This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-02-792R entitled 'Review of Potential Merger of the Library of Congress Police and/or the Government Printing Office Police with the U.S. Capitol Police' which was released on July 5, 2002. This text file was formatted by the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this document to Webmaster@gao.gov. This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately. GAO-02-792R: United States General Accounting Office: Washington, DC 20548: July 5, 2002: The Honorable Richard J. Durbin: Chairman: The Honorable Robert F. Bennett: Ranking Minority Member: Subcommittee on the Legislative Branch: Committee on Appropriations: United States Senate: The Honorable Wilson Livingood: Chairman: The Honorable Alfonso E. Lenhardt: Member: The Honorable Alan M. Hantman: Member: Capitol Police Board: Subject: Review of Potential Merger of the Library of Congress Police and/or the Government Printing Office Police with the U.S. Capitol Police: In the wake of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and subsequent anthrax incidents, protecting the Capitol complex[Footnote 1] has gained greater significance. Currently there are over 30 police forces operating in the District of Columbia, many of which have some authority or jurisdiction within the Capitol Hill area. Three of these, the Library of Congress (LOC) Police, the Government Printing Office (GPO) Police, and the U.S. Capitol Police (USCP), are part of the legislative branch of the federal government. This report responds to the requirements of the Senate Committee on Appropriations’ July 2001 report accompanying the legislative branch appropriations bill for fiscal year 2002.[Footnote 2] The Senate committee report directed GAO, in consultation with all stakeholders, to complete an updated evaluation on the feasibility of consolidating the LOC Police and/or the GPO Police with the USCP. As stated in the committee report, an updated evaluation on the feasibility of consolidating these police forces was deemed important to address the perceived need for consistently applied security policies and practices, efficient management of resources, and fair and equitable treatment of law enforcement personnel. The committee report also directed us to address issues related to ensuring an orderly transition, including the protection of the rights of affected staff. After discussion with Senate Appropriations committee staff, we agreed to (1) determine whether it is feasible for the LOC and/or GPO police forces to merge with the USCP; (2) determine how, if at all, a merger might affect overall security on Capitol Hill; (3) identify the costs and potential efficiencies associated with merging the LOC and/or GPO police forces with the USCP; and (4) identify issues that would need to be addressed prior to a merger, should a merger be deemed desirable. To address these objectives we reviewed prior reports on potential USCP mergers; reviewed policies, procedures, and general orders from the LOC, GPO, and USCP forces; and analyzed available personnel, budget, and cost data. We also interviewed officials from all three forces and the Capitol Police Board. In addition, we interviewed officials from the Fraternal Order of Police Labor Committees for the LOC, GPO, and USCP forces; Metropolitan Police Department of the District of Columbia; U.S. Supreme Court Police; New York City Police Department; International Association of Chiefs of Police; a private security consulting firm; Legislative Branch Emergency Preparedness Task Force; and Office of Personnel Management. To complete our analysis, in consultation with the requester’s staff, we made some general assumptions. To address the application of consistent security policies and practices and organizational efficiencies, we assumed that the LOC and/or GPO police forces would become separate divisions of the existing USCP organizational structure, that a merged force would be governed by a unified chain of command, and that some or all merged LOC and/or GPO officers would be fungible with the USCP officers. Additionally, for purposes of calculating increased salary costs and costs to provide enhanced retirement benefits to merged officers, we assumed that there would be a 5-year transition period after the implementation of a merger in order to not adversely affect the rights of staff and to provide fair and equitable treatment. Five years would allow merged LOC and/or GPO officers time to (1) transition to the USCP while mitigating the potential adverse effects of a merger, such as the possible application of the USCP mandatory retirement age to merged officers, and (2) acquire 5 years of service to allow certain officers to maintain enrollment in federal health insurance programs, if these officers were required to retire in 5 years. Although merger costs would be incurred over several years, for purposes of our analysis we estimated the costs as though they were being incurred in the first year. Specifically, in these cost estimates we included the total present value of increasing GPO officers’ salaries for the first 5 years of the merger, and did not calculate these costs beyond that point because after 5 years the composition of the workforce could change significantly, in part due to mandatory retirement of certain merged officers. We also included the present value of the increase in the total cost of providing enhanced retirement benefits to LOC and/or GPO officers. Additionally, we present the total cost to train some or all merged officers, although these costs might be spread over several years. Enclosure I provides more detailed information about our scope and methodology. We conducted our work between January and May 2002 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. In April and May 2002, we briefed Committee staff, Capitol Police Board members, and other interested parties on the results of our review. Enclosure II provides summary slides containing updated material from those briefings, and enclosure III provides detailed information estimating the costs of a potential merger. In this report we summarize the results of our evaluation and identify four options for Congress to consider with respect to merging the LOC Police and/or the GPO Police with the USCP. Background: Three legislative branch police forces, namely the LOC Police, the GPO Police, and the USCP, are located on or within a few blocks of the Capitol complex. The USCP is by far the largest of these three police forces, with 1,208 police officers[Footnote 3] and a fiscal year 2003 budget request of about $220 million. The LOC Police, with 122 officers, is part of LOC’s Office of Security, which in fiscal year 2003 submitted a budget request of about $14 million. The GPO Police, with 53 officers, is part of GPO’s Physical Security Group, whose fiscal year 2003 budget is about $3.9 million.[Footnote 4] The USCP is responsible for securing the 276-acre Capitol complex; protecting Members of Congress, their staff, 19 buildings, national treasures, and visitors; and regulating traffic within the Capitol grounds. The USCP has both a primary and extended jurisdiction. The USCP’s primary jurisdiction includes the Capitol and its surrounding office buildings and grounds. Beyond the boundaries of its primary jurisdiction, the USCP co-patrols an extended jurisdiction with the Metropolitan Police Department of the District of Columbia. The LOC Police primarily provides protection for LOC staff, congressional and public visitors, national treasures, and guards six buildings, including the Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and James Madison buildings -- two of which are located within the USCP’s primary jurisdiction. The GPO Police primarily provides protection for GPO staff and four buildings. The buildings are located near Union Station within the USCP’s extended jurisdiction (see map in enclosure II, slide 12, on page 28). USCP officers may receive retirement benefits comparable to other federal law enforcement officers, whereas LOC and GPO officers receive standard federal retirement benefits. USCP officers are subject to a mandatory retirement at 57 years of age with 20 years of service, [Footnote 5] which is not the case with the LOC or GPO police forces. The LOC and the USCP have the same pay scale, whereas the GPO Police has a lower pay scale. New officers in all three police forces are generally required to attend basic training at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center; however, the USCP also requires its officers to complete an additional 18 weeks of USCP-specific training. In contrast, LOC officers generally receive 8 to 10 weeks of LOC- specific training and GPO officers generally receive 1 to 2 weeks of GPO-specific training. Summary: Merging the LOC Police and/or the GPO Police with the USCP is feasible for several reasons. First, although each force has unique responsibilities, their overall missions share enough similarities that a merged force could assume both the unique and common responsibilities. Second, the three forces are located in the same geographic area with overlapping jurisdictions, so that most of LOC’s and GPO’s jurisdictions fall within the USCP’s current jurisdictional boundaries. Third, USCP officials believe that it is feasible to merge the LOC and/or GPO forces into USCP’s existing structure. Fourth, as long as members are not adversely affected, the LOC, GPO, and USCP labor committees of the Fraternal Order of Police told us that they support a merger, which could increase its feasibility. Moreover, other larger police forces, such as New York City Police Department, have successfully completed mergers,[Footnote 6] so the Capitol Hill merger, which would be on a much smaller scale, should be feasible. Nevertheless, if LOC and/or GPO police were to be merged with the USCP, challenges would need to be addressed prior to merging forces. These include gaining LOC and/or GPO management support, resolving differences in retirement systems, and integrating training and security systems. In deciding whether to merge these forces, Congress should consider these challenges along with the potential benefits resulting from a merger (see enclosure II, slides 17 through 20, on pages 33 through 36). Several potential security benefits could result from a merger of the LOC and/or GPO police forces with the USCP. A merged force governed by a single, unified chain of command could enhance the overall security of Capitol Hill by: * facilitating better communication and coordination of police activities; * providing centralized intelligence gathering, dissemination, and threat assessments; * developing consistent responses to emergency situations or threats; * allowing for flexibility in staffing officers; and; * providing additional training and new equipment for merged officers. More specifically, communication and coordination of police activities could be facilitated through a unified dispatch system and compatible radios. A unified chain of command could enhance the capability to develop a unified security plan, which could result in improved coordinated emergency defense strategies. Furthermore, a single chain of command could reduce response times, reduce the difficulty officers may face in working across jurisdictional boundaries, and enable resources to be deployed across police divisions, when needed. Training enhancements and standardized equipment could contribute to a more professional police force on Capitol Hill (see enclosure II, slides 21 through 24, on pages 37 through 40). A merger between the LOC and/or GPO police forces and the USCP would incur significant costs if the intent of a merger is to provide consistently applied security policies and practices and seamless security on Capitol Hill within the merger implementation period. We estimated certain costs associated with merging the current LOC and/or GPO police forces with the USCP with these intentions in mind. Therefore, we assumed a certain level of comparability and fungibility among the three police forces if they were to be merged. The increased costs related to a merger contained in our cost estimate included increasing GPO officers’ salaries in order to bring them up to the USCP pay scale, providing USCP equipment to all merged officers, training some or all merged officers, and providing enhanced retirement benefits to merged officers. The cost of a merger, depending on which forces are merged and the extent to which officers are provided with training and enhanced retirement benefits, could range from $13.1 million to $42.4 million.