Mr. WALSH. Thank you very much.

Your budget ought to be a model for the entire legislative branch, up just a little over 1 percent. We will be hearing the Capitol Police budget at a later time, and we will have more questions on that budget for you then. That will be next week, I believe.

Mr. LIVINGOOD. Yes, sir.

Mr. WALSH. And there are some security issues there that we may have to take special measures to deal with. But at this time I have no further questions.

Mr. Serrano.

EMERGENCY EVACUATION PROCEDURES

Mr. SERRANO. I did have a question. But you just reminded us that security issues may have to be discussed somewhere else. In your statement, you do speak about emergency evacuation. So stop me if I am going over.

Mr. LIVINGOOD. I will, sir.

Mr. SERRANO. I am just interested in what training has been available to Members' offices to deal with this issue.

Mr. LIVINGOOD. We have started, as you are aware, the first evacuations from the Capitol and House office buildings and have had our first fire drills, starting with the page dorms, and now we have had it in the Capitol, for the first time ever. We have distributed a fire evacuation plan, an evacuation plan which could be for anything, to every Member's office. We will be revising the plan as time goes on to make sure it is current.

We are training the Capitol Police in the area of emergency evacuation. They have the responsibility in every building, for stairwells, and all exits. We are training the Guide Service so they can assist in evacuating tours, and people visiting the Capitol. We are training people in my office, meaning the Chamber security, my immediate office, and parking security, to help in all this. So we do an awful lot of training.

Mr. SERRANO. The first fire drill went well?

Mr. LIVINGOOD. It went surprisingly well. We learned a few lessons that we have corrected, and, in fact, because of the training we had prior to that, it went very well. And we will have more.

Mr. SERRANO. On Members' office guidelines, you said they were sent out already?

Mr. LIVINGOOD. Yes, sir. They were sent out about 6 months ago to every office. They were hand carried by the Capitol Police. And I know they were delivered because I received various informational calls. And if anybody does not have one, just call me and we will make sure that they have it immediately.

Mr. SERRANO. Thank you.

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Latham.

EXPLANATION OF 1997 INCREASE

Mr. LATHAM. I would just like, Mr. Chairman, to compliment you as far as trying to keep the request appropriate, I guess.

One question, just historically: Why is there such an increase from 1996 to 1997? It is from $1.6 million to $3.8 million the next year.

Mr. WALSH. I will let the Sergeant at Arms explain that.

Mr. LATHAM. I mean, this is just a question, I guess, just to see what the jump was, on 59.

Mr. LIVINGOOD. That is when I first came. They took the Doorkeeper's Office and moved part of that to my office. So I inherited a substantial number of people, and it is salaries and equipment for them. It was combining part of the Doorkeeper's Office with the Sergeant at Arms Office.

Mr. LATHAM. I assumed it had to be additional responsibilities or something.

Mr. LIVINGOOD. And one area, garage attendants, had been under the Architect of the Capitol, and that was given to me by the committee, which has worked out well.

If I may say one thing, I had little reservations about, as some of you know, taking the parking attendants and making them security. It has worked out magnificently. I am so proud of them and what they have done and achieved. I could not be happier with that decision.

And I would just like to say, if I could, on Mr. Serrano's question on emergency evacuation, my thanks particularly to the cooperation we have had in this, all this evacuation and fire drills, et al., with the Senate Sergeant at Arms and also the Architect of the Capitol and the Physician's Office. We have never had a closer working relationship than we do today, and this has brought all of that together. We meet constantly once or twice a week, that often, and talk to each other almost every day. And never before has that been the case.

