It has been vacant now for about a year and a half. We do not yet have the authority which is required by the House Office Building Commission to take jurisdiction over that building, but we think that the House Office Building Commission will give us that and we will furnish that to the Committee. At the moment we don't have their authority to take jurisdiction, but these funds will enable us to use the building if authorized and if you would agree. PENDING AUTHORIZATION Mr. FAZIO. This is pending authorization? Mr. FAZIO. What do you want to do with it? Mr. WHITE. We would take some of the people that compose House support facilities, ours in particular, that don't need to be in a House Office Building, and put them over there next to the power plant thus enabling space to be gained in the Office Buildings. There are 20,000 square feet in this building, and we wouldn't have had to build a new building or purchase it. It would merely be transferring title and for $500,000, which is $25 a square foot, we would have a usable building in which to put support services, police, other entities that can be removed from the office buildings. It would make office building space available for better use. Mr. FAZIO. You don't anticipate any objections from the commission? Mr. WHITE. I don't. Mr. HIGHTOWER. Is that a masonry building? Mr. WHITE. Yes, sir. This isn't a very good example of photography, but I have some pictures of the exterior of the building. It is a two-story masonry building. It needs work and that is the reason for the $500,000. RAYBURN GARAGE PIPES Mr. FAZIO. We have had some people speak to us in regard to pipes continually bursting in the Rayburn Building relating to temperature, cold weather. Apparently they are very exposed. Maybe there was a flaw in the original design. Mr. WHITE. What has happened, Mr. Chairman, is that the pipes aren't bursting; it is the sprinker heads that have frozen and burst. > We had two this year and one several years ago. Mr. FAZIO. What do you think you could do to prevent this? Mr. WHITE. Remove them. What we did was remove the sprinkler heads in the vicinity of the doors. The difficulty is that every now and then in this region, we have experienced extremely cold weather, but it doesn't happen very often. There is no heat in that garage. There are a couple of things we can do. In the general vicinity of the doors the safety inspectors said the sprinkler heads didn't need to be there. There were probably half a dozen sprinkler heads at that location. Therefore we plugged them. We could do another thing. We could put them back and install one of these fan coil unit heaters with a steam pipe in it to blow across the doors when the weather becomes very cold. The doors can't be opened and closed very readily. They are very slow to operate and therefore remain open most of the time. Mr. FAZIO. I believe that one suggestion we have heard is for the heaters. Mr. WHITE. The pipes aren't bursting. It is the sprinkler heads. Mr. FAZIO. Do you think if you bring in warm air in a blower during the very cold period this would prevent the problem? Mr. WHITE. Yes, sir. Mr. FAZIO. It is rather inconvenient, and probably unsafe, for the people who park there or who need to drive in that area. Mr. WHITE. It sprays water around. Mr. FAZIO. And it freezes? Mr. WHITE. Yes, sir. Mr. FAZIO. Would you let us know how you want to handle that problem. Mr. WHITE. We will be glad to. Yes, sir. [CLERK'S NOTE.-The following was provided for the record:] The number of sprinkler heads in the parking garages that have frozen due to the open doors is minimal. The sprinkler heads in close proximity to the doors were removed in the past to guard against this possibility. However, due to the exceptionally cold weather experienced earlier this winter, two sprinkler heads did freeze and these have been removed. The policy of keeping doors open in the parking garages has been maintained due to the volume of traffic in these facilities and, of course, the policy of not heating these areas is in the interest of energy conservation. These facilities have not been heated in the past and the parking and police personnel that are assigned to these areas are accustomed to this condition. The garages are under "negative" air pressure due to the operation of exhaust fans. The make-up air enters the garages mainly through the open doors. During exceptionally cold weather, such as occurred earlier, the ambient air temperature close to the doors drops below the freezing point, thereby causing the difficulties with the sprinkler heads. We will look into the possibility of installing air heaters at these doors to prevent the sprinkler heads from freezing and report the estimated cost to the committee as soon as possible. CAPITOL POWER PLANT Mr. FAZIO. You are requesting $24,672,000 and 104 positions for the operation of the Capitol power plant, including the purchase of electricity, oil, and coal. You have also requested $800,000 for an electrical generator. Mr. WHITE. Yes, sir. Mr. FAZIO. We gave you $990,000 in fiscal year 1982 for the same project. Mr. WHITE. You did. Mr. FAZIO. We are concerned whether or not you gave us a faulty estimate for the initial appropriation? Mr. WHITE. We did. We had a faulty estimate, Mr. Chairman. We became suspicious and we looked into it further. We hired a consultant to get into the detail of it. It turns out that the principle was correct, but our number was incorrect. It will nevertheless save money. Instead of taking four years to repay the cost, it will be 7.5 because we were incorrect in our estimate of what the initial investment would be. It is, nevertheless, a savings that will pay for itself after 7.5 years. Mr. FAZIO. 