the Senate office level, and as you know, the obsolescence factor of computers makes leasing a fairly expensive proposition. I have been, however, looking at that issue in the context of the Capitol Police and some of their vehicles and equipment that have a fairly lengthy lifespan. I have an interest in leasing, and as you know, in the right format it can be a very cost-efficient way of going, particularly if the person providing the vehicle has a tax incentive to do it.

So the answer is, I have not looked at that in the context of the computers and equipment in the Senate offices, but it is something I have an interest in and am looking at in the context of the police. Senator BENNETT. I do not know if you are a devotee of C. Northcote Parkinson, the author of Parkinson's Law, but one of the statements that he makes is that the amount of time spent discussing a budgetary issue is in inverse proportion to the size of the budget. In other words, the typical business group will approve a $43 million nuclear reactor in 17 seconds flat, or something, because no one understands it, but they will spend 5 hours debating