[A question from Chairman Walsh and response follow:]

Question. What is in the request for the Guide Service and Special Services? Response. In FY 1999, the total budget request for the Capitol Guide Service and Congressional Special Services Office is $2,195,000. This represents an increase of $204,000 over FY 1998 appropriated funds. The majority of the increase is to cover inflationary costs in agency contributions, cost of living adjustments, and provision for adequate uniforms for employees. The Capitol Guide Service is also requesting $85,000 for an additional three FTEs for FY 1999. These employees are needed to assist with the dramatic increase in visitation to the Capitol and to cover extended hours of operation during the peak visitor season (March through August). The Congressional Special Services Office is requesting an additional $10,000 to cover inflationary increase in the costs associated with providing sign language interpretation to Congressional offices and the public.

Mr. WALSH. Anyone else?

Thank you very much.

Mr. SERRANO. Thank you.

Mr. LIVINGOOD. Thank you, sir.

CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER

Mr. WALSH. Back to you, Jay.

Mr. EAGEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Now referring to pages 61 through 62 of the subcommittee print, the fiscal year 1999 budget request contains total funding of $58,829,000 for the Office of the Chief Administrative Officer. I would like to include in the record pages 22 through 28.

Mr. WALSH. Without objection.

[The information follows:]

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER (See Page 61-62 Subcommittee Print)

The Office of the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) was established at the beginning of the 104th Congress. Included as part of my statement is a detailed organizational chart with division listings. Also included is a chart showing the FY '98 funding by division compared with FY '99 requests. Simply, the organization consists of six divisions overseeing 32 offices, more than 600 House personnel and has oversight responsibility for more than 200 contracts. The six divisions include: the CAO immediate office, the Office of Finance, Human Resources, House Information Resources, Media and Support Services and finally, the Office of Procurement and Purchasing.

The mission of the CAO organization is to provide excellent administrative services to the U.S. House of Representatives as a professional team that is proactive and focused on the evolving needs of Members and concerns of the House community.

We approached the FY99 budget development process with four basic goals:
♦ Our budget request must reflect the ability to proactively provide
baseline services as well as new services to the Members and staff.

♦ We would take a fresh look at the necessity and efficiency of each
function, i.e., we questioned the continuing need for each major
function, we looked at alternatives to the way we are delivering
service, and we assured ourselves that the end product was responsive
to House needs.

♦ All senior managers would be a part of the process and thus support the end product.

♦ We would produce a final budget which was reflective of the overall

funding challenges facing all of government.

For the future, as we look forward to the remainder of calendar year 1998 and

Fiscal Year 1999, the CAO will continually benchmark our decisions against several principles:

Excellent Quality Member / Staff Service - Our service must be based on user requirements, it must appear seamless to the user and it must be rapid.

Increased Budget Discipline & Efficiency we must eliminate duplication, our work must be project based, we must constantly question the need to continue a project, and budgets must be manager based.

♦ Synergistic Management - our management must be results oriented,

deadline driven, team oriented, plan guided, and pro-active.

♦ Professional Renewal and Revitalization

our personnel approach

must be focused to heighten management skills and improve the overall skill sets of all CAO employees.

♦ "Liquid IT" - achieving Information Technology services for Members

and Committees that is as reliable and easy as turning on the faucet to

get water or flipping the switch to get light.

The FY '99 budget contains a total funding request of $58,829,000. The funding requested is for direct operational costs of the CAO organization as well as other costs which are attributable to the entire House of Representatives.

The increase, in comparison to FY 1998, is driven primarily by two cyclical responsibilities carried within the CAO budget. First, is the more than $5 million net budget request for office equipment. This request, which is nearly 9% of the total, is for equipment costs incurred for the first session of the 106th Congress. The FY '98 funding for this same account is less than 4/10 of 1% due to the cyclical nature of these expenses. The budgetary effect of this "saw tooth" is presented in the chart that I request be submitted for the record. Second, the CAO's budget contains funds to cover estimated expenses for the Congressional transition to the 106 Congress.

Simply put, these two items require funding for which there was little comparable FY 1998 baseline expense. For point of comparison the CAO budget for Fiscal Year 1997 was $60,169,900. The budget presented today is a 2.2% decrease from the Fiscal Year 1997 budget as revised of two years ago.