7.5? Mr. WHITE. Yes, sir. Mr. FAZIO. That is the margin. Is it still viable? Mr. WHITE. Yes, sir. This is based upon a savings at present rates of electricity. As the rates go up, of course, you save more. Mr. FAZIO. This was, as staff pointed out, an area where we were urging caution. And looking at a memo from Ray Carroll to Manny Crupi back in 1981 the Architect's Office wanted to move at all deliberate speed and as a result we may have jumped the gun. Mr. WHITE. You are correct. We did jump the gun a little. On the other hand, the money hasn't been spent, Mr. Chairman, except for $76,000 for the consultant, but the money hasn't been spent. We still have $914,000 of it. ANNUAL SAVINGS Mr. FAZIO. What will the annual savings be? Mr. WHITE. Annual savings will begin to accrue immediately and in 7.5 years pay for itself and beyond that you begin to generate savings directly. Mr. FAZIO. What will the annual savings be in operating costs? Mr. WHITE. About $250,000, something like that. 7.5 into $1,790,000 tells us what you are going to save every year, whatever that amounts to. Mr. FAZIO. Why don't you provide for the record further elaboration? Mr. WHITE. It is roughly up in the 200 to 300 thousand dollar range. Mr. FAZIO. I have a few questions for the record concerning the electrical generator. [The questions and responses follow:] Question. We have a request for $800,000 for an electrical generator. This Committee provided $990,000 in fiscal year 1982 for this project. Now you are telling us your earlier estimates were faulty and you need to install a fourth generator. Response. The earlier estimate of $990,000 included funds for the preparation of final working plans and specifications and for the installation of three generators. We retained a consulting engineering firm, the Henry Adams Company of Baltimore, Maryland, to design the installation and these consultants advised that the plans should include the possibility of adding a fourth generator in the future. This additional electrical equipment, plus increased costs for the three generators over that originally estimated before final design became available, have increased the cost estimate substantially. However, the project is still cost effective and will pay back the installation cost in less than 7.5 years. Question. If we go along with your revised program, which now will cost $1,790,000, what will the annual savings be? Response. The annual savings will be approximately $250,000. On a simple payback basis, this will require approximately 7.5 years to recover the initial investment. If the anticipated increases in the charges made by PEPCO for supplying electricity to the Capitol Power Plant are factored into the financial analysis, the number of years required for payback are considerably less. Question. Have you netted the annual operating cost against the projected savings? Response. The annual operating costs are negligible since the number of hours of operation in order to shave the peak demand during the summer cooling period is estimated to be less than 100 hours per year. During operation, the cost of generating electricity is offset by the normal cost per kilowatt hour charge by PEPCO. Of course, in case of emergency, the generators are available to generate electricity for as many hours as required. It is almost impossible to guess how many actual hours the generators will run during any given year. LIBRARY BUILDINGS AND GROUNDS Mr. FAZIO. For Library buildings and grounds, we have a request for $6,039,000 and 133 positions for structural and mechanical care for the Library. I have no questions. [CLERK'S NOTE.-The material covering the fiscal year 1984 budget request for the deacidification facility and the restoration and renovation project has been included in the fiscal year 1984 supplemental hearings.] BOTANIC GARDEN Mr. FAZIO. You are requesting $2,044,000 and 57 positions for fiscal year 1985. I do not have any questions concerning this request. Are there any questions from other members of the committee? Mr. Lewis has submitted a question for the record concerning the Poplar Point Nursery. The question and a response follow:] QUESTION FOR RECORD FROM MR. LEWIS Question. I am interested in H.R. 3707-Does this bill deal with releasing the Poplar Point Nursery? I heard that to relocate the nursery and replace the greenhouses would cost about $12 million and the money would be coming out of the Transportation Fund? I have also heard a rumor about relocating the printing plants? Is all this part of your Master Plan of the Capitol? Response. H.R. 3707, a bill which seeks to authorize the transfer of the District of Columbia Employment Security Building from the Federal Government to the District of Columbia Government, is unrelated to the issue of the possible relocation of the U.S. Botanic Garden Poplar Point Nursery in Anacostia. It is, therefore, assumed that your question has reference to H.R. 4153, which was introduced on October 19, 1983, and which, if enacted, would direct the Architect of the Capitol to enter into an agreement with the District of Columbia Government to relocate certain greenhouse and nursery facilities of the U.S. Botanic Garden if WMATA's current plans for construction of the so-called "Green Line" to Prince George's County require the relocation of the U.S. Botanic Garden Poplar Point Nursery from Anacostia to another site. These plans woud entail "cut and cover" construction of the rail-line through the Nursery grounds, as well as construction of a subway station and parking facility on the site. These operations, if carried out, would necessitate the demolition