[Footnote 7] All of our estimates did not include the potentially significant costs to enhance and coordinate security, communications, or information technology equipment, because these costs would be contingent on the completion of security needs assessments that would likely be completed prior to implementing a merger. Additionally, we did not include the potential expense of hiring consultants to assist with planning and implementing a merger. In addition to the security benefits described previously, there are potential efficiencies, such as centralized recruiting and other human capital functions, and centralized dispatching and command center functions that could be realized from a merger. However, we were unable to quantify the cost of the potential efficiencies (see enclosure II slides 25 through 31, on pages 41 through 47 and enclosure III for additional details about estimating costs). Congress would need to address several issues if the forces are merged, including how to modify statutory provisions relating to authority of the forces, whether to alter the composition of the Capitol Police Board, how to apply USCP retirement provisions to LOC and/or GPO officers, and how best to fund and implement a merger. In addition, Congress would need to address logistical issues, such as planning and overseeing a merger and setting a timetable for its completion, while considering USCP’s existing plans to recruit, hire, and train additional officers (see enclosure II slides 32 through 37, on pages 48 through 53). We identified four options that Congress may wish to consider in relation to a potential merger. Although we make no recommendations on these options, they should be considered in the context of their related potential security benefits and costs. The ranges of estimated costs provided below do not include the potentially significant costs to enhance and coordinate security, communications, or information technology equipment. The costs estimates for each option vary depending on how training and retirement issues are addressed. The low cost estimate for each merger option includes costs to provide USCP- standard equipment to LOC and GPO officers, partial cross-training of all three police forces, and enhanced retirement benefits for future years of service for merged officers who have earned 20 years of federal law enforcement officer service. The high cost estimate for each merger option includes costs to provide USCP-standard equipment to LOC and GPO officers, complete cross-training of all three forces, and enhanced retirement benefits for past and future years of service for all merged officers who have earned 20 years of federal law enforcement officer service. In options where the GPO Police are merged with the USCP, cost estimates also include costs to increase GPO officers’ salaries to USCP levels. The four options we identified are: Merge both the LOC Police and GPO Police with the USCP: A merged force governed by a single, unified chain of command could enhance the overall security of Capitol Hill by facilitating better communication and coordination of police activities; providing centralized intelligence gathering, dissemination, and threat assessments; developing consistent responses to emergency situations or threats; allowing for flexibility in staffing officers; and providing additional training and equipment for merged officers. However, merging both LOC and GPO police forces with the USCP would be the most costly option. We estimate that merging all three forces could cost between $28.4 million to $42.4 million. Merge only the LOC Police with the USCP: Although not as comprehensive as merging all three forces, a merger of LOC Police with the USCP would provide similar types of security benefits. Two of LOC’s main buildings are located within USCP’s primary jurisdiction, a block from the U.S. Capitol, so a merger of the LOC Police with the USCP could enhance and facilitate emergency planning, evacuation procedures, and threat assessments, among other tasks. And, while differences exist, the LOC and USCP missions both include responsibilities for protecting visitors, congressional members and staff, and national treasures. Merging the LOC Police with the USCP would also entail substantial costs. We estimate that merging the LOC Police with the USCP could cost between $15.2 million and $25.9 million. Merge only the GPO Police with the USCP: Although also not as comprehensive as merging all three forces, a merger between the GPO Police and the USCP would provide security benefits. However, a merger between the GPO Police and the USCP would not be as close a fit as a merger between the LOC Police and the USCP because of differences in their primary missions (i.e., guarding GPO employees and its physical plant versus protecting congressional members and staff and national treasures) and GPO’s facilities are located farther from the Capitol. Merging the GPO Police with the USCP would also entail substantial costs. We estimate that merging the GPO Police with the USCP could cost between $13.1 million and $16.3 million. Retain current police forces and enhance coordination: Should Congress determine that the potential benefits of a merger are outweighed by potential costs, it could decide not to merge the forces. In the absence of a merger, Congress could potentially enhance security and coordination among the three police forces by directing that the forces establish memoranda of understanding (MOU). For example, all three forces could create MOUs that would establish, among other things, the standardization of equipment[Footnote 8] and communication systems, as well as the development of coordinated emergency response procedures. The potential security benefits and costs of MOUs will depend upon the exact nature of the agreements. It is important to note that the MOU option may present some risk because certain merger benefits, such as providing for fungibility of officers, creating a unified chain of command, and gaining efficiencies through centralized recruiting and dispatching functions, might not be realized through MOUs. In addition, the costs of implementing MOUs could also be significant. Potential costs associated with establishing MOUs could include providing cross training to some officers and purchasing security equipment. However, the costs of providing enhanced retirement benefits to LOC and GPO officers would not be incurred if MOUs were initiated. These four options represent a basic range of potential actions that Congress could consider to effect a merger of these police forces. Within these options lie many variations that could lower the costs of any merger. For example, we assumed that all officers would receive equal pay and benefits as USCP officers. Privatizing selected security functions or classifying certain duties into a different rank and pay structure might reduce overall merger costs. However, the feasibility of these variations would be contingent on a needs assessment of security coverage requirements. As a second example, Congress could consider providing cross training to fewer officers and/or reducing the scope of the cross training. If LOC and GPO officers were merged with the USCP and all cross training was eliminated for all merged officers, the cost of a merger would range from $18.9 million to $28.6 million, depending on how officers are provided with enhanced retirement benefits. Similarly, if the LOC Police and USCP were merged without providing officers cross training, merger costs would range from $8.4 million to $15.3 million. If the GPO Police were merged with the USCP without providing officers cross training, merger costs would range from $10.5 million to $13.3 million. While this variation would retain some security benefits such as instituting a unified chain of command, applying consistent security policies, and enhancing communication and coordination of police activities, the lower costs would need to be weighed against the reduced fungibility, training levels, and seamless security practices—which are all important reasons for considering a merger. Agency Comments: We requested and received official comments on our draft report from the Chief of the USCP, the Librarian of Congress; the Public Printer; the Chairmen of the Fraternal Order of Police Labor Committees for LOC, GPO, and USCP; and the Capitol Police Board. The agencies’ comments, which are included as enclosures IV through VIII, are summarized and evaluated below. We also received technical comments and clarifications, which we incorporated into the final report as appropriate. The Chief of the USCP noted that incorporating the security operations of LOC, GPO, and the USCP into a single police force would promote good security, improve flexibility, and establish a unity of purpose. The Chief indicated that while a merger would involve resolving a considerable number of administrative issues, given time and resources, these issues could be overcome. Our analysis recognized the need for a transition period in order to, among other things, allow time to address both administrative and security issues (see enclosure II slides 32 through 37, on pages 48 through 53). Our analysis also recognized a need for a pre-implementation planning period to address these issues. The Librarian of Congress commented that our report did not adequately address his statutory responsibility for collections security, explain the scope of collections security, or address the potential impact of a merger on the Library’s ability to maintain an effective program. We realize that securing the Library’s collections and maintaining order in the Library’s reading areas require the LOC Police to have certain training and responsibilities that the other police forces do not. However, we believe that officers under the direction of a unified Capitol Hill police force could receive appropriate training and perform these responsibilities in a manner so that the security of the Library and its collections is in no way diminished. We also acknowledge that if a merger occurs, Congress may need to redefine the Librarian’s role and statutory responsibility for facility and collections security. The Librarian of Congress also emphasized the importance of treating affected Library employees fairly. As discussed in our report, the language in the Senate committee report directing this review suggests that legislators are sensitive to protecting the rights of affected employees. Further, in analyzing merger options and their related costs we made several assumptions relating to pay, benefits, equipment, training, and transition periods that address this issue. Should Congress decide to merge the police forces, the merger-related employee issues could be addressed during a pre-implementation period, in which all affected parties could be consulted and their concerns considered. The Public Printer wrote that GPO had no objection to the concept of a merger of the GPO Police with USCP, as long as there would be effective consultation between GPO and USCP regarding security coverage of GPO’s facilities and operations. We agree that as part of a merger implementation plan, a needs assessment to determine the appropriate level of security coordination and enhancement would need to be conducted. In addition, if a merger occurs Congress may need to redefine the Public Printer’s role and statutory responsibility for facility and operational security. The Public Printer also commented that GPO does not now receive an appropriation to cover the costs of its police force. These costs are currently paid out of the revenues GPO receives from its sales and services. Thus, should Congress decide to merge the GPO police into the USCP, he noted that the cost of securing GPO’s facilities and operations might be borne by USCP rather than be covered by GPO’s receipts. We agree that if GPO Police were to be merged with the USCP, Congress would have to decide how best to fund the annual operating expenses of the newly merged force. Possible scenarios include the use of appropriated funds and incorporating the GPO Physical Security Group’s budget into USCP’s budget. Finally, the Public Printer expressed concern that current GPO officers be treated fairly regarding merger issues, such as determining USCP qualification requirements. As discussed in our report, and in accordance with directions in the fiscal year 2002 legislative branch appropriations report, our analysis included assumptions relating to pay, benefits, equipment, training, and transition periods that address this issue. In a joint response, the three chairmen of the Fraternal Order of Police Labor Committees endorsed the concept of consolidating the LOC and GPO police forces into the USCP. The chairmen commented that an integration of the three forces would serve to strengthen the security of the Capitol, its campus, and its related facilities. The chairmen also commented on (1) references made in the report regarding privatization of some positions, (2) concerns about provisions for transferring leave from officers’ current organizations to the USCP, and (3) the potentially high costs of training merged officers. Specifically, the chairmen commented that they understood that there may be a need for privatization but the lack of specificity prevented them from reaching an informed opinion. Concerns about leave centered on a desire to ensure that union members’ leave balances earned in their current organizations be preserved and transferred to USCP. Regarding training, the chairmen commented that the issue of training could be addressed at a significantly lower cost by leaving the members of the LOC and GPO police forces at their current posts; thereby, minimizing training costs for the current force and training new hires as older officers retire. We presented the potential privatization of some security functions as one of several options and variations, which could be considered in order to potentially reduce merger costs. All merger options and variations would need to be considered in the context of a needs assessment, and costs would need to be weighed against potential benefits and feasibility. If Congress were to consider using extensive privatization of security functions, further consultation with the unions may be necessary to assess the impact on affected staff. The chairmen’s points about transferring of leave balances are issues that Congress would need to address and clarify in legislation prior to the implementation of a merger. Regarding training costs associated with merging the police forces, we incorporated additional information on merger cost estimates that eliminated all cross training for merged officers. Eliminating the cross training lowers the estimated total costs of the merger options, but this would need to be weighed against reduced fungibility, training levels, and uniformity of security practices—which are all important reasons for considering a merger. Nevertheless, recognizing that the union proposal is a possibility, we calculated these cost estimates because it provides congressional decision makers another alternative to consider in weighing the benefits against the costs. The Capitol Police Board commented that they strongly agree with the conclusion that many challenges would need to be addressed and examined. Specifically, the Board noted that several issues would require additional study, including the significant costs of a merger, statutory provisions relating to authority, retirement plans, logistical issues, recruitment, and training. Our report noted that there are several outstanding issues that would need to be addressed in connection with any merger. Should Congress decide to merge one or more of the police forces, these issues and challenges could be addressed during a pre-implementation period. The Board’s comments included an attachment that contained the Architect of the Capitol’s (AOC) observations and commentary. The AOC stated that the option of merging USCP with the LOC police seems to be the most practical course of action, citing similar missions, contiguous jurisdictions, administrative similarities, and costs. We are providing copies of this report to the Chief of the USCP, Librarian of Congress, Public Printer, and the Chairmen of the Fraternal Order of Police Labor Committees for USCP, LOC, and GPO. Copies of this report will be made available to other interested parties upon request. This report will also be available on GAO’s home page at [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. If you have any questions, please contact me at (202) 512-8777 or by e-mail at stanar@gao.gov or Linda Watson, Assistant Director, at (202) 512-8685 or by e-mail at watsonl@gao.gov. Key contributors to this report were Geoffrey R. Hamilton, Mary Catherine Hult, Anne Laffoon, Lisa Shibata, Brian Sklar, and Mark Tremba. Signed by: Richard M. Stana: Director, Justice Issues: Enclosures: Enclosure I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology: The Senate Committee on Appropriations’ July 2001 report accompanying the legislative branch appropriations bill for fiscal year 2002 directed that we conduct an evaluation of the feasibility of consolidating the Library of Congress (LOC) Police and/or Government Printing Office (GPO) Police with the U.S. Capitol Police (USCP). As stated in the committee report, an updated evaluation on the feasibility of consolidating these police forces was deemed important to address the perceived need for consistently applied security policies and practices, efficient management of resources, and fair and equitable treatment of law enforcement personnel. The committee report also directed us to address issues related to ensuring an orderly transition, including the protection of the rights of affected staff. After discussion with Senate Appropriations Committee staff, we agreed to (1) determine whether it is feasible for the LOC and/or GPO police forces to merge with the USCP; (2) determine how, if at all, a merger might affect overall security on Capitol Hill; (3) identify the costs and potential efficiencies associated with merging the LOC and/or GPO police forces with the USCP; and (4) identify issues that would need to be addressed prior to a merger, should a merger be deemed desirable. To complete our analysis of all four objectives, we made some general assumptions based on discussions with agency officials and experts. Taking into consideration the intent of a merger to provide consistently applied security policies and practices and seamless security on Capitol Hill, we assumed that the LOC and/or GPO police forces, if merged, would become separate divisions of the existing USCP organizational structure—similar to the USCP’s current Capitol, House, and Senate Divisions. We also assumed that all officers and security- related personnel[Footnote 9] currently employed by the LOC and/or GPO police forces would become USCP employees and that a merged force would be governed by a single unified chain of command. Therefore, we assumed a certain level of comparability and fungibility among the three forces if they were to be merged. To achieve comparability and fungibility, we assumed that all merged LOC and/or GPO officers would be compensated at the same level of pay, receive similar retirement benefits as current USCP officers, and be given USCP basic training and equipment. Because a merger of the LOC and/or GPO police forces with the USCP would require considerable planning, for purposes of estimating costs, we assumed that a merger of the forces would not occur sooner than October 1, 2003 (the start of fiscal year 2004). We also assumed that merger issues would be addressed during a pre-implementation period (fiscal year 2003). However, implementation planning for a merger could be more than a year if deemed necessary. Additionally, for purposes of calculating increased salary and enhanced retirement costs, we assumed that there would be a 5-year transition period after the implementation of a merger. A 5-year transition period would (1) mitigate the potential adverse effects of a merger, such as the possible application of the USCP mandatory retirement age to merged officers and (2) ensure that all officers would be able to meet the minimum requirement to maintain enrollment in federal health insurance programs, if they were required to retire in 5 years. To address our objectives, we obtained and reviewed prior merger studies involving the USCP and other Capitol Hill police forces. We obtained and reviewed policies and procedures and general orders from the LOC Police, GPO Police, and USCP. We analyzed available personnel, budget, and cost data from the three forces. We interviewed officials from the Capitol Police Board, LOC, GPO, and USCP, along with officials from the Fraternal Order of Police’s Labor Committees for LOC, GPO, and USCP. In addition, we interviewed officials from the following agencies and organizations: the Metropolitan Police Department of the District of Columbia, the New York City Police Department (NYPD), U.S. Supreme Court Police, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), the Legislative Branch Emergency Preparedness Task Force, a private security consulting firm, and the International Association of Chiefs of Police. To determine the feasibility of merging police forces and how, if at all, a merger might affect overall security, we primarily relied on testimonial information provided by law enforcement officials and experts, as well as a comparison of documentation on USCP, LOC Police, and GPO Police missions, responsibilities, and enforcement jurisdictions. As a case example, we also interviewed officials involved in a merger where the New York City Transit Police and the New York City Housing Police forces were merged with NYPD. To identify the costs and potential efficiencies associated with a merger, we used past GAO, Congressional Research Service, and USCP reviews on mergers and queried agency officials to identify cost items. To calculate the salary, training, and equipment costs potentially associated with a merger we obtained personnel information from the LOC and GPO police forces, and obtained cost data, as appropriate, from the USCP. For retirement costs, we provided OPM relevant personnel data on LOC and GPO officers (e.g., work history and demographic information). OPM calculated the cost of providing enhanced retirement benefits to merged LOC and/or GPO officers using these data and four options, which we provided to them. Although merger costs would be incurred over several years, for purposes of our analysis we estimated the costs as though they were being incurred in the first year. Specifically, in these cost estimates we included the total present value of increasing GPO officers’ salaries for the first 5 years of the merger, and did not calculate these costs beyond that point because after 5 years the composition of the workforce could change significantly, in part due to mandatory retirement of certain merged officers. We also included the present value of the increase in the total cost of providing enhanced retirement benefits to LOC and/or GPO officers. Additionally, we present the total cost to train some or all merged officers, although these costs might be spread over several years. To calculate the change in salaries that would result from merging the LOC and/or GPO police forces with the USCP, we assumed that all current LOC and/or GPO security-related employees would be merged into the USCP. In order to create a fungible force, we assumed that these officers would be merged into the USCP at their existing or comparable rank and compensated according to USCP’s pay scale. Because LOC officers are on the same rank and pay structure as USCP officers, a merger of the LOC Police with the USCP would not increase LOC officers’ salaries. However, we assumed that if the GPO Police merged with the USCP its officers would receive a raise of approximately one-third of their current GPO salaries—which is the current difference in pay between GPO and USCP officers of the same or comparable rank. We calculated the increase in GPO salaries by using the differences in the midpoints of salary tables at comparable ranks between the GPO and USCP. In doing this, we assumed that officers of the same rank with similar responsibilities in a merged force would likely receive comparable pay. We performed this calculation for the first 5 years of a merger by calculating the present value of the increased salaries for all GPO officers. We assumed that the composition of the GPO merged officers would not change during these 5 years and that there would be an annual cost of living increase of 3.5 percent. Additionally, for the GPO Police, whose payroll is not currently processed by the National Finance Center, we included the annual fee that is charged to process an employee’s payroll. To calculate the initial equipment costs resulting from a merger, we assumed that if either or both the LOC and GPO police forces were merged with the USCP, officers would be provided new USCP-issued equipment. We calculated the costs of equipping each LOC and/or GPO officer with the equipment USCP issues to its incoming officers. Among other things, standard USCP equipment includes a handgun, ammunition, baton, riot gear, and a radio. USCP provided us with a list of equipment and estimated fiscal year 2003 costs for each item. We assumed that, in accordance with current USCP policy, officers of the rank sergeant and above would receive additional communications equipment such as pagers, and officers of the rank captain and above would receive pagers and telephone/radios. We assumed that should a merger occur, officers would be cross-trained in some manner, which would provide some fungibility among the forces and potentially improve security on Capitol Hill. To calculate basic training costs resulting from a merger, we assumed that if the LOC and/or GPO police forces merged with the USCP, all merged officers would receive the same training that all incoming USCP officers receive. The USCP basic training includes orientation, Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) basic police training, a 10-week session at the USCP training academy, 8 weeks of field training—structured on-the-job training, and initial weapons qualification training. While we assumed all GPO and/or LOC officers would receive the entire USCP basic training, it is conceivable that an alternative shorter, less costly training regimen could be developed for these merged officers. Since most LOC and GPO officers have already attended FLETC, we assumed that only officers that have not previously completed FLETC training would attend FLETC. The USCP provided us with estimated fiscal year 2002 costs to provide training to each officer. In addition, we assumed that based on current USCP practice, when officers attended any type of training, their positions would be backfilled by officers who would receive overtime pay at the current (March 2002) overtime hourly rate. We assumed that in addition to providing USCP basic training to LOC and/or GPO officers, there would be at least some cross training of officers if the LOC and/or GPO police forces merged with the USCP. We calculated three different cross-training options, all of which included providing USCP basic training to LOC and/or GPO officers. For the first cross-training option, we assumed that all 1,208 USCP officers would receive training on LOC and/or GPO policies, and if all forces merged, all LOC and GPO officers would receive training on each others’ policies. For the second cross-training option, we assumed that 175 USCP officers (enough to replace the combined current police forces at LOC and GPO) would receive training on LOC and/or GPO policies to allow flexibility in staffing, and if all forces merged, all LOC and GPO officers would receive training on each others’ policies. For the third cross-training option, we assumed that 88 USCP officers (half of the current number of LOC and GPO officers) would receive training on LOC and/or GPO policies, and half of LOC (61) and GPO (27) officers would receive training on each others’ policies. This option would provide some measure of flexibility in staffing at a reduced cost. To estimate the costs of providing enhanced retirement benefits to LOC and/or GPO officers, we assumed the following: all LOC and/or GPO officers would receive similar retirement benefits as USCP officers; all LOC and/or GPO officers would be provided with enhanced benefits as of October 1, 2003, the assumed effective date of the merger; and LOC and GPO officers would not be required to serve a minimum number of years as a USCP officer before being eligible to receive enhanced retirement benefits. We assumed that USCP mandatory retirement provisions (e.g., age 57 with 20 years of eligible service) would eventually be applied to all merged LOC and GPO officers. However, in the context of ensuring an orderly transition and protecting the rights of affected staff, we assumed these provisions would not be applied until 5 years after the merger was effected (i.e., October 1, 2008) in order to allow LOC and/or GPO officers time to transition to USCP to mitigate the potential adverse effects of a merger, such as the possible application of the USCP mandatory retirement age to merged officers. We provided these assumptions to OPM, who calculated the total present value of the increase in cost to provide enhanced retirement benefits. In calculating the estimates, OPM assumed that LOC and GPO officers have the same pattern of expected retirements; based on officers’ demographics, work histories, and retirement systems. We provided OPM with two considerations for estimating the costs of providing enhanced retirement benefits to LOC and/or GPO officers. The first consideration focused on whether enhanced benefits would be applied for past service as a police officer, and the second consideration focused on how years of service are treated in the application of mandatory retirement after October 1, 2008. Under the first consideration, LOC and/or GPO officers would be entitled to law enforcement retirement benefits (1) for past service as a LOC or GPO police officer as well as for future service as a USCP officer, or (2) only for future service as a USCP officer. Retirement annuity earned from past service would be added to that earned as a USCP officer. Under the second consideration, LOC and/or GPO officers would be required to retire at the USCP mandatory retirement age of 57 (only after October 1, 2008) based on either 20 years of (1) federal service, or (2) federal law enforcement officer service. How these considerations are decided creates four options for providing enhanced retirement benefits to LOC and/or GPO officers. The four retirement options are: Retirement option 1: * Officers would receive past and future enhanced retirement benefits; * Mandatory retirement based on 20 years of federal service. Retirement option 2: * Officers would receive past and future enhanced retirement benefits; * Mandatory retirement based on 20 years of federal law enforcement officer service. Retirement option 3: * Officers would receive only future enhanced retirement benefits; * Mandatory retirement based on 20 years of federal service. Retirement option 4: * Officers would receive only future enhanced retirement benefits; * Mandatory retirement based on 20 years of federal law enforcement officer service. We identified several cost categories that would result from merging the LOC and/or GPO police forces with the USCP, that we were not able to estimate because these costs would be contingent on needs assessments and security reviews. We did not estimate the costs of security enhancements to LOC and/or GPO that may be needed if a merger occurred. For example, if replacement X-ray machines were needed at GPO, the cost would be approximately $75,000 per machine. We did not include the potential costs of information technology and communication enhancements and coordination and/or vehicle replacement that might be necessitated by a merger. We also did not estimate merger planning and implementation costs, which could include the hiring of consultants or contractors. Additionally, we did not estimate the increase in cost associated with providing congressional retirement benefits to LOC and/or GPO civilian employees. After 5 years as a USCP employee, civilians contribute an additional 0.5 percent toward their annuities than do LOC and/or GPO civilian employees. Because of the relatively small number of civilians and because our analysis was focused on officers, we did not estimate this cost. In addition, since data on GPO’s current use of overtime and premium pay was unavailable, we were unable to estimate the increased overtime and premium pay for GPO officers, if the GPO Police merged with the USCP.[Footnote 10] Although we identified potential efficiencies such as centralized dispatch and recruiting functions that may be gained from implementing a merger of the LOC and/or GPO police forces with the USCP, we were unable to quantify these benefits. To identify issues that would need to be addressed prior to a merger, we reviewed past GAO, Congressional Research Service, and USCP studies on mergers, interviewed officials with past merger implementation experience, and interviewed LOC Police, GPO Police, USCP, and union officials. We evaluated these issues, confirmed with LOC, GPO, and USCP officials that they were still applicable, and identified those most relevant to implementing a potential merger. We conducted our work in Washington, D.C. and New York City from January through May 2002, in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. [End of enclosure] Enclosure II: Slide presentation: Review of Potential Merger of the Library of Congress Police and/or the Government Printing Office Police with the U.S. Capitol Police: Results of Work Completed for Senate Committee on Appropriations, Legislative Branch Subcommittee Staff: Contents: Introduction: Background: Merger Feasibility: Security Benefits: Estimating Costs: Issues to Address: Merger Options: [End of section] Introduction: Legislative Directive: As stated in the Senate Committee on Appropriations’ July 2001 report, accompanying the legislative branch appropriations bill for fiscal year 2002, GAO was to complete an updated evaluation on the feasibility of consolidating the Library of Congress (LOC) and/or the Government Printing Office (GPO) police forces with the U.S. Capitol Police (USCP). Among other things, an updated evaluation was deemed important to: * Address the perceived need for consistently applied security policies and procedures and efficient management of resources, and; * Provide fair and equitable treatment of law enforcement personnel, including protecting the rights of affected staff. Objectives: Based on discussion with Senate Appropriations Committee staff, we agreed to: * Determine whether it is feasible for the LOC and/or GPO police forces to merge with the USCP. * Determine how, if at all, a merger might affect overall security on Capitol Hill. * Identify the costs and potential efficiencies associated with merging the LOC and/or GPO police forces with the USCP. * Identify the issues that would need to be addressed prior to a merger, should a merger be deemed desirable. Scope and Methodology: * Reviewed policies, procedures, and general orders. * Reviewed prior GAO and Congressional Research Service reports on potential mergers involving the USCP and other Capitol Hill police forces. * Analyzed available personnel, budget, and cost data. * Interviewed officials from: - LOC, GPO, and USCP, - Capitol Police Board, - Fraternal Order of Police LOC, GPO, and USCP Labor Committees, - Metropolitan Police Department of the District of Columbia, - U.S. Supreme Court Police, - Legislative Branch Emergency Preparedness Task Force, - International Association of Chiefs of Police, - New York City Police Department (NYPD) and a private security consulting firm consisting of former NYPD officials, and, - Office of Personnel Management (OPM). Note: See enclosure I for additional information on our objectives, scope, and methodology. General Assumptions About a Merger: For purposes of determining the feasibility, effect on security, and cost of a merger, we made some general assumptions. * LOC and/or GPO police forces would, if merged, become separate divisions of the existing USCP organizational structure, similar to the current Capitol, House, and Senate divisions. * All officers and security-related personnel[Footnote 11] currently employed by LOC and/or GPO would become USCP employees. * A merged force would be governed by a single unified chain of command. * Some or all merged officers would be fungible with the USCP officers. * All officers in a merged force would receive USCP basic training. * All LOC and/or GPO officers who merged would receive new USCP-standard officer equipment, such as weapons and uniforms. * A merger would not occur any sooner than October 1, 2003, (fiscal year 2004). * Merger issues would be addressed during a pre-implementation period (fiscal year 2003). * There would be a 5-year transition period after the implementation of a merger to allow merged officers time to; - transition to the USCP while mitigating the potential adverse effects of a merger, such as USCP’s mandatory retirement age provision, and; - acquire 5 years of service to allow certain officers to continue to be eligible for federal health benefits. Cost Assumptions: For purposes of estimating the costs associated with a merger, we made the following assumptions: * To ensure comparability in a fungible force, all current LOC and/or GPO security-related employees will be merged into USCP force and compensated according to USCP’s pay and rank structure at their existing or comparable rank. * To estimate the increased GPO officers’ salaries, we assumed that the composition of merged GPO officers would not change. For purposes of estimating the cost to provide cross-training to officers, we made the following assumptions: * If all forces merge, some, or all, LOC and GPO officers would be cross-trained on each other’s procedures. * Some, or all, USCP officers would be cross-trained on LOC and/or GPO procedures. * Based on current USCP practice, when officers attend training, they are replaced by other officers, who would earn overtime. Costs associated with enhancing the level of security, communication, and information technology (IT) infrastructure are contingent on the completion of needs assessments and, therefore, have not been estimated. For purposes of estimating the cost to provide enhanced retirement benefits to LOC and/or GPO officers, we made the following assumptions: * All LOC and/or GPO officers would receive the same retirement benefits as USCP do. * LOC and/or GPO officers would be provided with enhanced retirement benefits as of October 1, 2003, the assumed effective date of potential merger. * LOC and/or GPO officers would not be required to serve a minimum number of years as a USCP officer before being eligible to receive enhanced retirement benefits. * USCP mandatory retirement age provisions (e.g., age 57 with 20 years of eligible service) would eventually be applied to all merged LOC and/or GPO officers; however, these provisions would not be applied until 5 years after the merger was effected (i.e., Oct. 1, 2008). * LOC and/or GPO officers would have the same pattern of expected retirements, based on officers’ demographics, work histories, and retirement systems. Background: USCP: * Protects Members of Congress and their staff, buildings, national treasures, and visitors. * Regulates traffic within the Capitol grounds. * Has specialized units (e.g., Dignitary Protection Division). LOC Office of Security: * Provides protection for LOC staff, buildings, Members of Congress and their staff, national treasures, and visitors. * Has primary responsibility for collections security. * Police force does not have specialized units. GPO Physical Security Group: * Provides protection for GPO staff and buildings (few visitors). * Provides security for classified information. * Police force does not have specialized units. Source: USCP, LOC Office of Security, and GPO Office of Administrative Support. USCP Primary and Extended Jurisdictions: [See PDF for image] This figure is a map of the primary and extended jurisdictions of the USCP. [End of figure] USCP Primary, LOC, and GPO Jurisdictions: [See PDF for image] This figure is a map of the primary and extended jurisdictions of the USCP, LOC, and GPO. USCP: * Secures 276-acre Capitol complex; * Guards 19 buildings; * Patrols parks and thoroughfares; * Protects Members of Congress in any area of the United States. LOC - Office of Security: * Guards six buildings, including the Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and James Madison; and Library Child Care Center, Taylor Street annex, and Landover, MD annex (not shown on map); * Patrols property and parking lots. GPO - Office of Physical Security: * Guards four buildings; * Patrols property and parking lots; * Monitors off-site facility in Laurel, MD, with closed circuit television cameras. [End of figure] USCP, LOC, and GPO Fiscal Year 2002 Personnel: [See PDF for image] This figure is a stacked vertical bar graph depicting the following data: USCP: Sworn Officers: 1,208; Civilians: 163. LOC Office of Security: Sworn Officers: 122; Civilians: 26[A]. GPO Physical Security Group: Sworn Officers: 53; Civilians: 4. [A] Includes 21 civilians in the Office of Security and 5 civilians in the police force. Does not include contract guards. Source: USCP (as of 4/20/02), LOC Office of Security (as of 5/4/02), and GPO Office of Administrative Support (as of 5/4/02). [End of figure] Table: USCP, LOC, and GPO Police Officer Demographics: Total number of officers: USCP: 1,208; LOC: 122; GPO: 53. Percent of officers in FERS: USCP: 79%; LOC: 58%; GPO: 70%. Percent of officers in CSRS: USCP: 21%; LOC: 42%; GPO: 30%. Average age: USCP: 39; LOC: 47; GPO: 47; Percent (and number) of officers age 57 and older: USCP: 1% (16); LOC: 20% (25); GPO: 15% (8). Percent (and number) of officers age 50 and older: USCP: 16% (195). LOC: 47% (57); GPO: 47% (25). Note: All demographic information is based on the current workforce, projected as of October 1, 2003. Source: GAO analysis of USCP, LOC Office of Security, and GPO Office of Administrative Support data. [End of table] Table: USCP, LOC, and GPO Budgets: FY 2001: USCP[A]: $103,800,000; LOC Office of Security[A]: $11,300,000; GPO Physical Security Group[B]: $3,600,000. FY 2002: USCP[A]: $126,200,000; LOC Office of Security[A]: $12,400,000; GPO Physical Security Group[B]: $3,900,000. FY 2003 Budget Submission: USCP[A]: $220,300,000. LOC Office of Security[A]: $14,200,000; GPO Physical Security Group[B]: $3,900,000. [A] Annual operating budget does not include supplemental appropriations. [B] GPO Physical Security Group budget is funded primarily through GPO’s revolving fund. Source: USCP, LOC Office of Security, and GPO Office of Administrative Support. [End of table] Merger is Feasible, but Challenges Need to be Addressed: Merging the LOC Police and/or the GPO Police with the USCP is feasible. Although each force carries out some unique responsibilities, their overall missions share enough similarities that a merged force could assume both the unique and common responsibilities. Challenges would need to be addressed, including gaining LOC and/or GPO management support, addressing differences in retirement systems, and integrating training and security systems. In deciding whether to merge, Congress would need to consider these challenges along with potential benefits. Factors Supporting the Feasibility of a Merger: Merger of the LOC Police and/or GPO Police with the USCP is feasible. * Missions are similar; - LOC Police more similar to USCP than GPO Police is to USCP. * Geographic proximity overlap; - All three forces operate within USCP’s extended jurisdiction; - Area of jurisdiction that current forces patrol would not necessarily increase. * USCP supports a merger; - USCP officials indicated they have the ability to absorb the two smaller forces. * Union representatives told us they support a merger; - Officers in all three forces represented by Fraternal Order of Police; - Union officials for all three forces generally favor the merger as long as members are not adversely affected. * Other much larger forces, such as in New York City, successfully merged with smaller forces to achieve benefits; - NYPD, the New York City Transit Police, and the New York City Housing Police merged in 1995; - Officials said they overcame obstacles they faced. Potential Challenges to a Merger: * LOC and GPO management have concerns about level and loss of direct control over security at their facilities. * Other potential challenges to a merger include: - Differences in retirement systems (e.g., USCP officers receive enhanced retirement benefits and LOC and GPO officers do not); - As of October 1, 2003, the LOC Police would have 25 and the GPO Police would have 8 officers older than the USCP mandatory retirement age (57); [Footnote 12] - Integrating communication, IT networks, and security systems; - Providing cross-training to police forces; - Some mission differences; - Demographic differences among the forces (e.g., USCP force is generally younger). Potential Security Benefits May Result from a Merger: Law enforcement experts and agency officials identified several potential security benefits that could result from a merger of the LOC and/or GPO police forces with the USCP. A merged force governed by a single, unified chain of command could enhance the overall security of Capitol Hill by (1) facilitating better communication and coordination of police activities; (2) providing centralized intelligence gathering, dissemination, and threat assessment; (3) developing consistent responses to emergency situations or threats; (4) allowing for flexibility in staffing officers; and (5) providing additional training and new equipment for merged officers. We also identified other benefits, such as potentially improving LOC and/or GPO officers’ morale. These potential benefits would need to be weighed against costs and other issues. Potential Security Benefits from a Merger: A merged force could provide several potential benefits to Capitol Hill security, including: * A single unified chain of command, which offers greater opportunity for: - consistent and integrated response to emergency situations or threats; - consistent policies and procedures to govern the merged forces; and; - improved access for LOC and/or GPO police forces to specialized units, such as the Dignitary Protection Division or the K-9 Section, currently under USCP command. * Capability to deploy resources where they are most needed: - Cross-training would allow flexibility of deploying staffing across divisions when needed. * Better positioning of the three forces to communicate and coordinate activities: - Unified dispatch system and compatible radios; - Reduced response times; - Potential for improved intelligence gathering and dissemination, unified threat assessment, and risk identification. * Providing additional training to officers on Capitol Hill: - 175 LOC and GPO officers would receive more extensive USCP training. * Reducing the difficulty officers may face in working across jurisdictional boundaries. * Enhancing capability to develop a unified security plan, which could result in improved coordinated emergency defense strategies. Other Nonsecurity Benefits from a Merger: * Potentially improving LOC and/or GPO officers’ morale: - LOC and GPO officers currently limited in law enforcement authority and responsibilities; - Potential for increased pay for GPO officers; - Potential for enhanced retirement benefits for LOC and/or GPO officers. * Providing expanded career opportunities: - LOC and/or GPO officers could apply for positions in various capacities, such as the Dignitary Protection Division; - Wider zones for promotion consideration may expand the number of people who could be considered for leadership roles. Merger Would Incur Significant Costs: We estimated certain costs of the merger, including increasing salaries for GPO officers, providing new USCP-standard equipment to all LOC and/or GPO officers, providing training (including overtime expenses) to officers from all three forces, and providing enhanced retirement benefits to LOC and/or GPO officers. * If both the LOC and GPO police forces merged with the USCP, estimated costs, excluding significant security enhancement costs, among others, could range from $28.4 million to $42.4 million.[Footnote 13] * If the LOC Police merged with the USCP, estimated costs, excluding significant security enhancement costs, among others, could range from $15.2 million to $25.9 million. * If the GPO Police merged with the USCP, estimated costs, excluding significant security enhancement costs, among others, could range from $13.1 million to $16.3 million. We were unable to estimate what could be the significant costs of enhancing and coordinating LOC and/or GPO Police security, communications, or IT equipment. Other costs not estimated include hiring consultants to help implement the merger, costs related to providing congressional retirement benefits to LOC and/or GPO civilian employees, and costs related to increased overtime and premium hours for GPO officers. Some potential efficiencies could be realized as a result of a merger, but these could not be quantified. Although merger costs would be incurred over several years, for purposes of our analysis we estimated the costs as though they were being incurred in the first year. Summary of Cost Estimates: Costs we estimated associated with a merger include: * Salary increase for GPO officers to bring them up to USCP pay scale. * Standardization of equipment – providing LOC and/or GPO officers with new USCP-standard officer equipment, such as weapons and uniforms. * Training some or all officers on USCP, LOC, and GPO procedures. * Providing enhanced retirement benefits to LOC and/or GPO officers. Present value of salary increases for 53 GPO officers for the first 5 years after a merger is implemented are estimated to be $3,373,120. Equipment costs are estimated to be: * $761,500 for 175 LOC and GPO officers; * $529,060 for 122 LOC officers, and; * $232,440 for 53 GPO officers. Training costs estimates range from:[Footnote 14] * $9.5 million to $13.8 million for both LOC and GPO officers; * $6.7 million to $10.5 million for LOC officers, and; * $2.6 million to $3.0 million for GPO officers. Present value of the increase in total costs to provide enhanced retirement benefits to LOC and/or GPO officers range from: * $14.8 million to $24.5 million for both LOC and GPO officers; * $7.9 million to $14.8 million for LOC officers, and; * $6.9 million to $9.7 million for GPO officers. Cost Categories We Identified, but did not Estimate: Actual costs for the following items are contingent on needs assessments and security reviews. These costs include: • Personnel expenses: - increased overtime and premium pay expenses for GPO officers; [Footnote 15] - background investigations, and; - increased retirement benefits for LOC and/or GPO civilians. • IT and communication system enhancements and coordination: - Computer replacement for LOC and/or GPO police forces; - Computer workstation (about $2,500); - Network connections. * Security enhancements and coordination for LOC and/or GPO police forces: - Equipment replacement, for example; - X-ray machines (about $75,000 per machine) and; - magnetometers (from $5,200 to $7,500 per machine); - Infrastructure (e.g., cameras and alarm systems). * Vehicle replacement ($25,000 per police cruiser). * Merger implementation costs (consultants and contractors). Source: USCP. Potential Efficiencies from a Merger: Some potential efficiencies could be realized as a result of a merger, but could not be estimated. Examples of efficiencies include: * Recruiting and human capital functions: - centralized payroll processing and; - merged recruiting and hiring functions. * Dispatching and command center functions. Several Issues Would Need to be Addressed Prior to a Merger: Congress would need to address several issues about a potential merger, including whether to merge the LOC Police and/or the GPO Police with the USCP, how to modify statutory provisions relating to authority of the forces, whether to alter the composition of the Capitol Police Board, how to apply USCP retirement provisions for LOC and/or GPO officers (e.g., differences in enhanced retirement employer and employee contribution rates), and how best to fund and implement a merger. If Congress decides to merge the forces, it would need to address logistical issues, such as planning and overseeing a merger and setting a timetable for its completion. Issues Congress Would Need to Address: * Whether and how to merge the LOC and/or the GPO police forces with USCP. * Statutory provisions related to responsibility and authority: - Identify LOC and/or GPO Police responsibilities to be assumed by the USCP; - Establish jurisdictional boundaries of the merged force. * Composition of the Capitol Police Board after a merger: - Determine role of Librarian of Congress and/or Public Printer; - Determine voting rights for any added officials. * Retirement: - Determine the application of USCP mandatory retirement age provisions for LOC and/or GPO officers; - Decide how to address differences among retirement plans (e.g., by automatically providing LOC and/or GPO officers with the same retirement benefits as USCP officers receive or providing other options such as buy-outs for selected employees); - Decide whether and how LOC and/or GPO officers would contribute to retirement annuities. * USCP qualifications requirements: - Identify who will decide the extent to and manner in which current USCP qualification requirements might be applied to LOC and/or GPO officers. * Transfer of annual and sick leave for LOC and/or GPO employees. * How and when to provide funding for a merger. * Merger implementation: - Decide how best to address merger implementation issues to ensure that all interested parties (e.g., appropriate legal, police, IT, labor, and human capital representatives from USCP, LOC, and/or GPO) are consulted and their concerns are considered; - Decide how to address merger implementation issues during a preimplementation period. Implementation Issues: * Staffing and equipment needs: - Review existing vulnerability, threat, and risk assessments; - Update these assessments as necessary or conduct new assessments as needed; - Utilize the results of these assessments to determine needs. * Communication and IT integration: - Develop a plan that will select and implement a compatible, integrated communication infrastructure. * Development of a unified command structure, including: - developing a unified security plan and emergency procedures; - determining procedures to govern a unified command, and; - establishing divisions and management structure. * Timetable for the merger: - Identify phases and establish milestones for accomplishments, while considering USCP existing plans to recruit, hire, and train additional officers. * Training requirements: - Determine whether exclusions to training requirements should be allowed, and if so, on what grounds; - Determine what protections should be made for officers who are not able to complete more stringent training requirements (e.g., assigning officers to light or desk duty); - Focus on logistics of cross-training merged force. * Employee needs and concerns: - Hold focus groups with LOC, GPO, and USCP police forces to identify and prioritize merger implementation issues from an employee perspective. Merger Options: We identified four options regarding a potential merger: * Merge both LOC and GPO police forces with USCP; * Merge only the LOC Police with USCP; * Merge only the GPO Police with USCP, and; * Retain current forces and enhance coordination through memoranda of understandings (MOUs). Merge both the LOC and GPO Police with USCP: Potential security benefits of merging all three forces include: * Single, unified chain of command among the three forces. * Better communication and coordination of police activities throughout Capital complex. * Centralized intelligence gathering, dissemination, and threat assessments. * Consistent response to emergency situations or threats. * Flexibility in staffing officers. * Additional training and equipment for merged officers. Cost of merging all three forces could range from $28.4 million to $42.4 million. * Costs depend on how retirement and training issues are addressed. Merge the LOC Police with USCP: Similar security benefits as a LOC/GPO/USCP merger although not as comprehensive. LOC’s proximity to the Capitol complex increases the perceived need for the two forces to coordinate emergency planning, evacuation procedures, and threat assessments. Fewer merger issues would need to be addressed because of similar missions and officer duties. * Both the LOC Police and the USCP protect visitors, congressional members and staff, and national treasures. Cost of merging the LOC Police and the USCP could range from $15.2 million to $25.9 million. * Costs depend on how retirement and training issues are addressed. Merge the GPO Police with USCP: Similar security benefits as the other two options, although not as comprehensive. Differences in mission make a GPO merger with the USCP not as close a fit because: * GPO police officers’ primarily guard GPO employees and printing facilities. GPO is a little farther away from the Capitol complex. Cost of merging the GPO Police and the USCP could range from $13.1 million to $16.3 million. * Costs depend on how retirement and training issues are addressed. Retain Current Police Forces and Enhance Coordination: If Congress decides a merger is not desirable, security and coordination among the three police forces could potentially be enhanced by directing that the forces establish MOUs.