[House Hearing, 110 Congress] [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office] HEARING ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE UNITED STATES CAPITOL POLICE- LIBRARY OF CONGRESS POLICE MERGER ======================================================================= HEARING before the COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION __________ MEETING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, JUNE 27, 2007 __________ Printed for the use of the Committee on House Administration Available on the Internet: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/house/administration/index.html ------- U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 37-024 PDF WASHINGTON DC: 2007 --------------------------------------------------------------------- For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866)512-1800 DC area (202)512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001 COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION ROBERT A. BRADY, Pennsylvania, Chairman ZOE LOFGREN, California, VERNON J. EHLERS, Michigan, Vice-Chairwoman Ranking Minority Member MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts DANIEL E. LUNGREN, California CHARLES A. GONZALEZ, Texas KEVIN McCARTHY, California SUSAN A. DAVIS, California ARTUR DAVIS, Alabama S. Elizabeth Birnbaum, Staff Director Will Plaster, Minority Staff Director ------- HEARING ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE U.S. CAPITOL POLICE-LIBRARY OF CONGRESS POLICE MERGER WEDNESDAY, JUNE 27, 2007 House of Representatives, Committee on House Administration, Washington, DC. The committee met, pursuant to call, at 11:36 a.m., in Room 1310, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Robert A. Brady [chairman of the committee] Presiding. Present: Representatives Brady, Lofgren, Capuano, Davis of Alabama, Ehlers, Lungren, and McCarthy. Staff Present: Liz Birnbaum, Staff Director; Teri Morgan, Deputy Chief of Staff; Michael Harrison, Professional Staff; Matt Pinkus, Professional Staff/Parliamentarian; Kristin McCowan, Chief Legislative Clerk; Kristie Muchnok, Professional Staff; Fred Hay, Minority General Counsel; and Bryan Dorsey, Minority Professional Staff. The Chairman. We will now call this hearing to order, and I recognize myself. The Ranking Member, who will join us momentarily, has given me permission to start without him. I recognize myself for 5 minutes for an opening statement. As most are aware, more than four years ago Congress enacted section 1015 of Public Law 108-7, the Legislative Appropriations Act of 2003, providing for a merger of the Library of Congress Police into the U.S. Capitol Police. Since that time, the agencies involved were charged with the task of developing a plan for implementation. I am pleased to report that after much prodding from this committee in the last six months, the Capitol Police and the Library of Congress have finally worked through the issues, and just last week finalized their recommendations for implementing this long overdue merger. Since the matter clearly falls within the authorizing jurisdiction of this committee in the House of Representatives, we are eager to review their recommendations as the first step toward advancing an appropriate authorizing bill through the legislative process. Today we will hear the views of the two affected agencies: Capitol Police, represented by Chief Phillip Morse; and the Library of Congress, represented by the Library's Chief Operating Officer Jo Ann Jenkins. We will also hear the testimony of the House Sergeant at Arms, Wilson Livingood, a security professional who has served on the Capitol Police Board, which oversees the Capitol Police, for more than 12 years. Lastly, but certainly not least, are the views of Michael Hutchins, the representative of policemen and policewomen who will be directly affected by this merger and are in the front line protecting this Capitol campus every day. Before yielding to the distinguished Ranking Minority Member of this committee, the Honorable Vernon Ehlers, I need to express that I look forward to working with all of you in order to achieve a seamless and fair transition and expect for me and my staff to have you and your staff's full cooperation. I now recognize the Ranking Member for five minutes for an opening statement. [The statement of Chairman Brady follows:] [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.001 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.002 Mr. Ehlers. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I apologize for my delay. I have two markups going on simultaneously, so it is not a good day; plus the fact that I woke up in a stupor this morning after the late night of votes last night. I thank the Chairman for his remarks and for calling today's hearing on the Library of Congress/Capitol Police merger. While bringing together these two organizations may seem like an easy proposition on paper, whenever you have two entities with existing cultures, established protocols and disparate missions, it is important to conduct a merger of those two groups thoughtfully and with due diligence. That is precisely what we are trying to do today. I welcome the opportunity to hear from the Library of Congress, the U.S. Capitol Police and others involved in this merger as to policies and procedures they have in place that will ensure that this union is successful and that it achieves the desired objectives of both organizations. To that end, there are several areas that I am particularly interested in and ask that each of our witnesses from the Library and U.S. Capitol Police address these concerns as they relate to their respective organizations. First, I want to assure all of the parties involved in this merger that you have my full support and that of my staff to complete your mission. Our goal is to make certain that you have the resources and assistance you need to successfully integrate your workforces and that we will do everything in our power to assist you. In particular, after your initial transition plan has been executed and you move into a phase where the effectiveness of the merger can be measured and your operations adjusted accordingly, we wish to provide a means to communicate with the Congress on your progress and impart any guidance or resources that your organizations require to achieve long-term success. Second, there are several areas where I would like to gain an understanding of your process as you continue to meld your organizations. For instance, how will your integration plans take into account the two distinct missions of your organizations? While the Library of Congress and U.S. Capitol Police both serve and protect the Congress and its assets, they do so in very different capacities. I am interested to hear from our witnesses today on how both organizations are working together to create a new shared vision that will apply the law enforcement expertise of the USCP to the unique needs of the Library. Third, how will we ensure that this merger doesn't adversely affect the core mission of either the Library or the USCP? The U.S. Capitol Police is primarily charged with securing the Capitol buildings, protecting Members of Congress, staff and visitors, and providing an emergency planning and response function in the event of a terrorist attack or other unplanned activity. Its core mission is too important to set aside, even in the interest of completing this merger. Similarly, the Library has a mission to serve the Congress and provide essential materials to enable Members and staff to get the information they need to effectively craft legislation and perform other essential duties. For example, one very important yet incomplete critical undertaking within the Library is to conduct an inventory of its collection, not only to have an accurate record of what materials are in its possession, but also to create a baseline for measurement of its inventory control efforts going forward. How will this merger impact the timeline for completion of this inventory? This and other important work within the Library must be completed in spite of the effort required to unite these two law enforcement bodies. I ask that our witnesses today provide this panel with the update on the effect of this merger on executing their core operations, and, if there is an impact, how that might be mitigated. Finally, I would like to get a sense from both of these organizations on how they plan to handle jurisdictional issues. For example, who will determine the number of officers deployed to a specific area of the Library; the U.S. Capitol Police, who are experts in proportional response, or the Library of Congress staff who have an innate understanding of the Library and its inner workings? Arguments can and likely will be made on both sides that their will should prevail. We must ensure that a hierarchy is in place to prevent such a breakdown in the chain of command before one occurs. Again, I thank our witnesses for the time today, and I look forward to receiving the testimony on this important effort, and I hope my obligations on the other two committees don't keep me away from this hearing too long. Thank you very much. The Chairman. I thank the gentleman. [The statement of Mr. Ehlers follows:] [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.003 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.004 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.005 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.006 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.007 The Chairman. Are there any other opening statements? Before beginning, the committee received testimony yesterday from the Inspector General of the Library of Congress. Without objection, I submit this testimony for the record. [The statement of Mr. Schornagel follows:] [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.008 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.009 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.010 The Chairman. I welcome the members of the panel and ask that they summarize their statements within the initial five minutes, and without objection, the written statements from witnesses will appear in the record of the hearing. We will begin with the Sergeant at Arms, The Honorable Wilson Livingood; and then move on to Chief Phillip D. Morse, Sr., Chief of Police, U.S. Capitol Police; and then Ms. Jo Ann Jenkins, Chief Operating Officer, Library of Congress; and lastly, Mr. Michael Hutchins, Chairman of the Fraternal Order of Police, Library of Congress Labor Committee. Before we start, I want you to know that my dad was a police officer, so my heart, mind, body, and soul are on your side every step of the way. I do understand and respect the job that you do every single day. When there is a problem, we run out and you guys are running in. So you are among a lot of friends. I appreciate the job you do to keep all of us and our families safe every single day that you are here. STATEMENTS OF HON. WILSON LIVINGOOD, SERGEANT AT ARMS, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES; CHIEF PHILIP D. MORSE, SR., CHIEF OF POLICE, UNITED STATES CAPITOL POLICE; JO ANN C. JENKINS, CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER, LIBRARY OF CONGRESS; MICHAEL HUTCHINS, CHAIRMAN, THE FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE, LIBRARY OF CONGRESS LABOR COMMITTEE The Chairman. Sergeant at Arms, you are on. STATEMENT OF WILSON LIVINGOOD Mr. Livingood. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for those comments, and good morning. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ehlers, and distinguished members of the committee, I am honored to appear before you today to discuss the merger of police operations between the U.S. Capitol Police and the Library of Congress Police. Before I begin, I want to thank the members of this committee for their steadfast and unwavering support of the men and women of the United States Capitol Police all the time. You have helped make it one of the finest law enforcement organizations in our Nation, and we will continue to strive to be the best. As I begin this morning, I believe it would be helpful to provide some background concerning the merger of the policing and security operations of the Capitol Police and the Library of Congress Police. When the merger was first considered, there was general and widespread agreement among virtually all of the affected groups that the underlying concept of a coordinated integration of police and security elements relating to the