of the Nursery's greenhouses and other structures, would interfere with outdoor plants, the operation of the Capitol Police canine facility and various storage and other activities carried on at the site. I am involved because the Joint Committee on the Library, which has jurisdiction over the Botanic Garden, has, since 1934, designated the Architect of the Capitol as acting director of the Botanic Garden, including the nursery. Thus, I act under the direction of and as the agent of the Joint Committee on the Library for these purposes. Since about 1976, a number of potential sites located on federal property have been identified by WMATA and recommended to us as suitable relocation sites. A number of these, after careful investigation, were found to be acceptable but for various reasons, including delays in commencing construction on the line, were eventually diverted to other uses. Most recently, during 1980 and 1981, a 25 acre federally owned site, known as Camp Simms, located in Southeast Washington, was identified as a potentially acceptable relocation site and considerable effort was expended by WMATA in performing studies to support that conclusion, including feasibility studies involving drainage, usage of existing buildings, transportation, etc. Based on these studies, Camp Simms was found to be a particularly attractive alternative because of the many existing structures on the site that could be utilized for storage and other purposes beneficial to the Congress. However, before any positive action to effect the transfer of Camp Simms could be taken, the District of Columbia Government expressed a strong interest in acquiring Camp Simms for local, community uses and offered to provide suitable acreage elsewhere to accommodate our Nursery operation. Inasmuch as the public benefit to be derived from utilization of Camp Simms for the purposes intended by the District Government was obvious, we cooperated with the District by relinquishing any claim to Camp Simms in favor of another acceptable site that was identified at so-called D.C. Village and is now the subject of H.R. 4153. Feasibility studies similar to those performed for Camp Simms have been prepared for the D.C. Village site and are now virtually complete. H.R. 4153, as I understand it, will enable the Poplar Point Nursery operation to be relocated with all of its existing buildings, structures and equipment replaced with state-of-the-art facilities. It will also provide an opportunity to acquire some additional structures to compensate, at least in part, for those lost to the District of Columbia when we relinquished to it the Camp Simms site. In this regard, I understand that it is the District of Columbia Government's intention to fund this relocation as a Federal-aid Highway project. Inasmuch as title to the land involved in this transaction is in the United States, I am informed that the District Government, pursuant to the provisions of Section 117 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (Public Law 97-424), expects to be entitled to receive 100 percent of the cost of relocation from the Department of Transportation. I am advised that such costs have been preliminarily estimated by the District Government's consultants at about $20,950,000. The possibility of relocating the printing plants was initially considered in connection with the planning study that was conducted on behalf of WMATA relative to the utilization of the many existing structures located at Camp Simms. Inasmuch as Camp Simms offered a number of suitable relocation facilities for activities such as printing, such a relocation appeared then to be an attractive option for consideration. The relocation study presently being conducted on behalf of the District Government with respect to D.C. Village does not specifically address the possibility of relocating the printers to that location. This would, of course, not preclude consideration of relocating the printers at some future date to a suitable site in the area identified in the study as available for eventual development for support facility needs, such as warehousing and light industrial uses. Of course, none of the foregoing relates in any way to the Master Plan for the Future Development of the Capitol Grounds, which the Architect was directed to prepare pursuant to Public Law 94-59, approved July 25, 1975, since the Poplar Point Nursery, being located in Anacostia, is geographically unrelated to the subject matter of the Master Plan, and, moreover, does not constitute a part of the area comprising the U.S. Capitol Grounds as defined in law (40 U.S.C. 193a). SECURITY REQUEST Mr. LEWIS. As I remember, in the 1984 supplemental you requested something over a couple million dollars for installation of additional electronic security equipment, and I think we all know the rising importance of security around here. But recently we had an extensive discussion related to some of those programs. There seems to be some overlap or duplication about some purchases made by the Capitol Police and the work that they have done installing this electronic equipment. Capitol Police staff does the work and there is not a budget request for installation. It seems that both of you are requesting a good deal of money to purchase security equipment. Can you outline that for us? You serve on the Police Board. Mr. LEWIS. Would you outline that? Are we duplicating budgets? Mr. WHITE. The answer is in terms of duplication, no, we are not duplicating in the purchase of electronic equipment. The only purchase that I am aware of that the Police made was recently in the form of the magnetometers, metal detectors that we now all walk |