Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

6. Ten-year statistics of GSA-Public Buildings Service funding.
7. Spread sheet, "Projects From Which the Post Office Has Withdrawn

Its Requirements"

8. Telegram to Rep. Kenneth J. Gray from Mr. R. A. Nack, February 4,

1971

9. Letter from the Postmaster General dated May 15, 1970, to Mr. Robert L. Kunzig, Administrator for GSA..

10. Letter of March 27, 1969, from Major General F. J. Clarke, Acting Chief, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to Postmaster General Winton M. Blount_.

11. Memorandum dated April 17, 1969, to Hon. Peter M. Flanigan, Assistant to the President, from Hon. Robert L. Kunzig, Administrator, GSA....

Page

60

62

95

105

193

194

12. Letter dated September 26, 1970, to Secretary of Defense Melvin R. Laird, from Postmaster General Blount__.

195

13. Letter dated October 8, 1970, from Secretary of Defense Laird to the Postmaster General_

197

14. Copy of Dispotition Form dated October 7, 1970, prepared by Mr. Barnes, Corps of Engineers*.

197

15. First Memorandum of Agreement between the Post Office Department and the Department of the Army providing for postal facilities acquisition services, dated March 11, 1971__

16. Second Memorandum of Agreement between the Post Office Department and the Corps of Engineers providing for postal facilities acquisition services, dated March 11, 1971___

17. Corps of Engineers Circular dated March 19, 1971..

18. Memorandum of working agreement between the Post Office Department and the Corps of Engineers dated May 20, 1971..

19. Third Memorandum of Agreement between the Post Office Department and the Corps of Engineers dated June 28, 1971...

20. Instructions issued to employees of the Corps of Engineers by General George A. Rebh, May 28, 1971.

21. Brochure compiled by the Corps of Engineers, dated February 12, 1971_ 22. May 5, 1971 memorandum from General George A. Rebh, Corps of Engineers.

23. May 28, 1971 Post Office Department Major Facilities Summary
Report*

24. Corps of Engineers memoranda dated May 7, 1971, and May 6, 1971,
in regards to Jacksonville and Fort Lauderdale Post Office Facilities,
respectively-
25. List of 12 comparable projects constructed by the Corps of Engineers
and received by the General Accounting Office_-

26. Letter dated June 30, 1971, from Col. Billy B. Geery, Corps of En-
gineers, to Michael Zimmerman, Supervisory Civil Engineers, GAO*_
27. Group of letters having reference to the agreement between the
Department of the Army and the Post Office Department_ _ .

28. Group of letters concerning agreement under which Corps of Engineers will serve as construction agency for Postal Service..

*Retained in Subcommittee file.

[blocks in formation]

29. Further correspondence concerning the delegation of authority for the
construction of Postal facilities by GSA_
30. Letter to Mr. John Constandy dated May 26, 1971, from Lawson B.
Knott, Jr., former Administrator of GSA, and letter dated June 3,
1971, to Mr. John Constandy from Lawrence F. O'Brien, former
Postmaster General__

31. A partial list of the kinds of facilities in which GSA has been involved in
recent years_
32. (a) Memorandum of understanding, dated March 17, 1971, prepared
and signed jointly by A. F. Sampson and Henry Lehne concerning
reimbursement for postal service space. (b) Copy of interim agree-
ment between GSA and U.S. Postal Service, July 1, 1971_.

Page

325

330

337

-350, 419

33. (a) List of GSA operated buildings proposed for transfer to the Postal Service. (b) List of Federal Buildings to be transferred to the Postal Service*

34. Letter dated January 13, 1970, from General Raymond, Corps of Engineers to Mr. James Wilson, Assistant General Counsel for the Postal Department*_

35. Memo (undated) by General Raymond, Corps of Engineers*.

355

379

379

MATERIAL RECEIVED FOR THE RECORD

GAO memorandum, "Notification of Appropriation Committees of Cost
Increases".

118

GAO memorandum, "Agreement-Congressional Liaison”.
GAO document, Policies and Practices Followed by the Post Office Depart-
ment in Leasing and Constructing Facilities_ -

132

149

Post Office Department chart, "Comparison of Planned Versus Actual
Accomplishments as of May 28, 1971__

255

Corps of Engineers' submission of contract estimated costs at three Florida
Air Force facilities.

406

Post Office Department chart, "Major Milestone Status as of May 28, 1971"

409

APPENDIX

A. Memorandum of Understanding Between Postal Service and GSA, dated March 17, 1971..

419

B. Interim Agreement between Postal Service and GSA, dated July 1, 1971__ C. Letter from Chairman Jim Wright to Hon. Winton M. Blount, July 23, 1971...

419

424

D. Letter to Representative Jim Wright from Postmaster General Blount,
July 26, 1971, enclosing "Answers from the U.S. Postal Service----
E. Letter to Mr. Lee B. Holmes, Mortgage Bankers' Association of Ameri-
ca, from Representative Jim Wright, July 14, 1971.