legislative branch was advantageous. There was an essential measure of institutional efficiency and effectiveness of security. The lessons we learned from 9/11, the anthrax attacks on the Congress, and Hurricane Katrina all pointed in one direction; and that is an integrated and coordinated communications and operations structure with clear lines of authority, that is absolutely critical to an effective emergency response effort. The anticipated merger is designed to aid the congressional community in that objective. All have agreed with the concept of a merger between the Capitol Police and the Library of Congress Police and the resulting benefits. Everyone also recognized there were many challenges involved. These range from operational and legal considerations, as well as employee protection considerations. With these thoughts in mind, the Capitol Police Board and the Capitol Police have constantly maintained that the merger must address these issues and be accomplished in a systematic, thoughtful, and appropriate manner. Unquestionably, there will be operational and administrative details that will require ongoing adjustments. However, from the policing and security perspective, any final legislative enactment, I believe, should provide clarity of the role, responsibilities, and expectations of all involved entities. It should grant the United States Capitol Police the unfettered ability and statutory authority to appropriately carry out the traditional mission of law enforcement and congressional security. Moreover, it is essential that the merger process provide the Capitol Police with adequate resources and a well-defined responsibility so that the Capitol Police are in a position to successfully carry out its fundamental operational mission of protecting the core functions of the legislative process. There are some items that are not covered by current proposed legislation. We are looking forward to working with the committee and staff to rectify the remaining issues regarding law enforcement authority. After hearing from other witnesses who intend to present opening statements, I will be more than happy to respond to any questions you might have regarding this important issue. Mr. Chairman, in closing I want to thank the committee for the opportunity to appear before you today. The Chairman. Thank you. And you are welcome. [The statement of Mr. Livingood follows:] [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.011 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.012 The Chairman. Chief Phillip D. Morse. STATEMENT OF PHILLIP D. MORSE Mr. Morse. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before the committee on House Administration today to discuss the status of the merger of the Library of Congress Police into the United States Capitol Police. The United States Capitol Police maintains the honor of protecting the Congress, its legislative process, as well as staff and visitors to the Capitol complex. We protect and secure Congress so it can fulfill its constitutional responsibilities in a safe and open environment. As the foremost symbol of American representative democracy, congressional operations are a highly visible target for individuals and organizations intent on causing harm to the United States and disrupting the legislative process of our government. In 2003 the Congress provided for the transfer of the personnel and functions of the Library of Congress Police to the United States Capitol Police with the intention of creating a cohesive, unified law enforcement and security operation. At the direction of the Congress, U.S. Capitol Police undertook the development of a comprehensive implementation plan which identified how two organizations would be merged together, as well as identifying potential legislative, personnel and fiscal issues requiring resolution before the overall transfer would occur. This implementation plan served as a guidance and direction for the U.S. Capitol Police in implementing those components of the merger which were within the authorization and jurisdiction of the U.S. Capitol Police and did not require legislative resolution. Over the subsequent years, the U.S. Capitol Police has worked closely with the Library of Congress through a memorandum of understanding to provide daily operational oversight and direction for the Library of Congress Police. Additionally, the U.S. Capitol Police has implemented a dedicated division within the operational components of the department to provide for security of the Library of Congress as part of the Capitol complex. A U.S. Capitol Police Inspector heads the division and it is comprised of the remaining Library of Congress police officers as well as U.S. Capitol Police officers and officials. To accomplish the mission of protecting the Capitol complex, inclusive of the Library of Congress, the U.S. Capitol Police is committed to continuing to work diligently to effect the merger of the Library of Congress Police into the department in order to achieve the intent of Congress for a seamless law enforcement and security operation with a unified command and control. With the help of Congress and the Capitol Police Board, the department will ensure that appropriate planning and resources are in place to achieve a successful transfer of law enforcement and security responsibilities, provide for a reasonable outcome for the Library of Congress employees involved in the merger, and provide for clear delineation of roles and responsibility for the security of the Library of Congress collections. As chief of the Capitol Police I take great pride in the many years of service this department has provided to Congress. Building on that legacy, we, the United States Capitol Police, look forward to continuing to safeguard Congress, staff, and visitors to the Capitol complex during these challenging times. In addition, we look forward to working with Congress, and particularly this committee, to effect the successful transfer of the Library of Congress Police in order to achieve the congressional vision of a unified law enforcement and security operation for the Capitol complex. I would like to take this opportunity to thank Dr. Billington for his support, and commend Jo Ann Jenkins and her staff for their full cooperation and guidance that has been invaluable in making this merger proposal successful. I thank you for the opportunity to appear here today and for your continued support for the men and women of the U.S. Capitol Police. I request that the full text of my testimony be entered into the record, and I am ready to address any questions you may have. Thank you. The Chairman. Without objection, it will be entered in the record. Thank you, Chief. [The statement of Mr. Morse follows:] [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.013 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.014 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.015 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.016 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.017 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.018 The Chairman. Ms. Jo Ann C. Jenkins. STATEMENT OF JO ANN C. JENKINS Ms. Jenkins. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Ehlers, members of the committee. I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the police merger of the Library of Congress and the U.S. Capitol Police. It has been a long time, but the Library of Congress and the Capitol Police are in agreement to complete the police merger and to achieve the goal of Congress for seamless security on Capitol Hill. We believe the draft legislation before this committee will complete the task that Congress began formally in 2003. Dr. Billington and I have forged a productive and collegial working relationship with Capitol Police Chief Morse, and the assistant chief, and we thank them for the understanding of our unique institutional needs as we gained a better appreciation for their central goal in providing security throughout the Capitol complex. I also want to thank publicly Capitol Police Inspector Tom Reynolds and Inspector Fred Rogers and the many Capitol Police assigned to the Library of Congress for their dedication in working with us to operate an effective combined police force over the last several years. The Library of Congress is forever grateful to the outstanding officers of the Library's police force for their professionalism and devotion to duty. A merger between the Library and Capitol Police force has been under discussion for some 20 years now. In 1987 Congress approved legislation mandating pay comparability between the Library Police and the Capitol Police and in 1990 directed the two forces to begin studying a merger. During this time the Library instituted a number of measures to strengthen security of its collections by integrating and updating physical security, preservation, and inventory management controls while further defining the central role of the Library Police for collections security. The Library also collaborated closely with the Capitol Police and the Architect of the Capitol in installing physical security enhancements, which were a part of the overall Capitol complex security improvements, such as the new police command center, intrusion detection systems, vehicle barriers, screening equipment, and security video cameras. Once the Congress set a merger in motion in 2003, our goal has been to integrate the two forces in a way that enhances overall security, maintains the historic statutory role of the Librarian of Congress to safeguard the Library's staff, visitors, and the priceless collections and provides maximum fairness for our police officers by ensuring no one is harmed by this merger. We believe this legislation achieves these goals and provides for a period of orderly transition, culminating in a completed merger by the end of fiscal year 2009. The Library of Congress supports the police merger legislation now before this committee and respectfully requests its approval. Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement and I would be happy to answer any questions you or other members of the committee may have. And I also ask that a statement by the Librarian and my longer statement appear in the record. The Chairman. Without objection. Thank you. [The statement of Ms. Jenkins follows:] [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.019 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.020 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.021 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.022 The Chairman. Officer Michael Hutchins. STATEMENT OF MICHAEL HUTCHINS Mr. Hutchins. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, good afternoon. I am Officer Michael G. Hutchins, Private First Class, a 31-year employee of the Library of Congress and Chairman of the Fraternal Order of Police, Library of Congress Labor Committee. I represent the remaining 82 police officers and technicians in the bargaining unit of the Library of Congress Police. Thank you for allowing me to appear before the committee to express our concerns regarding the proposed merge of the Library of Congress Police with the United States Capitol Police. Our full testimony has been submitted for the record. From the inception of the idea of a merger, our members were somewhat elated that finally a seamless security was being established with us--emphasis on us--included to contract our talent, experience and attention to duty in securing the Capitol Hill complex. We were all disgraced when it was realized that somewhere in the process considerations were not given that a grandfather clause be entertained that would have kept all officers employed in their chosen profession. This would have mitigated for the loyal and dedicated officers that pride themselves on tenure and duty, who desire longevity in their position as police officers. Very disheartening is the distance and disconnection from us by the Chief of the Capitol Police and the Capitol Police Board. We think it is reasonable to have knowledge as to what is expected to successfully transition to this agency. Our members do want the merge of the two departments to become a reality, but we desire that it occur in the true sense of the definition of a merge. We deserve to have this accomplished in the most fair and equitable manner possible so that all Library of Congress Police Officers will be afforded the opportunity to transition into the United States Capitol Police and be allowed to continue to serve as police officers until such time as they are entitled to an unreduced annuity. As a result of the extensive delay of the proposed merger, our careers have been placed in a state of suspense. There has been no opportunity for lateral or upward mobility like that realized by our combined law enforcement partners that we work united with daily. Even small items such as attending to the statutory law and the issuance of the same weapons and equipment is stagnant, also showing no true urgency to attain seamless security. In closing, we confirm that we desire a merger to occur. It is a logical and practical goal. However, again we emphasize the hope that it would be accomplished in a fair and equitable manner resulting in the following: Number one, that all officers that meet the United States Capitol Police age and years of service requirement be laterally transferred into the United States Capitol Police, their complete system. This will make the Library of Congress Police whole and without loss of time or status. Number two, all remaining officers, regardless of age or tenure, be retained in their positions as police officers. This can be brought about by whatever your expertise deems possible. Again, we emphasize that these dedicated men and women deserve the opportunity to work the required time in order to realize an unreduced annuity for their services rendered to the United States Government. We sincerely believe that the completion of this process within a reasonable period and in a fair and equitable manner will obtain the desired result of the seamless security sought throughout the Capitol Hill complex. With your help and expertise, this can become a reality. Thank you for your attention to this matter and the time you have allowed us today. [The statement of Mr. Hutchins follows:] [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.023 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.024 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.025 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.026 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.027 The Chairman. Thank you, Officer. I just have a couple of real quick questions, and then I will let others who have questions go. Officer Hutchins, everybody seems to be in accord with this merger. I spoke with you, and we are going to try to address it in the best way we can, but they talked about grandfathering people in. How many people would not be grandfathered in under the present merger? Mr. Hutchins. Under the present proposal we received, 21 people would not be afforded the opportunity to continue in their career as a police officer, and of the 61 that would---- The Chairman. Please turn your mike on. Mr. Hutchins. I apologize. Under the current proposal, 21 officers will not be able to transition to the United States Capitol Police as police officers. They would be under the proposal for the civilian positions. Of the 61 remaining officers, several of them because of their age and tenure, wouldn't be around much longer, maybe a year or two or what have you. I don't have the exact numbers. The reason we took the grandfather clause was because of the fact that conditions that we were under prior to legislation being passed we felt warranted some exemption to this. We have an established retirement system that, to my knowledge, they would continue to fund it, we could become Capitol Police Officers. Under that particular retirement system, the Capitol Police would be under their retirement system. Somewhat like the Metropolitan Police which has two or three different retirement systems in that agency. The Chairman. You first said the first group of 21 that would not be able to continue, would not be because of age, so what would it be a result of? Mr. Hutchins. Actually, most of the officers, not all of the 21, would not be able to attain 20 years of service before they reach the age of 60. So 60 is the drop-off number for Capitol Police. The Chairman. Because they started later? Mr. Hutchins. Yes, sir. Also, some of them will have already reached the age and have enough time to actually get an unreduced annuity. The Chairman. Okay. I understand the pay is not the issue because we don't really do the pay, that is subject to another committee, and the pension can be a problem, and age is a problem. I guess, Chief, talking about training, would there be a problem with the new people coming in and would they have to do some extra training to come up to a standard different than the Library of Congress as Capitol Police Officers? Mr. Morse. Once they became Capitol Police officers, we also go through 10 weeks of training for the functions that we do as Capitol Police officers, they would need to attend the 10 weeks of Capitol Police training. The Chairman. I understand that you are trying to look at it from this point as a two year process. Hopefully if we can resolve this and come to some agreements with the Capitol and the Library Police, that could it happen sooner. If you are talking about 10 weeks for training, that is less than 2 years. Mr. Morse. There are other things involved in the transition. For instance--and I believe Mr. Ehlers had mentioned concepts of operations and integrating those. In the first year we are looking at administrative policy, operational policy, assets, resources, identifying those, ensuring that they are in place. The second year is really evaluating the employees, placing the employees, training the employees, preparing the employees for the duties and responsibilities of the U.S. Capitol Police. The timeline is very specific, and it is a two-year process. The Chairman. One real quick question. The Capitol Police, do they retrain as they go, after so many years? Do they get regular physicals or anything like that? Mr. Morse. Regarding training, training is ongoing, both mandatory and in service. There is also experienced officer training that we put our officers through routinely. As far as a physical, no. The Chairman. The only thought is when I first came here nine years ago, I was in a different size suit myself, and I thought maybe a little disadvantage for the Library Police to get new physicals and the Capitol Police don't have to. I don't want to see injustice done to them. But we do want to have fit police officers out there, even though we may not have fit Congressmen. I just wanted to know what would happen. I thank you. I yield to the Ranking Member Mr. Ehlers for any questions. Mr. Ehlers. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Your comments make me wonder if perhaps we need a job retraining program for Congressmen after a few years on the job. I note that your proposed legislative language was adopted by the Senate Legislative Branch Appropriations Subcommittee. I am curious: Have they done a detailed cost analysis or have you worked out a detailed cost analysis at this point? Mr. Morse. Within the past few years there have been analyses done on costs. For instance, in the area of employee transfer salary and benefits, salary and benefits of new police officers, overtime salaries and benefits, general expenses-- there is certainly not a precise cost, because we would have to wait for legislation to be approved for certain things to occur. The only remaining costs that we can't be specific on right now are the physical security implementation costs, because that requires an assessment to see if the USCP and Library systems can be integrated without any issues. But we do have a cost analysis in those areas that I stated, and I can submit those to you for review if you would like. Mr. Ehlers. We would appreciate that. Ms. Jenkins, do you have anything to add? Ms. Jenkins. No, sir. I would just say that we have been working closely with the Capitol Police and we are trying to maximize the resources that we would transfer to the Capitol Police, and feel comfortable with the estimate they have come up with. Mr. Ehlers. Thank you. I do want to commend both of you. I know this has been a very long process. In fact, I at one point decided it would probably not be done before I die or retire. You proved me wrong. I appreciate the dedicated purpose that both organizations, particularly both of you, have put into resolving the many, many questions. I have another question. Well, I can't specify it exactly, but the drafts of legislation forwarded to us leaves several matters to be resolved through future negotiations between the Library and the Capitol Police. Can you describe how you can go about resolving these matters? These aren't deal stoppers, are they? Mr. Morse. We don't believe that they are deal stoppers but there are areas that require some further analysis. And the issues that we addressed here to get to the point we are now at may have brought to our attention things that we didn't think about and that we have to ensure are absolutely correct. But none of those issues are deal stoppers, and we look forward to continuing the relationship we have and completing the merger. Mr. Ehlers. So both of you are confident you will be able to resolve these issues in a timely fashion. Ms. Jenkins. Yes. Mr. Ehlers. Good. Thank you. Another question is the role of the inspector general, particularly in oversight investigations, but also investigations of any thefts, crimes and improprieties. The Library has its inspector general and the Capitol Police has their inspector general. Who is really going to be in charge of those investigations in the Library? Mr. Morse. We both can answer this. Certainly there may be some change, but the way I always look at the merger and any Capitol Police operation that we transition somewhere else is that it should mirror what we currently have, and so I would say that the Capitol Police inspector general would continue to do the things that he does with the Capitol Police employees and that the inspector general of the Library would continue to do his responsibilities, perhaps with some more clarification, so that there is no overlap in their responsibilities; i.e., criminal investigations of our employees and things like that. I think that can be easily corrected. Mr. Ehlers. As long as they don't start investigating each other. Another question: What is the role of the Capitol Police Board in determining regulations governing physical security in the Library of Congress? Perhaps Mr. Livingood? Mr. Livingood. Currently the Library has its own physical securities section, and after the merger the Capitol Police are going to be doing a survey to see what equipment they now have and to find out if this technology they have can be integrated into our system. Once that is finished, we are going to be discussing should the physical security remain with the Library of Congress responsibility or should it be transferred to the U.S. Capitol Police. If it is transferred to the Capitol Police, we would receive input from the Library, what they would need from the Library and the Librarian. And in matters of priorities--a lot of times the Capitol Police Board is asked to come up by the committees, what is the priority--we would, working with the Library, come up with a list of priorities both for here and for the Library. Mr. Ehlers. Last question. The Librarian is allowed to determine policy and procedures for physical security and collection security that the Capitol Police is expected to enforce. Doesn't this in some way make an overlapping responsibility with the current Police Board? Mr. Morse. Just as we do with the Committee on House administration, and the Senate Rules Committee, the Librarian would maintain the oversight of rules and regulations within the building, and certainly because of the security of the collections, and the focus of the Librarian, that he would have oversight in how those things were protected. Once again, the Capitol Police would submit its expert opinion, recommendations, to ensure the safety not only of the collections but the people in the complex, and we would hope to come to the same resolutions we have with all these other issues that we are addressing. I don't see any issue. It is a matter of us managing the police functions in order to protect. Mr. Ehlers. Once again I want to thank you and commend you for the progress you have made on this. It is not an easy task. I have been in negotiations of this type before and I am pleased you have reached this agreement and hope the rest is good as well. Thank you. I yield back. The Chairman. Thank you. Mr. Capuano. Mr. Capuano. Mr. Chairman, I want to follow up on your comments and ask Officer Hutchins, is it fair to say that the bumps left in the road mostly revolve around the 21 people that you mentioned that may not be able to continue their careers as they had planned? Mr. Hutchins. Not continue their careers as police officers, sir. Here again, their heart is there. As Chairman Brady spoke of, he was a police officer and it doesn't go away. Mr. Capuano. Is it fair to say that most of the bumps that remain in this agreement mostly revolve around concerns of those 21; is that a fair representation or not? Mr. Hutchins. That is fair; yes, sir. Mr. Capuano. What I would like at some point is I would like maybe some written commentary on the specific concerns of these 21 people: What is it that is stopping them? Is it age, physical condition, whatever it is; because I am sure that we would like a breakdown, but individually. My guess is there are several different reasons that apply to different people and I would be curious myself to find out what issues you identify as specific to the individuals. Not now but at some later point. Mr. Hutchins. Yes, sir; we will get that to you as soon as possible. Mr. Capuano. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Chairman. Thank you. The gentleman from California, Mr. Lungren. Mr. Lungren. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate all the work that you folks have done on this, but according to my observations from when I was Attorney General of California, this seems to be making it far more complicated than it ought to be. We had a merger of State Police with the CHP in California. We had in my own district establishment of the Citrus Heights Police Department breaking away from the County of Sacramento Sheriff. We managed 25 or 35 joint task forces around California, led by the Department of Justice. Man, in 2003 the decision was made to do this; we are now in 2007; now you are telling us if we are lucky, by the end of 2009 we will have the merger accomplished. What are we doing? I mean are we reinventing law enforcement as we know it in the modern era? Chief, I am perplexed that it sounds so complicated. You have got good men and women, good supervision, and you have the standards set. Why does it take 2 years, if we are lucky? Mr. Morse. I agree with you. Mr. Lungren. No one else does. Four people say maybe we will get there, but we have got all these problems. Mr. Morse. I have been chief since October 30, 2006 and in the last 3 months we have come to resolution on issues that have been around since 2003. One of the things that I found has made this very successful is reaching out to the Library of Congress, face to face, and discussing the issues frankly and coming to resolution. So I have proceeded very quickly with this. The Library has assisted with that. And with what I inherited I think that 2 years to resolve it is certainly long overall, but for what I was given to resolve, I think a 2-year timeframe is good. Mr. Lungren. So how many sworn officers do you have now, 1,900 or something like that? Mr. Morse. 1,671 is our authorized strength. Mr. Lungren. And we are going to add 83, as I recall. Mr. Morse. The Library of Congress police authorized FTE is 148. Mr. Lungren. I am talking about real live people. How many real live people, sworn officers, do we have now? We heard from Officer Hutchins that 21 are not going to be eligible. We are talking about the eligibles. Ms. Jenkins. We have 99 officers on the Library of Congress' payroll now who are not U.S. Capitol Police officers. Mr. Lungren. Sworn officers, 99. Do you agree with Officer Hutchins there are 21 now that would not be eligible to transfer in? Ms. Jenkins. According to our Human Resources, we have 23 officers who would not transfer as Capitol Police officers but they would transfer as Capitol Police civilian staff. Mr. Lungren. So we are talking about, if that scenario remained, we would add 76 officers to 671 officers--no, 1,671 officers, right? Mr. Morse. Yes, sir. Mr. Lungren. Officer Hutchins, how old are the oldest officers who are, quote-unquote, ineligible right now under this scenario that has been presented here? Mr. Hutchins. Sir, the age in question is 57. Capitol Police, you cannot come on board after you have obtained your 37th birthday, and 57 is the cutoff. In order to get the other 3 years they extend to you, you must submit written documentation. Mr. Lungren. I guess my question is what is the age limit of officers? Mr. Hutchins. Presently at the Library there is none, as long as we successfully pass the physical. Mr. Lungren. So how old are the oldest officers? Mr. Hutchins. We have some guys that retire from Metropolitan that came on board maybe in their fifties. Mr. Lungren. How old would they be now? Mr. Hutchins. Our oldest, I think we come up to 2020 where we would have to keep people on board if they retired in the system we are now. Mr. Lungren. That is not my question. The question is the age. Ms. Jenkins. The range of the officers are from their late twenties, up to early seventies. Mr. Lungren. Mr. Livingood, you have been involved in this for some period of time. Any reason why we can't accelerate this? Mr. Livingood. I think that we have come an awful long ways and it has taken a long period, but as Chief Morse said, in the recent 6 months they have come an awful long ways. I think that now that we are ready, it appears to be a finalization of this. I think you have to have--you couldn't do it tomorrow. It would be sometime after a merger has been signed. It has not been signed yet. Mr. Lungren. Didn't we start Iraq in 2003? Mr. Livingood. That is what I say. Yes, sir. Mr. Lungren. I am saying Iraq. Didn't we start Iraq in 2003? Mr. Livingood. Around there, yes. Mr. Lungren. We have got people telling us we have been there too long. That was a pretty big assignment. Mr. Livingood. I think it is a different issue, but I understand what your point is. Mr. Lungren. Yield back. The Chairman. Thank the gentleman. Mr. McCarthy. Mr. McCarthy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If I can just follow up with Jo Ann, how many officers do we have in the Library of Congress--because you said 23, the officer said 21. Is the real number 23? Ms. Jenkins. Yes, sir. Mr. McCarthy. Is it my understanding that those sworn officers on the transfer over would be civilian employees and be under CRS or FERS retirement system, just as the Library of Congress police officers are today. Is that right? Ms. Jenkins. My understanding is that the way the legislation is written now, if it were passed as it is, the officers would be under the Library of Congress retirement system for the period of time they were Library of Congress employees and they would be under the Capitol Police retirement system for the number of years they were under that system. Mr. McCarthy. How many officers in the Library of Congress are over the age of 60? Ms. Jenkins. I would have to get Human Resources to run the numbers. Mr. McCarthy. Do we have a guess? Because you gave me a range from the twenties to the seventies. How old is the oldest officer? Ms. Jenkins. I'm sorry. The Human Resources is telling me the oldest officer is 66, and there are 10 of them. Mr. McCarthy. Ten of them over 60? Ms. Jenkins. Yes, sir. Mr. McCarthy. Now I'm confused because you told me in the seventies. Ms. Jenkins. I misspoke. The oldest officer is 66. By the time the police merger goes through. Mr. McCarthy. I have had information that someone once told me we had an officer that was 80 years old. Could we have the Human Resource person follow up? Let me move to Police Chief Morse. Your June 14 memo I have here, and I guess this memo is not signed off on, you state in fiscal year 2008 you require an additional 450,000 to conduct necessary studies in preparation for the integration of the Library of Congress security and information system. Additional resources will be required in fiscal year 2009 to achieve the full merger. Will you elaborate what that would be for? Mr. Morse. That is for the physical security assessment integration, and that would yield us answers as to the total amount it would take to make that integration happen. So in 2009 we would be requesting money to make that integration happen if we thought it was---- Mr. McCarthy. I'm a freshman so you will have to walk me through this. This evaluation of Library of Congress officers, you are going to evaluate them or evaluate the system of how you are merging it? Mr. Morse. The physical security systems, alarms, camera systems. Mr. McCarthy. Is that going to be contracted out? Mr. Morse. Yes. Mr. McCarthy. So this 450, you have some estimates out there or is this a guess? Mr. Morse. We have some rough estimates. Mr. McCarthy. So could come higher, could come lower. Mr. Morse. Right. Mr. McCarthy. I just want to finish up with, if I can ask Jo Ann, Mr. Chairman, I think we have some numbers here that are quite different than what other information has been provided. I think the committee needs some follow-up especially between the 21, 23, and the ages. If we can get a list of all the officers of the Library of Congress, their ages, and how long they have been on the force, that would be helpful to this committee. With that, I will yield my time. Mr. Lungren. Will the gentleman yield. Mr. McCarthy. I yield to Mr. Lungren. Mr. Lungren. Mr. Chairman, the reason I am a little upset is I had my staff talk to people at the Library of Congress yesterday. We got a certain number. Our staff had gotten a number earlier. Now we get a different number now. It is not the question of the number but, frankly, I don't appreciate getting three different types of information from the Library of Congress about the way they are running things. To me, that shows disrespect for this committee that is supposed to have jurisdiction over the Library of Congress and, frankly, I don't appreciate getting three different numbers and getting an entirely different number here. As I prepared for this hearing, I based it on information that we received, and if we are going to take the time to ask, I expect to get an honest answer, and I don't appreciate any different answer. This committee has jurisdiction over this, and frankly those that are under the jurisdiction of this committee ought to understand when we ask them questions, we expect a straight answer, not three different answers in 3 different days. I thank the gentleman for the time. Mr. McCarthy. I yield back to the Chairman. The Chairman. Thank you. I do agree with you. We ought to get the list of officers at the Library of Congress, with their ages, and also get a list of these civilians and how they become civilian officers; what is the effect of their pensions; what is the effect of their longevity. I think we need this information to us on the committee as soon as possible so we can intelligently move forward and we have something on paper that everybody agrees to, and I hope that will satisfy the members on our committee. Does anybody have anything else? If you can get that to us as quickly as possible because we want to get this merger done. We want to work it out. We don't want anyone to lose their jobs. That is part of the reason we are asking questions, because we want to make sure we protect those people. We don't want them to lose their benefits, we want to make sure they are made whole. I think we can do that by working together, everybody working together in unison to get a fair merger, which is what I understood and heard both sides would want to happen. We may have to do our due diligence and for myself--and I think I can speak for everybody on this committee--I know they are interested in trying to get this done. Anything we can do to be helpful to bring this to a complete closure so everybody is happy and on the same page, we would like to do that. Again, hearing no other questions--would anybody like to say anything else--this hearing is adjourned. [Whereupon, at 12:27 p.m., the committee was adjourned.] [Information follows:] [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.030 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.031 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.032 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.033 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.034 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.035 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.036 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.037 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.038 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.039 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 37024A.040