[Footnote 16] MOU’s could address such things as standardization of equipment and communication systems and development of a coordinated emergency response procedure. However, MOUs may not address potential security benefits of a merged force, such as: * unified chain of command; * flexibility to post officers where they are most needed, and; * efficiencies through centralized dispatch and recruiting functions. Potential costs of MOUs: * Potential costs of establishing MOUs could be significant; * Costs would depend upon what specifically is included in the MOUs; * Costs could include providing cross-training to some officers and purchasing security equipment; * The costs of providing enhanced retirement benefits to LOC and/or GPO police officers would not be incurred if MOUs were initiated because officers would remain in their current retirement system. Merger Option Variations: The four merger options presented in previous slides represent a basic range of potential actions. Other options and variations which could reduce merger costs might also be considered. These include: * privatizing certain aspects of security, and; * reducing or eliminating cross-training by providing cross-training to fewer officers and/or reducing the scope of the cross-training provided. Over time, the merged force could cross-train all newly hired officers. These other options need to be considered in the context of benefits to be gained, costs, and resolving issues that need to be addressed. Additional Variation: Merge Forces Without Providing Training: Costs could be reduced by minimizing or eliminating cross-training. Total cost of a merger, after eliminating all training for merged officers, would range (depending on enhanced retirement benefits) from: * $18.9 million to $28.6 million if both LOC and GPO Police were merged with the USCP; * $8.4 million to $15.3 million if the LOC Police and USCP merged, and; * $10.5 million to $13.3 million if the GPO Police and USCP merged. This would likely reduce some security benefits such as reducing the fungibility of officers and reducing seamless security practices; however, other benefits, such as a unified chain of command and better communication could be retained. [End of enclosure] Enclosure III: Slide presentation: Estimating the Costs of a Potential Merger of the Library of Congress (LOC) Police and/or the Government Printing Office (GPO) Police with the U.S. Capitol Police (USCP): Contents: Summary: Increased Salary Costs: Equipment Costs: Training Costs: Retirement Costs: Summary Costs: Total Merger Costs: Per Capita Officer Costs: [End of section] Summary: Merger Would Incur Significant Costs: We estimated certain costs of the merger, including increasing salaries for GPO officers, providing new USCP-standard equipment to all LOC and/or GPO officers, providing training (including overtime expenses) to officers from all three forces, and providing enhanced retirement benefits to LOC and/or GPO officers. * If both the LOC and GPO police forces merged with the USCP, estimated costs, excluding significant security enhancement costs, among others, could range from $28.4 million to $42.4 million.[Footnote 17] * If the LOC Police merged with the USCP, estimated costs, excluding significant security enhancement costs, among others, could range from $15.2 million to $25.9 million. * If the GPO Police merged with the USCP, estimated costs, excluding significant security enhancement costs, among others, could range from $13.1 million to $16.3 million. Estimating Costs: Estimating Increased Salary Costs for GPO Officers: Present value of salary increases for 53 GPO officers for the first 5 years after a merger are estimated to be $3,373,120. * Salary increases were calculated as the difference in the midpoint fiscal year 2002 salary, by rank, for comparable USCP and GPO ranks. - GPO officers would receive, on average, a 33 percent pay increase. * We assumed an annual 3.5 percent cost of living increase. * Salary costs also include the cost of payroll processing by the National Finance Center, which already processes USCP and LOC payrolls. No salary increase for LOC officers because the LOC Police use the same rank and pay structure as the USCP. Estimating Equipment Costs for LOC and/or GPO Officers: Equipment costs are estimated to be: * $761,500 for 175 LOC and GPO officers; * $529,060 for 122 LOC officers, and; * $232,440 for 53 GPO officers. Equipment costs include costs to provide LOC and/or GPO officers with new standard USCP officer equipment, such as handgun, radio, pepper spray; riot gear and gas mask; and uniform clothing. Equipment costs also include the costs to provide communication equipment, per USCP policy. * Officers rank sergeant and above are provided with hand-held communication devices. * Officers rank captain and above are provided with radio/telephones. Table: Current Training Requirements: Type of training: Orientation; USCP: 1 week; LOC: None; GPO: None. Type of training: Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC); USCP: 8 weeks; LOC: 8 weeks; GPO: 8 weeks. Type of training: Agency-specific training; USCP: 10 weeks (USCP Academy Training); LOC: 2 weeks; GPO: 1 day. Type of training: On-the-job training[A]; USCP: 8 weeks; LOC: 6-8 weeks; GPO: 1-2 weeks. Type of training: Weapon qualification; USCP: Semi-annual; LOC: Semi-annual; GPO: Annual. [A] Field training officer program is a structured on-the-job training program that is specific to officers’ job duties and responsibilities. Source: USCP, LOC Office of Security, and GPO Office of Administrative Support. [End of table] Options for Providing Basic and Cross-training to Officers: Training Option 1: Complete cross-training: * All 122 LOC and/or 53 GPO officers receive USCP basic training; * All 1,208 USCP officers receive training on LOC and/or GPO policies; * If all forces merge, all LOC and GPO officers receive training on each others’ policies. Training Option 2: Partial USCP officer cross-training: * All 122 LOC and/or 53 GPO officers receive USCP basic training; * 175 USCP officers receive training on LOC and/or GPO policies to allow flexibility in staffing; * If all forces merge, all LOC and GPO officers receive training on each others’ policies. Training Option 3: Partial USCP, LOC, and GPO officer cross-training: * All 122 LOC and/or 53 GPO officers receive USCP basic training; * 88 USCP officers receive training on LOC and/or GPO policies; * If all forces merge, half of LOC (61) and GPO (27) officers receive training on each others’ policies. Estimating Training Costs: Total training cost estimates range from: * $9.5 million to $13.8 million for both LOC and GPO officers; * $6.7 million to $10.5 million for LOC officers, and; * $2.6 million to $3.0 million for GPO officers. Training costs include providing USCP basic training to all LOC and/or GPO officers, which is estimated to be: * $9,052,770 for LOC and GPO officers; * $6,446,140 for LOC officers, and; * $2,606,630 for GPO officers. Cross-training estimates vary, depending on the number of USCP officers cross-trained on LOC and/or GPO procedures and on the number of LOC and/or GPO officers cross-trained on each others’ procedures. Table: Estimating Training Costs: Basic USCP training[A]: Cost to train if USCP-LOC merged: $6,446,140; Cost to train if USCP-GPO merged: $2,606,630; Cost to train if all forces merged: $9,052,770. Cross-training: Option 1: Complete, all forces: Cost to train if USCP-LOC merged: $4,078,210; Cost to train if USCP-GPO merged: $407,820; Cost to train if all forces merged: $4,706,150. 13,758,920 $3,014,450 $10,524,350 Total Option 1 $9,922,770 $2,665,710 $7,036,940 Total Option 2 Cross-training: Option 2: Partial, USCP: Cost to train if USCP-LOC merged: $590,800; Cost to train if USCP-GPO merged: $59,080; Cost to train if all forces merged: $870,000. Cross-training: Option 3: Partial, all forces: Cost to train if USCP-LOC merged: $297,090; Cost to train if USCP-GPO merged: $29,710; Cost to train if all forces merged: $438,540. Total training costs (Basic and cross-training): Total Option 1: Cost to train if USCP-LOC merged: $10,524,350; Cost to train if USCP-GPO merged: $3,014,450; Cost to train if all forces merged: $13,758,920. Total training costs (Basic and cross-training): Total Option 2: Cost to train if USCP-LOC merged: $7,036,940; Cost to train if USCP-GPO merged: $2,665,710; Cost to train if all forces merged: $9,992,770. Total training costs (Basic and cross-training): Total Option 3: Cost to train if USCP-LOC merged: $6,743,230; Cost to train if USCP-GPO merged: $2,636,340; Cost to train if all forces merged: $9,491,310. [A] USCP basic training includes orientation, FLETC, USCP training academy, field officer training, and initial weapons training. Source: GAO analysis of USCP, LOC Office of Security, and GPO Office of Administrative Support data. [End of table] Options for Providing Retirement Benefits: OPM estimated costs for providing enhanced retirement benefits considering two decisions –whether to provide law enforcement retirement benefits for past service as a LOC or GPO police officer and whether eligibility should be based on federal service or federal law enforcement officer service. * Application of retirement benefits to past service: - LOC and/or GPO officers would be entitled to enhanced retirement benefits (1) for past service as a LOC or GPO police officer (law enforcement) as well as for future service as a USCP officer, or (2) only for future service as a USCP officer. Retirement annuity earned from past service would be added to that earned as a USCP officer. * Eligible years of service: - LOC and/or GPO officers would be required to retire at the usual USCP mandatory retirement age of 57 (only after October 1, 2008) based on (a) 20 years of federal service, or (b) 20 years of federal law enforcement officer service. * How these decisions are made creates four retirement options for providing law enforcement retirement benefits to officers. Estimating Increased Retirement Benefit Costs: Increase in retirement cost estimates range from: * $14.8 million to $24.5 million for both LOC and GPO officers; * $7.9 million to $14.8 million for LOC officers, and; * $6.9 million to $9.7 million for GPO officers. Increase in retirement costs are estimated as the total present value of the cost to provide law enforcement retirement benefits to LOC and/or GPO officers. Total present value includes the increase in the present value of future agency contributions and the net increase in the present value of the unfunded liability to the federal government. Table: Estimating Increased Retirement Benefit Costs: Retrospective & future benefits: Mandatory retirement for officers with 20 years of federal service: Cost if USCP and LOC merged: $14,800,000[A]; Cost if USCP and GPO merge: $9,600,000[A]; Cost if all forces merged: $24,400,000[A]. Retrospective & future benefits: Mandatory retirement for officers with 20 years of federal law enforcement officer service: Cost if USCP and LOC merged: $14,800,000; Cost if USCP and GPO merge: $9,700,000; Cost if all forces merged: $24,500,000. Only future benefits: Mandatory retirement for officers with 20 years of federal service: Cost if USCP and LOC merged: $9,200,000; Cost if USCP and GPO merge: $7,300,000; Cost if all forces merged: $16,500.000. Only future benefits: Mandatory retirement for officers with 20 years of federal law enforcement officer service: Cost if USCP and LOC merged: $7,900,000; Cost if USCP and GPO merge: $6,900,000; Cost if all forces merged: $14,800,000. [A] Total present value includes the increase in the present value of future agency contributions and the net increase in the present value of the unfunded liability to the federal government. Amounts assume a merger would be enacted October 1, 2002, with an effective date of October 1, 2003. Source: OPM analysis of LOC Office of Security and GPO Office of Administrative Support data. [End of table] Summary Table of Estimated Costs if LOC, GPO, and USCP Merge: Cost Item: Increasing salaries for GPO officers, first 5 years of merger; Estimated costs if LOC and GPO merged with USCP: $3,373,000. Cost Item: Providing USCP-standard equipment to LOC and GPO; Estimated costs if LOC and GPO merged with USCP: $762,000. Cost Item: Providing training to officers: (1) Cross-train all LOC, GPO, & USCP officers; Estimated costs if LOC and GPO merged with USCP: $13,759,000. Cost Item: Providing training to officers: (2) Cross-train all LOC, all GPO, & 175 USCP officers; Estimated costs if LOC and GPO merged with USCP: $9,923,000. Cost Item: Providing training to officers: (3) Cross-train half of LOC & GPO, & 88 USCP officers; Estimated costs if LOC and GPO merged with USCP: $9,491,000. Cost Item: Providing enhanced retirement benefits: (1a) Retroactive & future benefits, 20 years federal service; Estimated costs if LOC and GPO merged with USCP: $24,400,000. Cost Item: Providing enhanced retirement benefits: (1b) Retroactive & future benefits, 20 years of federal law enforcement officer service; Estimated costs if LOC and GPO merged with USCP: $24,500,000. Cost Item: Providing enhanced retirement benefits: (2a) Only future benefits, 20 years federal service; Estimated costs if LOC and GPO merged with USCP: $16,500,000. Cost Item: Providing enhanced retirement benefits: (2b) Only future benefits, 20 years of federal law enforcement officer service; Estimated costs if LOC and GPO merged with USCP: $14,800,000. Note: Figures in this table do not represent an aggregate total of all costs associated with a merger. Source: GAO analysis of OPM, USCP, LOC Office of Security, and GPO Office of Administrative Support data. [End of table] Summary Table of Estimated Costs if LOC and USCP Merge: Cost Item: Providing USCP-standard equipment; Estimated costs if LOC merged with USCP: $529,000. Cost Item: Providing training to officers: (1) Cross-train all LOC & USCP officers; Estimated costs if LOC merged with USCP: $10,524,000. Cost Item: Providing training to officers: (2) Cross-train all LOC & 175 USCP officers; Estimated costs if LOC merged with USCP: $7,037,000. Cost Item: Providing training to officers: (3) Cross-train half of LOC & 88 USCP officers; Estimated costs if LOC merged with USCP: $6,743,000. Cost Item: Providing enhanced retirement benefits: (1a) Retroactive & future benefits, 20 years federal service; Estimated costs if LOC merged with USCP: $14,800,000. Cost Item: Providing enhanced retirement benefits: (1b) Retroactive & future benefits, 20 years of federal law enforcement officer experience; Estimated costs if LOC merged with USCP: $14,800,000. Cost Item: Providing enhanced retirement benefits: (2a) Only future benefits, 20 years federal service; Estimated costs if LOC merged with USCP: $9,200,000. Cost Item: Providing enhanced retirement benefits: (2b) Only future benefits, 20 years of federal law enforcement officer experience; Estimated costs if LOC merged with USCP: $7,900,000. Note: Figures in this table do not represent an aggregate total of all costs associated with a merger. Source: GAO analysis of OPM, USCP, and LOC Office of Security data. [End of table] Summary Table of Estimated Costs if GPO and USCP Merge: Cost Item: Increasing salaries for GPO officers, first 5 years of merger; Estimated costs if GPO merged with USCP: $3,373,000. Cost Item: Providing USCP-standard equipment: Estimated costs if GPO merged with USCP: $232,000. Cost Item: Providing training to officers: (1) Cross-train all GPO & USCP officers; Estimated costs if GPO merged with USCP: $3,014,000. Cost Item: Providing training to officers: (2) Cross-train all GPO & 175 USCP officers; Estimated costs if GPO merged with USCP: $2,666,000; Cost Item: Providing training to officers: (3) Cross-train half of GPO & 88 USCP officers; Estimated costs if GPO merged with USCP: $2,636,000. Cost Item: Providing enhanced retirement benefits: (1a) Retroactive & future benefits, 20 years federal service; Estimated costs if GPO merged with USCP: $9,600,000. Cost Item: Providing enhanced retirement benefits: (1b) Retroactive & future benefits, 20 years of federal law enforcement officer experience; Estimated costs if GPO merged with USCP: $9,700,000. Cost Item: Providing enhanced retirement benefits: (2a) Only future benefits, 20 years federal service; Estimated costs if GPO merged with USCP: $7,300,000. Cost Item: Providing enhanced retirement benefits: (2b) Only future benefits, 20 years of federal law enforcement officer experience; Estimated costs if GPO merged with USCP: $6,900,000 Note: Figures in this table do not represent an aggregate total of all costs associated with a merger. Source: GAO analysis of OPM, USCP, LOC Office of Security, and GPO Office of Administrative Support data. [End of table] Table: Merger Options Vary in Cost, Ranging from $13.1 Million to $42.4 Million: Training Option 1: Complete cross-training: (1a) Retroactive & future/20 years federal service: Total cost if LOC & USCP merged: $25,853,000; Total cost if GPO & USCP merged: $16,220,000; Total cost if all forces merged: $42,294,000. Training Option 1: Complete cross-training: (1b) Retroactive & future/20 years law enforcement: Total cost if LOC & USCP merged: $25,853,000; Total cost if GPO & USCP merged: $16,320,000; Total cost if all forces merged: $42,394,000. Training Option 1: Complete cross-training: (2a) Only future/20 years federal service: Total cost if LOC & USCP merged: $20,253,000; Total cost if GPO & USCP merged: $13,920,000; Total cost if all forces merged: $34,394,000. Training Option 1: Complete cross-training: 2b) Only future/20 years law enforcement: Total cost if LOC & USCP merged: $18,953,000; Total cost if GPO & USCP merged: $13,520,000; Total cost if all forces merged: $32,694,000. Training Option 2: Complete cross-training: (1a) Retroactive & future/20 years federal service: Total cost if LOC & USCP merged: $22,355,000; Total cost if GPO & USCP merged: $15,871,000; Total cost if all forces merged: $38,457,000. Training Option 2: Complete cross-training: (1b) Retroactive & future/20 years law enforcement: Total cost if LOC & USCP merged: $22,366,000; Total cost if GPO & USCP merged: $15,971,000; Total cost if all forces merged: $38,557,000. Training Option 2: Complete cross-training: (2a) Only future/20 years federal service: Total cost if LOC & USCP merged: $16,766.000; Total cost if GPO & USCP merged: $13,571,000; Total cost if all forces merged: $30,557,000. Training Option 2: Complete cross-training: 2b) Only future/20 years law enforcement: Total cost if LOC & USCP merged: $15,466,000; Total cost if GPO & USCP merged: $13,171,000; Total cost if all forces merged: $28,857,000. Training Option 3: Complete cross-training: (1a) Retroactive & future/20 years federal service: Total cost if LOC & USCP merged: $22,072,000; Total cost if GPO & USCP merged: $15,842,000; Total cost if all forces merged: $38,026,000. Training Option 3: Complete cross-training: (1b) Retroactive & future/20 years law enforcement: Total cost if LOC & USCP merged: $22,072,000; Total cost if GPO & USCP merged: $15,942,000; Total cost if all forces merged: $38,126,000. Training Option 3: Complete cross-training: (2a) Only future/20 years federal service: Total cost if LOC & USCP merged: $16,472,000; Total cost if GPO & USCP merged: $13,542,000; Total cost if all forces merged: $30,126,000. Training Option 3: Complete cross-training: 2b) Only future/20 years law enforcement: Total cost if LOC & USCP merged: $15,172,000; Total cost if GPO & USCP merged: $13,142,000; Total cost if all forces merged: $28,426,000. Note: To simplify the presentation of total costs, we included the amounts of increasing GPO salaries ($3,373,120) and providing LOC and/or GPO officers with equipment in the total. Source: GAO analysis of OPM, USCP, LOC Office of Security, and GPO Office of Administrative Support data. [End of table] Estimated Per Officer Cost to Merge LOC or GPO Officers: Cost item: Increasing salaries for officers, first 5 years of merger; Per officer cost to merge LOC (122 officers) with USCP: $0; Per officer cost to merge GPO (53 officers) with USCP: $63,644. Cost item: Providing USCP-standard equipment; Per officer cost to merge LOC (122 officers) with USCP: $4,337; Per officer cost to merge GPO (53 officers) with USCP: $4,386. Cost item: Providing USCP basic training; Per officer cost to merge LOC (122 officers) with USCP: $52,837; Per officer cost to merge GPO (53 officers) with USCP: $49,182. Cost item: Providing cross-training (1 of 3 options): (1) Cross-train all merged & USCP officers; Per officer cost to merge LOC (122 officers) with USCP: $33,428; Per officer cost to merge GPO (53 officers) with USCP: $7,695. Cost item: Providing cross-training (1 of 3 options): (2) Cross-train all merged & 175 USCP officers; Per officer cost to merge LOC (122 officers) with USCP: $4,843; Per officer cost to merge GPO (53 officers) with USCP: $1,115. Cost item: Providing cross-training (1 of 3 options): (3) Cross-train half merged & 88 USCP officers; Per officer cost to merge LOC (122 officers) with USCP: $2,435; Per officer cost to merge GPO (53 officers) with USCP: $561. Cost item: Providing enhanced retirement benefits (1 of 4 options): (1a) Retroactive & future benefits/20 years federal service; Per officer cost to merge LOC (122 officers) with USCP: $121,311; Per officer cost to merge GPO (53 officers) with USCP: $181,132. Cost item: Providing enhanced retirement benefits (1 of 4 options): (1b) Retroactive & future benefits/20 years law enforcement; Per officer cost to merge LOC (122 officers) with USCP: $121,311; Per officer cost to merge GPO (53 officers) with USCP: $183,019. Cost item: Providing enhanced retirement benefits (1 of 4 options): (2a) Only future benefits/20 years federal service; Per officer cost to merge LOC (122 officers) with USCP: $75,410; Per officer cost to merge GPO (53 officers) with USCP: $137,736. Cost item: Providing enhanced retirement benefits (1 of 4 options): (2b) Only future benefits/20 years law enforcement; Per officer cost to merge LOC (122 officers) with USCP: $64,754; Per officer cost to merge GPO (53 officers) with USCP: $130,189. Source: GAO analysis of OPM, USCP, LOC Office of Security, and GPO Office of Administrative Support data. [End of table] [End of enclosure] Enclosure IV: United States Capitol Police: Office Of The Chief: 119 D Street, NE: Washington, DC 25510-7218: June 21, 2002: Mr. Richard M. Stana: Director: Justice Issues: United States General Accounting Office: 441 G Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20548: Dear Mr. Stana: Thank you for the opportunity to review the draft GAO report on a potential merger of the Library of Congress Police and/or the Government Printing Office Police with the United States Capitol Police. Your team has fairly captured the concerns, interests and recommendations of the United States Capitol Police expressed during our series of meetings. It is my view that the incorporation of all Legislative Branch law enforcement and security operations into a single department will promote good security, improve flexibility for all of the merger partners, and help establish a unity of purpose. As noted in your report, there are a considerable number of administrative issues to be resolved in the course of the merger. Given time and resources, none appear to be beyond our ability to overcome. Should the Congress determine that a merger is the preferred course of action, the United States Capitol Police is prepared to begin work to ensure that the will of the Congress is carried out as efficiently and effectively as possible. I congratulate you on the fine work of your team and look forward to working with you in the future. Sincerely, Signed by: Terrance W. Gainer: Chief of Police: [End of enclosure] Enclosure V: The Librarian Of Congress: 101 Independence Avenue, S.E. Washington, DC 20540-1000: Tel.: (202) 707-5205: Fax: (202) 707-1714: E-mail: libofc@loc.gov: June 21, 2002: Mr. Richard M. Stana: Director, Justice Issues: United States General Accounting Office: Washington, DC 20548: Fax: (202) 512-8692: Dear Mr. Stana: Thank you for your letter of June 10, 2002, forwarding for review and comment the draft report Review of a Potential Merger of the Library of Congress Police and/or Government Printing Office Police with the U.S. Capitol Police (GAO-02-792R). The Senate Report (S. Rept. 107-37) directed that the General Accounting Office study include in its assessment the responsibilities unique to each of the agencies, specifically citing the Librarian of Congress's responsibility for collections security. However, your draft report does not fully address my statutory responsibility. Collections security is a fundamental priority of the Library of Congress, and has been consistently supported and funded by the Congress. With more than one million visitors annually viewing the collections exhibits, representing some 124 million items, and a quarter-million researchers annually using the collections, protecting the collections is vital. The report does not adequately explain the scope of collections security, nor does it amplify the potential impact of a merger on the Library's ability to maintain an effective program. It is important to recognize the preeminent role of the Library's police force and the Office of Security in protecting the collections. The Library police and security staff are specially trained and knowledgeable about our priceless collections. Our police patrol collections storage areas, respond to emergencies affecting the collections, monitor intrusion and fire detection systems protecting the collections, and perform exit inspections. The Office of Security chairs and coordinates the Library's Collections Security Oversight Committee and manages the physical and electronic security programs for the collections (Enclosure I). In response to past studies of the feasibility of consolidating police forces within the Capitol complex, I have stressed two issues that are critical to the Library: that the security of the Library and its collections is in no way diminished, and that affected Library employees be treated fairly. We suggest some minor corrections as noted in Enclosure II. I commend your efforts to complete this important review, and I would very much appreciate your attention to the comments that I have provided. Sincerely, Signed by: James H. Billington: The Librarian of Congress: Enclosures: Enclosure I: Supporting Collections Security Policies: The majority of Library police force duties and responsibilities directly support collections security initiatives including, but not limited to, the following: * First responders to emergencies and contingencies relating to the collections (water leaks, flooding, fire/smoke hazards, power outages, etc.) * Twenty-four-hour monitoring of alarm and communications control centers; 85 percent of monitored systems (cameras, alarms, access control, and fire detection and suppression systems) are dedicated to protecting the collections. * Patrolling the stacks, reading rooms, and collections-processing areas to monitor security and to identify fire and water leak hazards. * Responding to calls for assistance involving disruptive individuals in reading rooms and other research facilities. * Preliminary investigations of missing collections and collection mutilation incidents. * Arresting and processing of offenders associated with the theft and mutilation of collections items. * Coordination and development of security procedures with service units responsible for the identification and internal protection of collections. * Coordination with Office of Security staff responsible for the planning, design, and implementation of physical and electronic security controls for the collections. * Providing escorts for at-risk collection material from one Library building to another. * Entrance inspections (screening for collection mutilation tools). * Exit inspections at 12 Library building exits. In addition to police responsibilities, Office of Security managers, specialists, and engineers spend the majority of their time coordinating the collections security program, including: * Planning, design, and implementation of physical and electronic security controls protecting the collections; * Internal/external liaison and point-of-contact for physical security controls protecting the collections; * Implementation of the Library Security Plan; * Chairmanship and facilitation of activities of the Collections Security Oversight Committee and its four standing subcommittees; * Integration of funding requirements for electronic and physical security controls protecting the collections Library-wide; * Contracting Officer's Technical Representative for the Library's $1.5 million security guard contract devoted primarily to collections security; * Monitoring of contract guard exit inspections at five Library reading rooms. [End of enclosure] Enclosure VI: United States Government Printing Office: Office Of The Public Printer: Washington, DC 20401: June 24, 2002: Mr. Richard M. Stana: Director, Justice Issues: General Accounting Office: 441 G Street, NW: Washington, DC 20548: Dear Mr. Stana: Thank you for sending me the General Accounting Office (GAO) draft report, Review of a Potential Merger of the Library of Congress Police and/or the Government Printing Office Police with the U.S. Capitol Police. As we have stated previously before the House and Senate Appropriations Subcommittees on the Legislative Branch, GPO has no objection to the concept of a merger of our police with the U.S. Capitol Police (USCP), as long as there is effective consultation between GPO and the USCP concerning security coverage of our unique mission-essential operations. Also, because the draft report is unclear on this point, our position is based on the assumption that the costs of a merged police force would be borne by the USCP, not GPO. In addition, we have expressed concern that GPO's police officers be treated fairly under any merger plan. GPO's mission-essential operations have a number of unique security considerations. Security must be provided for buildings that are kept accessible to the workforce around the clock to meet congressional and agency printing demands, and for the routine delivery of supplies and materials and the shipping of finished products, including secure products such as U.S. passports, from GPO's loading dock areas. It will be critical to have effective consultation between GPO and the USCP to ensure that these and other security needs-and any changes dictated by our mission-essential operations-would be met by a merged GPO/USCP police force. Currently, GPO does not receive an appropriation to cover the costs of our police force. These costs are covered by revenues received for printing and documents distribution services. The current cost of GPO's police force is approximately $4 million. The GAO draft report says that the costs of a GPO police force merger with the USCP could range from $13.1 million to $16.3 million, excluding any additional security enhancement costs. For GPO to assume these costs would put an unacceptable burden on our printing rates chargeable to Congress and Federal agencies and on the costs of other services we provide. In our view, the USCP should be responsible for the costs of a merged police force, since the force would be under its unified command. We note the draft report assumes that "all...GPO security-related employees will be merged into [the] USCP force and compensated according to USCP's pay and rank structure at their existing or comparable rank" (p. 7). In our view, GPO's police officers also should be treated fairly as associated merger issues, including the determination of USCP qualification requirements, are worked out. Beyond these considerations, we have no objection to the merger of GPO's police force with the USCP. Sincerely, Signed by: Michael F. DiMario: Public Printer: CC: The Honorable Mark Dayton: Chairman, Joint Committee on Printing: The Honorable Christopher Dodd: Chairman, Senate Committee on Rules and Administration: The Honorable Mitch McConnell: Ranking Member, Senate Committee on Rules and Administration: The Honorable Robert Ney: Chairman, House Committee on House Administration: The Honorable Steny Hoyer: Ranking Member, House Committee on House Administration: The Honorable Richard J. Durbin: Chairman, Senate Subcommittee on Legislative Branch Appropriations: The Honorable Robert Bennett: Ranking Member, Senate Subcommittee on Legislative Branch Appropriations: The Honorable Charles Taylor: Chairman, House Subcommittee on Legislative Appropriations: The Honorable James Moran: Ranking Member, House Subcommittee on Legislative Appropriations: [End of enclosure] Enclosure VII: Fraternal Order of Police: Labor Committees: United States Capitol Police: Library of Congress Police: Government Printing Office Police: 1320 G Street, S.E. Washington, D.C. 20003: Office: 202-544-4813: Fax: 202-544-5918: June 21, 2002: Mark Tremba: General Accounting Office: Dear Mark: Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Draft report regarding the consolidation of the United States Capitol Police (USCP); the Library of Congress Police (LOCP) and the Government Printing Office Police (GPOP) departments. We, the undersigned chairs of the respective Fraternal Order of Police Labor Committees representing the sworn officers of all three organizations, wish to endorse the concept of consolidating all three departments into the USCP. Your draft report clearly illuminates the reasons for the consolidation. We agree that such an integration of forces will serve to strengthen the security of the Capitol, its campus and its related facilities. The officers "on the ground" reached this conclusion long ago. We did not however, have the benefit of the General Accounting Office's (GAO) skills and resources to fully investigate the issue. While we endorse your report and urge the consolidation, we do wish to make some comments. The report makes reference to "privatization" in the last paragraph on page 4. We understand that there may be some need for privatization but the lack of specificity prevents us from reaching an informed opinion. Our members at the LOCP and the GPOP are also concerned about what provisions may be made for transferring leave from their current organizations to the USCP. We want the leave balances earned by every member to be preserved. We believe that the issue of training could be addressed at a significantly lower cost by leaving the members of the GPOP and the LOCP at their current posts. This default approach would minimize costs by letting attrition address the training issues. It proved quite successful when the New York City Police Department absorbed the New York Housing and Transit police agencies. We suggest that the GPOP and LOCP departments be made into Divisions within the USCP, similar to the current House, Capitol and Senate Divisions. Incumbents in the new Divisions would remain within their respective assignments. If an officer in one of the new Divisions wished to transfer into a traditional USCP organizational element, that individual would be required to complete the necessary training, if he or she met the appropriate standards. Otherwise, USCP recruits, who are hired after consolidation, would be trained as they are now. They would receive specialized instruction by Field Training Officers upon arriving at their new assignments. This follows the current USCP approach to training. We wish to congratulate the GAO members who conducted this study. We found them to be very professional, thorough and interested in producing a reliable and informed product. Sincerely, Signed by: Michael DeCarlo: Chairman, USCP: Signed by: Tyrone Bryant: Chairman LOCP: Signed by: Phil Griffin: Chairman GPOP: [End of enclosure] Enclosure VIII: United States Capitol Police Board: H124 The Capitol: Wilson Livingood, Chairman: Alfonso E. Lenhardt, Member: Alan M. Hantman, Member: Washington, DC 20515-6634: July 3, 2002 Memorandum: To: General Accounting Office: From: Bill Livingood [Initialed by "DK" for WL] Chairman, United States Capitol Police Board: Subject: USCP Board Response to Draft Audit Report: We appreciate the diligence of the General Accounting Office in the careful and well executed review of the potential merger of the Library of Congress Police and/or the Government Printing Office Police with the United States Capitol Police. We strongly agree with the conclusion that there are many challenges that need to be addressed and examined, as well as multiple differences requiring further in depth study and resolution. We furthermore agree that a careful review focusing on the "significant costs" that would be incurred in the merger should be examined in a more deliberate and detailed fashion. In addition, we concur with the conclusion that there are issues such as statutory provisions relating to authority, retirement plans, logistical issues, recruitment, and training that require careful deliberation and additional study. Once again, thank you for the continued interest in the safety and security of the Capitol community. Attachment: Comments from Architect of the Capitol: Reference: Review of a Potential Merger of the Library of Congress Police and/or Government Printing Office Police with the U.S. Capitol Police: The AOC has reviewed the referenced report and provides the following observations and commentary. The option of merging the U.S. Capitol Police (USCP) with the Library of Congress (LOC) Police seems to be the most practical course of action. This is based on a number of relevant factors. 1. Similar Missions: The USCP and LOC police share very similar missions. Their training is similar and through existing MOU's, equipment is compatible. 2. Contiguous Jurisdictions: The LOC Police are responsible for an area that is immediately adjacent the present Capitol campus. The benefits of merging of these two forces and their respective jurisdictions are fully addressed in the referenced report. 3. Administrative Similarities: The USCP and LOC Police share many of the same administrative features which would facilitate any merger. Specifically, these are: the same rank structure, the same pay structure, and National Finance Center processing of payrolls. 4. Costs: The referenced report presents data that quantifies the costs associated with merging these different entities. The costs for merging both the LOC Police and the Government Printing Office Police is estimated at 28.4 to 42.4 million. The comparable costs for merging only the LOC and USCP is 15.2 to 25.9 million. [End of enclosure] Footnotes: [1] The Capitol complex includes, among other things, the United States Capitol, Senate and House office buildings and garages, the Capitol Power Plant, and various other facilities. [2] S. Rep. No. 107-37, at 25 (2001). [3] Number of officers for the USCP as of April 20, 2002, and for the LOC and GPO police forces as of May 4, 2002. [4] The GPO Physical Security Group’s budget is funded primarily through a revolving fund, which is an account funded by reimbursements from GPO’s customers for the costs of printing and related services. [5] Under federal statute, USCP members must retire when they reach 57 years of age if they have completed 20 years of eligible service, or upon the completion of 20 years of service if then over 57 years of age. [6] In October 1995, the New York City Housing Police (about 3,500 officers) and the New York City Transit Police (about 4,500 officers) merged with the much larger New York City Police Department (about 0,000 officers). [7] The present value of the increase in the total cost of providing enhanced retirement benefits to LOC and/or GPO officers ranges from $6.9 million to $24.5 million under different scenarios. For additional information about retirement costs, see enclosure III, slides 10 through 12. In addition, these merger costs include the present value of salary increases for GPO officers for the first 5 years of a merger, which we estimated as $3.4 million. [8] The LOC, Capitol Police Board, and Architect of the Capitol, entered into an MOU in 1998 that required LOC to coordinate with USCP to maintain continuity and consistency of security system design, procurement, installation, and operation of security equipment and systems within the Capitol complex (e.g., exterior perimeter alarms, equipment, magnetometers, and interior alarms). [9] The LOC Police is part of LOC’s Office of Security. The GPO Uniformed Police Branch is part of GPO’s Office of Administrative Support, Physical Security Group. [10] The LOC Police and the USCP use the same rank and pay structure, which generally includes the same rates of overtime and premium pay categories, such as Sunday pay. [11] The LOC Police Force is part of LOC’s Office of Security. The GPO Uniformed Police Branch is part of GPO’s Office of Administrative Support, Physical Security Group. [12] USCP members must retire when they reach 57 years of age if they have completed 20 years of eligible service, or upon the completion of 20 years of service following if then over the age of 57. [13] Totals do not sum due to inclusion of cross-training costs applicable only if both forces merged with the USCP. [14] Although training costs may be spread over several years, we include the total cost to train some or all officers in the first year. [15] LOC Police and the USCP use the same pay structure, which includes the same rates of overtime and premium pay. [16] The LOC, the Capitol Police Board, and Architect of the Capitol entered into an MOU in 1998 that required LOC to purchase compatible equipment and communication systems. A new MOU could include GPO and specify that all three forces develop coordinated emergency response procedures. [17] Totals do not sum due to inclusion of cross-training costs applicable only if both forces merged with the USCP. [End of section]