425

443

F. Letter to Chairman Jim Wright from Mr. Lee B. Holmes, Mortgage
Bankers' Association of America, July 22, 1971..

444

G. Memorandum to Chairman Jim Wright from Sherman S. Willse of subcommittee staff, July 27, 1971___

447

*Retained in Subcommittee file.

IMPACT OF POSTAL BUILDING PROGRAM ON FEDERAL

AGENCIES

TUESDAY, JULY 13, 1971

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS AND OVERSIGHT

OF THE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS,

Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met at 10:10 a.m., in room 2253, Rayburn Building, Hon. James C. Wright, Jr. (chairman), presiding.

Mr. WRIGHT. This subcommittee will be in order.

From the beginning of the Republic, the business of providing timely delivery of the mail to U.S. citizens was one of the original and vital functions of the Government. One of the earliest acts of the Continental Congress was to make provisions for post roads and post trails.

Always, from that moment until this year, Congress exercised legislative jurisdiction over this key function of government, and the Public Works Committees of the House and Senate exercised the legislative responsibility to provide buildings for use by the Post Office Department, often in conjunction with other agencies of the Government, particularly following passage of the Public Buildings Act of 1959.

Much of this has changed. The Postal Reform Act of 1970 has radically altered that historic relationship. That act created an independent establishment of the executive branch with the capacity to sell on the open market up to $10 billion worth of bonds and with unrestricted authority over postal facilities. The act also provided for the Postal Service to take over from the Federal Government all public buildings in which it occupies 55 percent or more of the space. These provisions for unilateral decisions by the Postal Service for its own interests seem to portend serious planning and management problems for the General Services Administration, and its tenant agencies, and for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which the Postal Service has retained as its facilities construction and real estate management agency.

It will be the purpose of these hearings to ascertain exactly what effects the building program of the Postal Corporation will have upon the Government and its agencies and, therefore, upon the taxpayers of this country; and what protections, if any, should be provided to the taxpayers under these new circumstances. Mr. Grover. Mr. GROVER. Mr. Chairman, I would like to associate myself with your remarks concerning these very important hearings. These oversight hearings are doubly important to me since I am a member of and am very much interested in the work of this Subcommittee on

(1)

Investigations and Oversight, and also I have the honor of serving as ranking minority member of the Subcommittee on Public Buildings and Grounds, which is responsible for legislation dealing with the facilities we will be discussing here.

On this very point, Mr. Chairman, recent events have come to our attention, particularly concerning the withdrawal of the Post Office from certain facilities scheduled for their use. Like yourself, I have become extremely concerned over the impact such actions will have. What will be the effect upon the Federal agencies who were to have become tenants? One of our committee's basic responsibilities is for the smooth transition in dealing with the space needs of Federal agencies whether these needs involve merely an expansion or a new location. Plans have been drawn and sites have been acquired. Must we begin anew the processing of design, or site acquisition for those public buildings which it has been determined do not now meet postal needs? Or will these plans be abandoned with space needs left to gather cobwebs and dust? What effect will such delays have upon the waiting agencies?

And what of the Corps of Engineers, Mr. Chairman? What effect will the proposed Corps of Engineers construction and management relationship with the Postal Service have upon the agency which has for so long and so well served, through this committee, the rivers and harbors and flood control needs of this Nation?

I have many unanswered questions, Mr. Chairman, and it is my hope that, as the testimony unfolds before us in these 2 weeks, we will not only find some reasonable answers, but we may be assured that the projected efficiency of one part of this Government will not work to the inefficiency of other parts.

Mr. WRIGHT. Our first witness for today in these hearings is Mr. Rod Kreger, Acting Administrator of the General Services Administration. That Agency was created by law to be a real estate agent and to exercise a landlord relationship with all the other agencies of Government.

I understand that Mr. Kreger is accompanied by Mr. Herman Barth, Deputy General Counsel, General Services Administration. Mr. Kreger, are there others with you who may testify today or respond to questions?

Mr. KREGER. Yes, I have with me Mr. Bill Sanders, Deputy Commissioner of Public Buildings Service; Mr. Bill Butts, Director of Office of Budget; Mr. Mike Martin, my special assistant; and Mr. Thomas Gherardi, director of our congressional affairs office.

Mr. WRIGHT. But you and Mr. Barth will be the ones who will be answering questions of the committee; is that right?

Mr. KREGER. Most of them; yes, sir.

Mr. WRIGHT. Would you two then stand to be sworn at this time? Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you will give to this subcommittee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

(Messrs. Kreger and Barth responded in the affirmative.)

Mr. WRIGHT. Mr. Kreger, I observe that you have a prepared statement. You may proceed in such manner as you desire, either reading the statement, or presenting it in toto, or submitting it for the record and summarizing it, just as you please.

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »